Board of Commissioners - Regular Meeting

on Thursday, June 25th at 6 o'clock, held at the Municipal and Safety Building, 601 East Main Street. I'd like to call the meeting to order. For the first order of business, I would like to welcome Pastor Maddie Montgomery from the Altar Fellowship. If they wouldn't mind coming up for the invocation and the pledge, if everybody would stand with me.

All right. Well, let's first come before the Lord. Heavenly Father, you alone are worthy of our honor and our praise and our allegiance and our admiration. And so, Lord, we turn our attention to you this evening and we commit again this land to you. This place we are so privileged to call home, Johnson City, Tennessee. God, we thank you for the grace that you have shown to this land. We thank you for the many ways that you've used this land for your glory to this point. And we thank you, God, that you are just getting started. I lift up each of the commissioners to you today, Father, as I have many times before. And I ask that you would work in their hearts and their minds. Would you pour out on them your spirit of wisdom and revelation, that the decisions that they make that affect this land, that affect the lives of the people that live in this land, that they would be decisions that are pleasing and honoring to you. And Lord, would you continue to set this land apart as a city on a hill. Set this land apart as a light in the darkness and depravity of the world. And let this land be a place where the righteousness and peace and joy of your kingdom burst forth. And the light of your truth bursts forth into a world that so desperately needs to see it. Father, we plead the blood of Jesus. over Johnson City, Tennessee. And we ask you, God, to capture the hearts of this land and to use hearts yielded to you here to bring your glory and to advance your kingdom and to proclaim your gospel to the ends of the earth. And we ask this in the mighty name of Jesus, our King. Amen. Amen. We can turn to face the flag for the pledge. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, with liberty and justice for all.

Thanks so much, Pastor Montgomery.

Mr. Willis. Mayor, the first item on your agenda is consider approval of minutes for the regularly scheduled city commission meeting held on Thursday, June 4th, 2026.

Move for approval. Second. Ms. Laus.

Commissioner Fowler. Yes. Commissioner Goetz. Yes. Commissioner Wise. Yes. Vice Mayor Brock. Yes. Mayor Cox.

Yes.

Mayor, item 3.2, consider approval of the minutes for the special called city commission meeting, which was held on Thursday, June 11th, 2026. Move for approval.

Second. Ms. Louse?

Commissioner Fowler?

Yes.

Commissioner Goetz? Yes. Commissioner Wise? Yes. Vice Mayor Brock? Yes. Mayor Cox?

Yes.

Mayor, our next item is proclamations, resolutions, and presentations, and we're happy to have with us this evening Mr. Rex Henley with Pepsi, who will share with us plans for our July 4th event at Freedom Hall. Mark Stone, our general manager, is here as well. So welcome, Rex.

All right. Thank you so much for giving me just a few minutes of everyone's time. Thank you for letting me take a couple minutes to promote our event. So on July the 4th, a week from this Saturday over on the grounds of Freedom Hall. We, you know, Pepsi, the Pepsi Independence Day fireworks celebration. And, you know, the fireworks show itself will be, you know, on site there at Freedom Hall. And before I get into all of it, I wanted to say just there's a couple of awesome, you know, it's milestones, really. So this year is the 40th event. that Pepsi has done this fireworks show and our Independence Day celebration in the city of Johnson City. So it's been tremendous partnership with all the folks in the city. Mark's team is tremendous to work with. All you guys are amazing. So 40th year, amazing, right? So but that's not the best one. The best part of it is, is this year and what makes it the most special is it's the 250th anniversary of our country. So, you know, what a what a reason to really show our appreciation and to kind of. Step up our game, I guess, is what I would say for a couple of reasons that I just mentioned. So thank you for giving me just a couple of seconds. So the events that day start, they kick off actually offside over at the Langston Center. The Little Miss Pepsi Firecracker pageant will be over there offside due to some issues with traffic. being able to take the stage. It's hot outside. You know, folks don't really think about a beauty pageant when it's 95 degrees outside. So we were able to work with the folks in the city and the folks over at the Langston Center and move it over there. So That's from 1 to 3, and then the four categories of that, the winners will be coming back to do some things on stage later that evening. But at 3 o'clock, the food trucks that are on the ground, and there's a bunch of them, there'll be some tremendous food for everyone to enjoy. But that's at 3 o'clock. It opens at 3. And, you know, then at four o'clock, there'll be the kids activities open up. There is a kids zone that the city of Johnson City, we've worked with them. We added to the event a few years ago and we kind of elevated that to, you know, to be something that, you know, we're really pleased. And there's, you know, somewhere for kids to enjoy and kind of, you know, get away from having to hold their parents hands and things like that. So, Good deal there, but that's awesome. And then there's also Touch a Truck. We've got the Fire Rescue, and then we have our 1982 Buick. It's a replica of the Mountain Dew car that Darrell Waltrip won back-to-back championships. We're also going to have it a part of the Touch a Truck and the things where kids can enjoy and kind of take pictures and things like that. Then at 5 o'clock from 5 to 7, they'll be on site. Folks will be getting registered for something I'll talk about here in just a few minutes. It's a wonderful opportunity for folks to win some really cool prizes. But folks are being registered now. There's through, you know, Food City's value cards and radio remotes and things like that. But, you know, they'll also be able to be registered on site there. at freedom hall. And then at five 30 to six is really when things start really cranking up. Um, you know, the WXBQ DJs will come on stage, you know, we'll obviously, uh, do the national anthem, uh, you know, uh, the color guard and we actually this year we have a special performance of taps a young man is going to do for us which is going to be awesome we thought that was nice and then when uh miss johnson city miss historic jonesboro and the four winners for the little miss uh pepsi firecracker pageant will be on stage to uh do the pledge of allegiance okay so that's awesome and then at Starting at 6, from 6 and at 7, our opening acts. Some folks we've had here before, two great young men. They both were participants on The Voice. To kick it off at 6 is Noah Spencer and then following Noah at 7.10. will be Carson Peters and Iron Mountain. So like I said, both of those young men were on The Voice. They were contestants on The Voice and did really well. And then our headliner at 825 and kind of perfect for this historic event, 40 years, our 250th anniversary, we got a really iconic and historic band, Shenandoah. Okay, so like I said, If you've ever listened to country music, you know, or you like country music, everybody knows Shenandoah, right? So we're pretty pleased with that. And then at 940, the 15 contestants that are being registered now and on site that day, there'll be 15 contestants that'll be up on the stage at 940, and they'll all have an opportunity to win, be a part of the Great American Giveaways sponsored by Food City. First prize is $10,000 in groceries. So, you know, what an amazing to win, you know, and then second prize is a year supply of gas. And then the third prize is a year supply of Pepsi. So all that's part of the Great American Giveaway and it'll be announced right there on the stage that night. So, you know, some tremendous opportunities for folks to win some really cool prizes. And then that'll wind up around 10 o'clock. And then our vice mayor, Miss Jenny Brock, will come up on stage and, you know, welcome, you know, folks to the event and say a few words and kick off the fireworks show that'll start on 10.05. And I promise I'm getting ready to wrap it all up here. But here's the thing. We switched fireworks providers this year. This company is out of North Carolina. It's called Pyro Nova. And the show they're presenting to the city is unlike anything I've ever seen. It's a culmination of fireworks, laser lights, and a audio of our history from 1776 all the way up to this year. So I've saw parts of the show and it's going to be tremendous. And the big thing about this is, and I can't stress enough, You're going to want to be on the grounds of Freedom Hall to get the full effect of this. I mean, you can see it everywhere, all over the city, you know, people pulling parking lots and things like that. But for this specific event and, you know, what we're, you know, really, really proud of is this Declaration in the Sky that we partnered with Pyro Nova. You're going to want to be on the grounds, OK? I think you'll be truly pleased with the presentation. And lastly, I'll just say, here's the best part about all this. It's free. It doesn't cost you anything. You know what I mean? So load up, load up your, your kids, grab your family members, you know, grab a blanket, grab some stadium chairs and head out to freedom hall. And I promise you, you will not be disappointed in the show we got this year. So again, thank you for allowing us to do this again for the 40th year. Mark, thank you. You and your team, tremendous people to work with. And like I said, I welcome everyone, everyone to come out to the event on the 4th of July, a week from this Saturday. It's going to be awesome. Okay. All right.

Thanks, Mr. Henley. Anybody have any comments?

My understanding is the origins of this event was it was a Pepsi employee and associates event that you just decided to invite everyone else to attend 40 years ago.

Yeah.

So I want to thank you for doing that. I guess you didn't do it probably, but for Pepsi having done it.

Yeah, actually, it's a long story and I won't take up everybody's time, but I can remember when I first started my career at Pepsi 32 years ago, we would literally have portable fountains and pump soda and just give it to people. That's how it all originated. And again, the partnership with the city of Johnson City, it's grown into this tremendous event that we are so proud to be a part of in the city of Johnson City and the great partnership we've had year over year over year over year. It's been awesome.

Thank you for doing that again. Appreciate it.

Absolutely. Absolutely.

Thank you very much. It sounds like a great agenda and a show. And it is a show. I mean, a big part of what I like to do is just watch the people that come out there. And they bring, you know, enough stuff so that for four, five, six hours that they come out there, they're very comfortable and have fun. So thank you all. Thank Pepsi. Is Food City a part of it this year as well? It's presented.

The whole thing's presented by Food City. So Food City, City of Johnson City, and a lot of other folks that it would take me a while to go through the partnerships we've had. But just tremendous support from all of our sponsors. And again, like I said, you guys have always allowed us to do it in the City of Johnson City for 40 years. And it's just been a tremendous partnership and a wonderful event for families.

The fire chief's running out right now, and he talks about fireworks over there. Thank you, guys. I mean, it really is the premier show in East Tennessee. And just since I was a kid, I'd see Pepsi get painted in the grass. I was so excited about it. And there's a lot of people and a lot of resources to make it come together from a lot of different moving parts. And so awful glad Pepsi's been in there the whole time doing it. So thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. All right.

Mr. Willis, before, there's, it looks like a few people are standing. I don't know if you want to try to find a seat or anything. If anybody wants to scoot in, there's not a ton left. But if, just want to offer that out there before we keep moving.

Mayor, our next item is public comment on our agenda items. Your first request for public comment is on agenda item 9.3, which is an ordinance assigning low-density residential district R2C to approximately 13.64 acres located along Hopper Road at 135 Hopper Road and 0 Hopper Road. Mr. Tony Treadway has signed up against this ordinance. Mr. Treadway.

Mr. Treadway, if you don't care to come up and state your name, and I'll remind you, as you know, you've got three minutes to speak, and it's your time to let us know your thoughts and not to have a lot of interaction back and forth.

Tony Treadway to St. Ann's Court, Johnson City, proud citizen. I was touched by the prayer this afternoon, evening, about Johnson City being a proud city on a hill. We're all proud of Johnson City. We were here to do the right things. You guys are visionaries, you are risk mitigators, and the most recent risk before you is Hopper Road and the development proposed there. This has been rejected by the county when it was in a 105 townhome development directly. The developer then brought it to the city. You wisely passed it back to city commission, too much density, not enough infrastructure. Today we're faced with still a 37-home development on a worse road than Indian Ridge Road. Part of the road is owned by the county. Part of the road is owned by the city. It's a mess. I particularly drove Hopper Road to where the entrance of this development will be. There is a blind hill that, driving at speed limit 25 miles per hour, I had three seconds to stop and it was in a great weather day in the middle of daylight. If we're not careful and if we don't start building infrastructure before we build developments, we're going to kill somebody. We're going to kill somebody. This development has too many homes in it on a road that is a mess. You know it's a mess. Now, let's talk about the track record of the city in building infrastructure before large developments happen. Right now, you're dealing with what? Mountain View Road. How many years ago did we say we're going to improve Mountain View Road? There's now a thousand apartments on Mountain View Road. We're just now getting around to it. Four years ago, the city said, you know what? We're going to build a traffic circle. around Archer's Point to mitigate traffic there. How many more years do we have to wait? We've heard about, oh, we're gonna build a stoplight on Market Street. The city hasn't even begun, hasn't even begun securing land for that development. So let's be real. You've got a lot of priorities in this city. Hopper Road is a huge problem with 37 homes on it. So do the wise thing. Reduce the number of homes or say no. Thank you for your time. Oh, by the way, who all is here tonight in support against Hopper Road? How many people are against Hopper Road? Thank you for coming, folks. Thank you.

Thanks, Mr. Hedway.

The next agenda item that has received requests for public comment is item 10.3, an ordinance to establish property tax rate, appropriate funds, and adopt a budget for the fiscal year July 1, 2026 to June 30, 2027. The first speaker is Chris Coraggio, who has signed up for the ordinance.

Coach, if you don't care to come up and state your name.

Chris Coraggio, 1 South Brook Lane, Johnson City, Tennessee. A budget has been described as a financial portrait of a city's vision. Rather than being merely an accounting spreadsheet, our budget will determine if Johnson City progresses forward, maintains the status quo, or gets left behind. This is not a swim team issue. This is not even a pool issue. This is an issue of the vision you will set for our city. In the budget you came up with, you have already shown the foresight to recognize what the city needs both now and for its future. When you chose to include the Aquatic Center, you recognize the benefits to the community's safety, health, and well-being when there are adequate venues to program. You recognize that Freedom Hall Pool and Legion Street Pool, while current assets, will not last another 52 or 67 years. Your vision in the budget's construction was sound then, and it is still sound today. Now, this evening, you may be subjected to naysayers who are opposed to any kind of public involvement, any kind of public investment, whether because of their own avid self-interest or their lack of foresight of what Johnson City can be. Please do not be swayed by them. You may once again be subjected to deceptive, biased, fake news propaganda about aquatic center costs. Here are the facts. Aquatic centers have a significant positive economic impact when they host events and competitions. A local weekend meet can generate $50,000 or more. A state championship, $500,000 or more. Specifically, the Greensboro Aquatic Center has generated over $258 million for their community since it opened in 2011. Think about some of the best investments in the quality of life for Johnson City and our citizens were met with the same negative pushback, name calling and threats that you have unfairly been having to endure over the past month. The Tweetsie Trail, Founders Park, the Turkey Trot, even the public library are all recognized as positive aspects for Johnson City. All of them were initially opposed when they were first proposed. It seems like there will always be people who do not share the enlightened vision for the path forward. Commissioners, you have diligently put in a great deal of thought and research to create the portrait of John Cena's future. You've prepared a comprehensive budget which will make that vision a reality. Now is the time to be strong, be resolute, vote to pass this budget in its entirety. Thank you. I got it.

Thank you, Dave.

Mayor, your next speaker also regarding agenda item 10.3 is Mr. William Berman, who signed up against the ordinance. Is Mr. Berman present? William Berman. Okay. We'll move to the next speaker, also regarding agenda item 10.3, Mr. John Hughes, who has signed up for the ordinance.

Mr. Hughes, if you don't care to come up and state your name and try to be as exact as coach and end at three minutes on the dot. I'm sorry.

My name is John Hughes. I live at 1604 Otto Wild Drive. Over the years, this commission has approved projects that serve specific interests and segments of our community. We have invested downtown parking lots, public art installations, streetscape improvements, and many other quality of life projects. Not every resident uses those amenities and that's okay. The role of the city government is not to provide one service that appeals to everyone. It is to provide a variety of services that collectively make Johnson City stronger as a community. The families and youth of our community deserve that same consideration. The city has already invested our taxpayer dollars in an aquatic center master plan with a feasibility study. Those studies identified both the need and the opportunity. Failing to act now would be like a doctor ordering tests, receiving results, and then refusing to prescribe treatment. Planning without action accomplishes nothing. One concern that I hear constantly, and I agree, hey, you know, nobody likes to pay taxes. But the tax increase would make Johnson City an outlier compared to surrounding communities is not true. When we look at the numbers, a typical $300,000 home, this guy, a Johnson City homeowner currently pays about $2,500 a year in combined city and county property taxes. Under this proposal, the amount would increase approximately to 2,715 per year or about $210 annually. The whole pit and caboodle is about $18 per month. For the aquatic center, that would make up $5 of that. Even after the increase, Johnson City homeowners would still pay less than the homeowners of Kingsport and Bristol and would remain slightly behind Knoxville for a comparable home. The reality is that we choose to live in the city because we value the services it provides. We expect firefighters to respond when our homes are in danger. We expect police officers to answer the call when help is needed. We expect our schools to consistently score in the top of the state. We expect roads to be maintained, parks to be available, and opportunities for our children to grow and succeed. That's why I chose to live in the city. I don't want to be on a volunteer fire department and I'm useless at pouring asphalt. Those services do not happen by accident. They happen because leaders were willing to make a choice to invest in the future of our community. Aquatics is one of those investments. It's not a luxury. It's not a public service. It teaches many things like water service or water safety, supports our competitive athletics, provides recreation for families, and improves quality of life for residents of all ages. So tonight I ask you to continue to work with what you've already started. Follow through on the planning, recognize that conveniences of living in a city cost money, and ensure that aquatics remains part of Johnson City's future. Thank you guys.

Thanks, Mr. Hughes. I want you to stop just for a second. You've got the best shirt I'll probably see all year.

I'm partial to it. She hates it at this point. I have one for our track, because I know we're track fam. So look for me at the track meets with my son. He'll be cringing.

I had pointed out.

Mayor, your next speaker. Also, again, agenda item 10.3, Mr. Randy Keebler, who has signed up against the ordinance.

Mr. Keebler, if you don't care to come up, state your name. Yes, sir.

Hello, Kenny. Randy Keebler. Now, he mentioned Greensboro. He's right. Greensboro's population is around 1.7 million. They have over 10,000 millionaires. We don't. Nobody here has mentioned one time what the people are going to pay to access this aquatic center. Not one time. So let me round some figures because I went from Rogers, Arkansas and all of them. So your general kid is going to be $16. That's per child to go in there. These people that are going over here right now, they can't afford it. So you take three children of the adult, you're talking $63. The people at Gray, they're four miles closer to Kingsport. Why would they come here? You annex them. You charge them taxes. But it's useless. They're closer to Kingsport. You offer nothing else. So on top of that, Besides, I mean, you don't have to be like Kingsport. You don't have to be like Bristol. You have to be like Johnson City. You can't be like Greenville. You can't be like Greensboro. You can't be like Rogers, Arkansas. You have different people. You have a different pay scale. There's a lot of single mothers that have children. They can't afford sitters. That's what they use. Now, I understand that the people of the swim team, I understand the coach. Freedom Hall pool should have been fixed earlier. a long time ago. If it could have lasted, and it was feasible, I'm not saying ditch the effort. I'm saying put it back. Put it back on the burner. If nothing else, I mean, if all these people are for it, then why don't you put it to a referendum? If you're right, you win. If the referendum votes against it, that's with the will of the people. This is our 250th anniversary So really, it comes to the point, is this still a free country where the majority rule, or is this where the tail wags the dog? Thank you.

Mayor, your next speaker, again, agenda item 10.3 is Mr. Kent Johnson, who has signed up against the ordinance.

Mr. Johnson, if you don't care to come up, state your name.

Yes, my name is Kent Johnson, Johnson City, Tennessee. I'm glad the city was named after me. Thank you for letting me speak and thank you for serving on the commission. I appreciate it. And I'm here today to respectfully oppose the proposed 28 cent property tax increase. And I'll give you several reasons for that. First of all, this budget proposal raises taxes permanently. So it's not just 200 a year, it's 200 for the next years indefinitely. So we got to look at it just not as a $200 increase, but as a thousands, hundreds of thousands dollar increase over a lifetime. At the same time, the aquatic centers provided to, it's projected to lose money every year. The city's own feasibility study projects losses and says a subsidy will be required. That continuous subsidy will come from the general fund and will compete for dollars with police and fire, infrastructure and maintenance. The Kingsport Aquatic Center, we mentioned Greensboro, let's mention Kingsport, is operating at a $2.5 million loss per year with the bill falling on taxpayers' shoulders. We're asking for long-term debt for a nonessential project, 275 million per year in fixed payments regardless of usage or success. A binding 20-year obligation taking on major debt for a discretionary amenity, not for infrastructure, not for public safety, not for maintenance, we're taking on this kind of debt. Horrible timing, inflation, county taxes, increased property valuations creates a quadruple whammy. No increased income. Property taxes are really bad because there's no increased income for those, and you can't reasonably budget for those. They hit you by surprise, and you get hit on all sides. There's a much cheaper viable alternative. Repair the existing pool. for 750 to 850,000 versus the new project cost at a minimum of 37 million, possibly 55 million with all the interest payments. Cost risk is already evident. Consultants estimate 39 to 49 million. The city budget uses 37 million, way beyond what the consultants estimate. Significant risk from the final cost will be higher than advertised based on past history. What is that past history? The Buffalo Valley Golf Course and Pine Oaks. Taxpayers spent over $8.7 million since 2006, was subsequently closed and sold. The Brinkley Center, Millennium Center, cost taxpayers $15 million to build, $1 million per year in losses, sold for $6 million. West Walnut Street Development, initial cost $25 million, final cost $41 million, 64% cost overrun. So I'll finish up, just one last paragraph. This is a permanent tax increase to fund a project that will most likely lose money every year, financed with long-term debt, community where people are already overburdened with costs, and there are far cheaper alternatives available.

Thank you. Thank you very much.

Our next speaker on agenda item 10.3 is Ms. Samantha Davis, who has signed up for the ordinance.

Ms. Davis, you don't care to come up and state your name?

Good evening. Thank you, commissioners, for recognizing my time to speak. My name is Samantha Davis. I've held permanent residence in Johnson City for over 25 years, but this is the very first time I've ever spoken at a meeting. I'm here tonight in support of the proposed budget and the tax increase that would help fund a comprehensive aquatic center. I believe deeply in the value of aquatics because I've experienced it firsthand. My twin brother and I grew up swimming with the Barracuda Swim Club and Science Hill High School at Freedom Hall Pool. Our family used to joke that we spent more time at Freedom Hall than we did at our own home. The lessons we learned through swimming and having access to an aquatics facility helped shape who we became as adults. Like many others, I was disappointed about the closure decision for Freedom Hall. And after that announcement, I met with Mayor Cox and Commissioner Goetz and shared my concerns and my belief that Johnson City deserves a modern aquatics facility with programming that serves residents of all ages. When I learned this budget proposal included funding for that vision, I felt heard. For those who have been opposed to funding this aquatic center because it stands to lose money, I want to remind our city that we already subsidize two pool facilities that lose money. Given the age of our current infrastructure, the capital maintenance cost to repair and maintain what life they have left has reached a critical tipping point. I've heard concerns also that an aquatic center may not generate a profit, but I believe we're asking the wrong question. The right question isn't whether this project costs money. It is whether Johnson City will be stronger, safer, healthier, and more attractive because of this investment, and I believe that answer is a resounding yes. A wise woman once told me, if you're going to spend the energy to assume an outcome, why not imagine a good one? So I've been imagining all the positive outcomes of a new aquatic center. Imagine an anchor to our thriving downtown that is the launching point for increased development with hotels, restaurants, and retail. an indoor and outdoor amenity located conveniently off the interstate as a powerful tool for tourism where visitors have one more reason to pour sales tax dollars into our economy. Imagine a strategic addition to the Memorial Center utilizing existing infrastructure that serves as a regulation-sized competition pool, one that can sustain and scale a thriving competitive swimming community via regional meets and welcoming thousands of athletes and visitors a year. Imagine granting access to water safety and swimming skills to thousands of children, creating dozens of entry-level jobs and skills training for young adults in our community via lifeguarding and swimming instructor roles for years to come. Imagine decreased rates in our city's chronic illness, mental health challenges, and senior loneliness epidemic all without having to step foot inside of our healthcare system. Imagine an amenity that strengthens downtown, enhances the quality of life, and helps further solidify Johnson City as a place where families like mine want to live and employers want to invest. In closing, I understand that no one enjoys paying higher taxes. But I think the return on this investment to our community justifies the cost. This is a long-lived asset that serves residents for decades. The cost is spread across the entire community. The benefits are shared broadly. And this is a unique economic development tool we do not yet have. And I think that is the best, most responsible use of our public dollars. I urge the commission to approve the tax increase and move this project forward. Thanks for your time.

Thanks, Ms. Pate.

Our next speaker is Ms. Jennifer Oakley, again, agenda item 10.3, who signed up neutral toward the ordinance.

Ms. Oakley, if you don't care to state your name.

Good evening. I'm Dr. Jennifer Oakley. I am a resident here in Johnson City at 1404 Lake Ridge Square. I wanted to start tonight by acknowledging what many people in the community are feeling. Families are concerned about rising costs and many residents are worried about the proposed tax increases. Those concerns are real and they deserve to be heard. But I would ask that we separate the discussion about taxes from the discussion about whether Johnson City has a legitimate need for an aquatic facilities. Right now, many people that I've heard online who are opposing the tax increase that would support an aquatic center assume that swimmers can simply go elsewhere. They believe there are other adequate facilities available in our area. Unfortunately, that is not the reality. The Freedom Hall pool has been the primary training and competition facility for our community for years. With its closure, there is no comparable facility available to absorb the swimmers who have lost access. We've explored the alternatives. The college facilities are not generally available for community use. The Kingsport facilities are already operating at capacity and cannot realistically accommodate the swimmers displaced from Johnson City. The idea that there are plenty of other available options is simply incorrect. For our children, swimming is not just recreation. It teaches discipline, perseverance, teamwork, goal setting, and personal responsibility. It provides a healthy activity that keeps kids engaged and active year round. For some students, it becomes an important part of their educational and athletic future. The swim community originally came before this council with a modest request, make the repairs necessary to extend the life of our existing pool while beginning the conversation about what Johnson City's long-term aquatic needs would be. When the city announced plans in the recent past to seek bids to repair the current facility, many of us were encouraged. It felt like progress and it felt like we were being heard. Today the conversation has shifted almost entirely to the proposed aquatic center and the associated tax increase. As a result, the swim community has found itself at the center of a controversy that it did not create. I'm not here tonight to tell you how to fund a future facility. I'm here to ask that the genuine needs of the Johnson City families and athletes not be lost in this broader debate. Regardless of where people stand on taxes, I hope we can all agree on one thing. A city the size of Johnson City should not be without adequate aquatic facilities for its residents. Our children deserve a place to swim. Our schools deserve a place to compete. And our community deserves a solution. Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Our next speaker, again, agenda item 10.3, Mr. Chris Edwards, who signed up neutral toward the ordinance.

Hey, Mr. Edwards, if you don't care to state your name, don't stand up too fast.

Chris Edwards, here's the beauty of signing up as neutral, because I never know what I'm going to say until I listen to people behind me. And there have been a couple things that have influenced the three things that I want to share with you tonight. I am not an expert in many things, but I am an expert in what I do. I have worked for the global leader in maintenance, repair and operations for the last 25 years. For the last 10 years, I have been very specific as a consultant where businesses or municipalities fly me in to help understand what went wrong and to put plans in place to make sure they don't happen again. One thing that I have not heard yet is we had a facility that had a major break and a failure. If this was a for-profit organization, the people that were in charge of that facility would no longer have a job. That's a given, 99%. I understand with municipalities, we don't have that luxury. My question is, if we have not rebuilt the policies, the procedures, and the maintenance recording for a new pool, it's like me giving my daughter a brand new car after she crashes the first one I gave her. So possibly we're going a little bit too fast. Let's make sure we're not going to get in the same position if we invest money into something that we potentially need. The second thing that I hopefully believe I'm an expert in, Mr. Fowler, you can correct me if I'm wrong, I love to swim. So in my four pools, 100%. But something that was shared to me when I was sitting down, we sent out a survey, right? An aquatics survey. 1,507 people. I'm going to say that again. 1,507 people responded. We are making a massive, massive investment for 1,507 people. Again, being a neutral person, I love the gentleman who said, let's put it out to referendum. I think that's the path we need to take. Had that number been larger and stronger, I think you would have had a very just cause to move forward. And again, I don't want to take anything from anyone, but when we're financially crippled, after a couple other financial investments over the years, we have to be proved. The third thing that I want to share tonight, and I heard this as well from the prayer when we walked in and a couple other gentlemen that stood up, we should all be proud of what we're doing in the city. The problem is we might be going a little bit too fast to build that pride. Let's slow down, make more financial decisions, and if we go a year or two without a pool, we'll find ways around it. Thanks for your time.

Thanks.

Our final speaker on agenda item 10.3 is Ms. Hannah Pogue, who signed up as neutral toward the ordinance.

Ms. Pogue, if you don't care to come up and state your name.

My name is Hannah Pogue. This is in reference to the proposed 2027 Johnson City budget that when the commission and administration ignore policies and procedures that hurt the community from the ground up, you can expect distrust. I personally thought that this was just an issue of underqualified individuals making policy within the Parks and Rec Department. But then the city manager and commission approved a payout that glossed over an entire Johnson City sex and drug trafficking industry. So obviously the problem goes deeper. I cannot understand why the problem was deemed solved when Sean Williams was caught, because Sean Williams is a secondary problem here. By failing to address the root of the problem, you have sentenced the public at large to be at the mercy of a corrupt police department. And your intent must now be

Keep it to the budget, please.

And your intent with the budget must now be questioned. Number one, I'm alarmed by how many officials, directors, managers, and school administrators here who have personal bankruptcies, questionable degrees and experience, and criminal charges. And these people are in charge of what goes where. Taxpayer's dollars, where it's funding. Number two, to address the monthly stipends, I ask this commission and directors, managers, et cetera, are there other benefits that you collect while you sit on this board? Do you get health insurance, meals, transportation, travel expenses covered? Has anyone ever submitted their personal business expenses for reimbursement? Does anyone get, say, a free country club membership or their seasonal golf carts and golf passes covered by taxpayers? Have you ever used public works to maintain your private holdings? Have you ever hidden your holdings in trusts or LLCs or used Johnson City Public Works trucks to haul soil and boulders out of a private equity condo development being built along Mountain Ridge Road? In summary, have any of you ever taken advantage of your position in order to build or strengthen your own personal interests? Could any of your personal actions represent a conflict of service to the taxpayers in this community? Number three, Parks and Rec spends $10.5 million annually and still has managed to fail youth in Johnson City. The current state of parks is in disrepair, specifically Kiwanis Founders Warriors. I don't know if we're in charge of Warriors. The team bracket of 12 to 17 years old soccer has 12 registrants for the upcoming season. Make that make sense to me. I know triple that amount that will not play for this current Parks and Rec department. In comparison to the failing state of public spaces and playgrounds for adolescents and teenagers, the Pine Oaks Golf Course has its own spotless website, quoting that in 1960, that in 1960, golf was a hard sport to enter for the common man. Not noted on this website is that a 1960s dollar represents nine cents today. And locally, in 1960, Johnson City was actively resisting the federal order to desegregate public schools. The present day Parks and Rec has never evolved past beyond the standards. Yearly maintenance.

Thank you, Ms. Pope.

Okay. In summary, it doesn't matter what I'm saying. It only matters who is saying what I'm saying. It seems that the administration of Johnson City has operated for generations without any oversight.

Thank you. Thank you for coming.

Thank you.

Mayor, your next item is the consent agenda.

I will start to my right. Dr. Fowler, is there anything you would like to pull off the consent agenda?

No, sir. Vice Mayor Brock?

Yes, I would like to pull 6.1.3. I think that's Jason Miles.

Commissioner Weiss? I don't have any .

No, thanks.

Stick to that one. I'll just go ahead and say, Jason, do you care to come up for item 6.1.3?

Jason Miles, Public Works Director. Good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor, Commissioners. I've got a brief presentation I'll show you in response.

Yes, ma'am.

Yeah. Is it coming up? So I'd like to talk about the State of Franklin Road and downtown square parking improvements that are proposed before you. Existing conditions, this graphic indicates what we have today, of course. Our project goals are two-phase parking and roadway improvement project. We intend to improve parking capacity and accessibility in the downtown area. This will support downtown growth. Our total estimated cost for the two-phase project is about $460,000. Phase one improvements proposed. We intend to construct 32 additional parking spaces along West State of Franklin Road, east of Spring Street, which includes four spaces within the downtown square parking lot. We would also construct a median and reconfigure lanes to create parking dry valve with speed humps. It's kind of difficult to see, but I'll draw your attention to the graphic on the bottom where Heading west on State of Franklin, the road sort of divides with that median that's proposed there. We would create sort of a pull-off drive-out lane that becomes essentially a parking drive-out. The three squiggly or four squiggly lines that you see on each end indicate the speed humps that you're very familiar with, of course. So the idea is to create a traffic calming effect as well as the additional parking. We would also eliminate the dual entry exit for the downtown square parking lot. It would become a single entry exit only. We've cleared that with the fire department to ensure that we've got adequate fire access for the downtown square business owners. Phase two would remove the islands within the downtown square parking lot that are currently there. We would reconfigure the parking spaces to maximize capacity by providing 37 additional parking spaces. We will provide pedestrian access along the roadway frontage and to breezeways between the buildings and ensure, of course, safe emergency vehicle access. We recommend approval of this plan. This is the presentation that we gave at the Planning Commission, of course, and It was a vote of all in favor with exception of one. Any questions? Anthony Todd, of course, is here with us as well, our city traffic engineer, to answer any technical questions you may have.

I do, and I don't know if Anthony wants to come up or you can answer either one. I just have concern about one of the entry and exits. points being closed off and the number of cars that will be in that lot and the fact that I guess they'll only be able to come out and turn right. Is that true? And they'll be turning right on a single lane now? That's correct. So that just concerns me in terms of stacking.

You're correct. They would turn out into a single lane that is a parking lane. So they wouldn't merge back into the traffic until you got down around Spring Street. So it goes out into that parking lane.

So that would put them merging close to the traffic light?

At Spring Street where the crossing is, the mid-block crossing is right now.

Okay. So you've got cars merging out of the, what do you call in the side street there? I always call it a service lane.

Spring Street, yes.

Okay. But that's where people are crossing the street. And they're going to be merging out?

Yes, and we have a raised intersection there, a speed hump for them as they cross there.

All right. And you're going to increase that parking lot by how many inside the parking lot, not the ones that are going to be street side?

So there will be four of those that are added in phase one as a part of that project that were actually inside the parking lot. the remainders on the street. So just four more spaces?

In phase one, yes. What about when it's finally finished?

37, I'm sorry. That's additional spaces.

Will the trash things still be there in the same location?

They're shifted. I don't know if you'll be able to see. It is right there at the old exit that is near Spring Street. Those are the new locations for the dumpsters.

They'll be moved somewhat. They will. And that'll free up a couple parking spots right there.

It does, and we're taking out the sign that's there now, which also adds a couple of parking spaces.

Speaking of dumpsters, not to get on too much of a route, but when move that will they be in close will the dumpsters be in in a closed area i i find one thing interesting that we require new constructions when they have dumpsters have them in a closed area with the gate and shut it and our ones downtown tend to not be in enclosed areas and then therefore the community to use them but they also can get taken advantage of that way and so would these be in an enclosed yes sir yeah and we're looking at other areas to enclose dumpsters that currently are not enclosed to help clean up downtown as well okay With the traffic one, I do have, I love this, I love road diet, getting more parking places, knowing the math on what a parking place means to businesses downtown. In a parking garage, it costs a lot of money for a parking space in a parking garage. So this is a way to use existing land um and get creative with it also this is i had a friend die in high school crossing the street got hit by a car david hudson and i think the community's wanted this for a long time this is pretty bold and it's hard to look at for some people to understand traffic flows but you know we've tried different crossing lights there and our downtown is amazing but it is separated by state of Franklin and then also some train tracks. And this is a really great way to bring two sides together. There is a right-hand turn onto Rhone Street that looks like how your merchant traffic right there goes away. And so is there any queuing? That section right there is the only spot that I wonder what traffic could look like if you could still turn right on Rhone Street. I know there's three or four spaces there, but

The spaces there, you would have to turn out what is now considered the through lane. So you would turn beside those vehicles.

If that stayed, a right-hand turn there, would there be any... Did you model that at all? I know you couldn't. You get the danger of cars going straight to a new island or peninsula. I don't know what you call that. But...

We certainly have the opportunity to bump that side out as well for the right turn onto Rhone Street. And that shortens your distance on that side of the intersection as well. Most people are actually crossing from the opposite side of the street as they cross around.

Are you talking about a right-hand turn going south on Rhone Street?

Going north. So if you're coming west... From the interstate, essentially. And you get to that red light. There's still a good many cars that want to go right into downtown. And there's not really a good right before that to cue into because you go by the TV station and across. So I sure would like to see what it would look like if cars could stay going right on that Rhone street. Okay. Sure. You guys are the experts, but I'd love to model that.

From a traffic perspective, like is there a way to anticipate or measure, like forget the parking spots and just talk about it as traffic calming, um, Is there a way to quantify the degree? Like right now, when it's four lanes going both directions and it's posted 40, is it 40 or 30? 30 down there, but it's 40 further out. And I don't think people always see that sign that suggests they go 30. What's the average degree? factor in reduction of speed when you throttle down the travel lane?

It's hard to say. The lanes are already fairly narrow, so what you're doing is taking away lanes. If you put things closer to the traffic, many times that will slow the traffic. What is going to happen is during the peak period, you're going to have more congestion. You're certainly not going to have fast-moving traffic during your peak periods.

Sorry, Commissioner, on that one, too, is I try to make everything a math problem. And if every space downtown is worth about a $20,000 spend, but you're adding about 50 spaces on an annual basis, that's a lot of potential spend. And then I try to think about slowing time down. And, you know, at rush hour, busiest time of the day, do you think people are going to sit through a red light or two red lights or is that something you model?

It is very hard to model that because it's also affected by the crosswalks and how many people are crossing mid-block. So it would be very hard for us to model that. But you will sit through probably multiple signals at peak periods.

So four lanes are going to merge at some point in time into two lanes. Where does, if you're going east, I guess, on the state of Franklin, where will they start merging into that single lane?

It will be merging right around where the railroad tracks cross the road. So it will be merging before you get to the Yeehaw area and the Buffalo Street intersection.

Okay. And what's, I mean, I'm sure you all have a traffic count in that area, but So, I mean, that's a math issue, too. If you know how many cars are coming down, how long it's going to take them to merge into a single lane. Are we expecting any stacking then back on State of Franklin that basically shuts it down?

Certainly during the peak periods, it's going to get congested. There's no doubt about that. But off peak periods, it should not be congested. So these are the numbers. I don't know if you can read those small numbers, but those are the numbers that we have right now. So a typical day is going to get you around 13,000 vehicles moving through there.

Around 13,000 vehicles from what time to what time?

That's 24 hours. Okay.

And that peak hour, is there a peak hour? You know, because it really probably.

There is. I don't have those numbers in front of me, but the peak hour is typically around 10%. Okay.

And what about traffic going to the west? Where do they start merging?

They start merging right around Colonial Way.

Okay. So they'll be in a single lane stopped at the traffic light.

Yes.

And we don't think that that's going to cause people sit through it several times? There may be times, yes.

But when you're counting 13,000, you're counting both directions. Correct. And presumably, we're going to see that traffic spread over probably 16 hours of the day. I mean, the middle of the night, the count's going to be down. If you did that over a 24-hour day, it's nine cars a minute going both directions. You're probably at 12 or 14 cars a minute, so six or seven going each direction. And what's the standard interval on a traffic light downtown? I mean, how long does each light usually take?

So they're currently on 140 second cycle in the PM period. So that means 140 seconds before it gets to the next green. So going from green on the main street back around to green on the main street again.

So you're going to wait at the light if someone's playing on their phone and doesn't see the light turn green.

You do that now. Yeah.

And that red-white cycle, does not seem like the most efficient cycle in town. It's not. It is. The cross traffic doesn't. One side is not as fair as the other.

That's correct. It does give the preference to the state of Franklin, and we're going to look at reducing that.

I got one other question. I don't know how much you guys have explored this. For me, if it works here, it should work on Downstead or Franklin some. Walnut Street needs parking, too. If you're pinching traffic down, if it did... if this happens and it works, is it similar the rest of the way down? I mean, because to me, there's good alternatives coming from ETSU, turning on Watauga, well, Unica, going down Commerce. There's a lot of – this may not be the most efficient way that people go. It's just the highway that you look at. And so I think the more you can get the mindset of downtown is our downtown and – get the traffic to go the most efficient ways before it. So if it was extended down, does it impact traffic?

This would be the first step. As development happens on Walnut Street, as there's more need for parking along Walnut Street, then we can continue to extend it on down.

So we believe that modifying this area as presented here tonight outweighs the traffic patterns through that area and, you know, what we're going to face, you know, from our travelers about, you know, getting, I mean, I see a couple of pinch points. One is certainly merging into a single lane with the volume of traffic that comes down through there. So they may be waiting on that end and then get to the traffic lights and wait. Let's see, there's two, one, two that are in the single lane zone, so to speak.

Yeah, the goals of this project are both parking and pedestrian safety. So those are the two primary goals.

With that said as well, I visit a lot of downtowns to get ideas and thoughts. You go through Knoxville or Asheville, you're not staying at 55 miles an hour the whole way through the downtown. You're sitting at a few red lights. Not that we wanted people to queue up at red lights multiple times, but you can also window shop. There's other things that happen in a downtown when you're at red lights and I just want to kind of reiterate, this is our downtown. And it really, I think, takes away some of the feel of our downtown because it seems like there's a highway through the middle of it.

Any other?

No. Sorry, I didn't mean to talk so much.

Thank you.

Thank you. I would make a motion to approve consent.

Second.

Ms. Lause, will you call the roll?

Commissioner Fowler?

Yes.

Commissioner Goetz? Yes. Commissioner Wise? Yes. Vice Mayor Brock? No. Mayor Cox?

Yes. Mayor, your next item is item 7.1, a concept plan amendment for 621 Lake Harbor Drive, and this is public hearing.

Good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor, Commissioners. I'm Riley Pudney, Development Coordinator with the Planning Division, and tonight is a request for a concept plan amendment at 621 Harbor Point Drive. Just to orient the commission of the timeline, June 8th, a neighborhood meeting was held. There was one in attendance. June 9th had a recommendation and public hearing with the planning commission, and we are here today as a final action and public hearing for city commission. Unlike a rezoning, it only has one hearing at both planning and city commission since it is not in ordinance. So this is the final action tonight. To orient the commission on the location, the property is outlined in blue and is an RP2 zoning designation at the corner of Rockingham Road and Boring Chapel Road. So you can kind of see the intersection there and the development that it goes into is the lake estates. development. So the request was brought to us of the property owner at 621 Harbor Point Drive to decrease the stormwater easement from 100 foot to 25 feet for the purpose of cleaning up their lot line. Originally, they were thinking about subdividing for a future home, but now there's no subdivision in play and they are just wanting to kind of have that front setback that the rest of their neighbors and community has as well. So a background of this parcel, it was rezoned from R2 to RP2 in 1994 as part of the Lake Harbor estate subdivision. At that time, there was no sinkhole study done, but in efforts of kind of protecting the property and a known not sinkhole, but depression, a 100 foot easement was provided at the time. That's what was kind of basically required. And so through that request, a flood analysis was completed currently. And the analysis was reviewed by our city engineering department. And it was an ingredients that the decrease from 100 feet to 25 feet would not negatively impact the storage of the existing sinkhole that is on the rear of the property. So this was determined to be the only sinkhole on the property after the flood analysis. It would not impact that nor have additional water flow for the neighborhood and community. And additionally, at future development, at any point if a new residence were to come, this study encompassed all future development in that area. So no additional studies would be required. So due to those recommendations of the city engineer and flood analysis, staff would recommend approval of the concept plan amendment. And it is a public hearing.

Any questions for staff?

Did you, just any impact on already established neighborhoods in that area that are adjacent to the property?

Correct. There would be no impact of additional water flow, capacity, and storage. And the study did also evaluate if it were to further subdivide and a new home were to be built on the other half of the lot, an additional study would not be required to. It would handle that.

Okay.

Thank you. Point of order, there appears to be a discrepancy between the address on the slide and the address on the Agenda.

It's the same cross street. So maybe the house number is the same on each street and doesn't. I just want to make sure there's nothing.

Agenda reflects 621 Lake Harbor Drive and the slide is Harbor Point Drive.

It should be Harbor Point Drive.

Okay.

I believe.

Did this have to get like publicly noticed or it's public hearing? Totally fine having it all and

A concept plan amendment does not require public notice besides just the letters that go out to the public.

Okay. Will? So I think with that correction, we're fine to move forward? Okay.

That sounds great. It's the right cross street, you know, and it was two lots, so I get the, but I'm going to, there's no other questions for staff. I'm going to open the public hearing. If anyone is here to speak for or against the concept plan amendment at 621 Harbor Point Drive. Seeing none, I will close public hearing. Anybody?

I'll move for approval.

Second. Ms. Laos?

Commissioner Fowler? Yes. Commissioner Goetz? Yes. Commissioner Weiss? Yes. Vice Mayor Brock? Yes. Mayor Cox?

Yes.

Mayor, your next item is item 8.1, ordinance 4940-26. This is first reading an ordinance to revise the code of the city, the code of Johnson City, excuse me, to reference purchasing authority thresholds in the relevant portions of the Johnson City purchasing policy manual by amending title five, chapter one of the code of the city of Johnson City, Tennessee.

Good evening, city staff, commissioners, vice mayor, and mayor. I'm Megan Bell with the legal department. I'm here to talk to you about Title V of our code. And before I get started, I just want to let you know this is part of a process that the legal department is reviewing. There's 20 titles within the Johnson City Code. And as with any kind of maintenance project, they need a little upkeep and housekeeping. So as we're reviewing different sections, we see the things that would be, it may have redundancies or it may have something that we just need to clean up a little bit. and that's where this is housed. So, for the purchasing policy or the purchasing procedures for the city, there are three regulatory sources. Of course, we have the Tennessee Code annotated, we have the Johnson City Code, and then we have the Purchasing Policy and Manual. And the way it works is the Tennessee Code actually gives the municipalities the authority to exercise certain powers. The Johnson City Code says, yes, we're going to exercise those powers that's provided to us in the Tennessee Code. And the Purchasing Policy says, This is how we're going to exercise them. And it holds all the details. It identifies what forms. It identifies timeframes, things like that. What we had was we had both some of the specifics found in the Johnson City Code as well as in the purchasing policy. And we just are, what we're trying to do is remove the specific dollar amounts from the city code. They will still remain in the purchasing policy so that we have less chance for, for the need for clarification or for inconsistencies should they arise. So we're moving the specific dollar amounts and we're directing the reader to just refer to the purchasing policy. The purchasing policy still is reviewed and approved by the commissioners so this is not taking it out of your oversight. It's just streamlining the process to make it more efficient. We have two main slides that we're going to look at. This is the current version for 5-102, which is in the ordinance that talks about the authority to make purchases and negotiate contracts. And you'll see there's, in each paragraph, there are dollar amounts there. And in the proposed version, It references that it will be no contract covering no greater sum than the amount specified in the purchasing policy as approved by the Board of Commissioners in each section. We do have on this slide an additional paragraph. That is our reference point of how many times this has been updated. And it's kind of like a title search for a deed. It just helps us to go back and see the different versions of the ordinance. But it's not actually new language for the code. We have that same issue here for Section 5117 and 5118. We've just taken that $100 and $2,000 and then the additional $2,000 of reference out and included that same language directing people to the purchasing policy. So the next steps, if this process or this ordinance is passed after the three readings, then any purchasing policies would then go through a work session first and would come before the Commission through a resolution. Is there any questions?

Entertain a motion? Discussion?

I will move for approval. I appreciate you taking the time to kind of straighten these things out for us to make sure we're not doing things appropriately. So thank you.

Man, I'll make a second and just acknowledge that I think anytime you list criteria in multiple places, you run the risk that the two criteria begin to be in conflict with each other. And so pointing back to one source of authority really is just a best practice.

Ms. Lousey, call the roll.

Commissioner Fowler?

Yes.

Commissioner Goetz? Yes. Commissioner Wise?

Yes.

Vice Mayor Brock? Yes. Mayor Cox? Yes.

Mayor, next item 8.2, Ordinance 4947-26, first reading, an ordinance to amend Article 6 and Article 11 regarding parking standards for B3 and the West Walnut Street districts. And this is Ms. Putney.

Again, good evening, commissioners. This is a first reading on a zoning text amendment that would change the downtown parking requirements for the B3 and West Walnut District. This is a citizen request text amendment. So there are two ways for a text amendment to come before a planning commission and city commission. One is in the most often staff-initiated And the second is a citizen request where they, similar to a rezoning, they request a text amendment that kind of puts us on a timeline to get it together and a proposal in front of you. So with that, we are currently at the first reading of June 25th with final action would be August 6th. So the public hearing would be July 16th on this item. The request was made by Christ Community Church, which is located at 400 Ashe Street. That would allow for them and other non-residential properties in the B3 and West Walnut District to continue to operate without having to meet existing parking requirements. Currently, their parking is all off-site and is currently non-conforming to our zoning and parking requirements. The church is also actively planning a addition, which would require them to come into that parking compliance due to their increase in nonconformity. And so they cannot meet that. So what we have looked at as a staff is the B3, because B3 has a lot of similarities to the West Walnut District. So we kind of wanted to bring everything into one umbrella. So for the B3 and West Walnut districts, we looked at reducing the parking requirement for residential uses. So this means everything that's existing would not have to change. It would not affect existing parking requirements. It would just be for new residential use. construction and non-residential uses, excluding hotels, motels, extended stays, those bed and breakfast type establishments, those would not have to meet parking requirements for that proposed use. So it would mirror what we have in the B2, which is our downtown district. reiterating kind of what I've said in the previous slides. This is just an example of what the districts look like. So your dark red is our downtown B2 district where there are no parking requirements. The West Walnut District is in your peach color and your B3 is in your lighter pink. And so not only would this help bring development to the West Walnut District and downtown, but also properties that are downtown adjacent along the corridor as well. And so both the B3 and West Walnut District are very much intended to promote uses compatible with downtown, have pedestrian-oriented uses. And so this amendment focuses on investing in the opportunities and what has already been in place with infrastructure to help buildings and new development come into those without restraints. So currently, just wanted to let you guys know, the West Walnut District area regulations has a minimum setback of only 15 feet from the adjoining property on West Walnut Street. So West Walnut Street has a 15 foot setback. There's no other setbacks, sides, rear. So what we see that's actively happening and you can see in this, visual is that there are buildings that are property line to property line that currently do not provide parking and cannot provide parking. Similar to the B3, they have 15 feet when facing an arterial or collector road, so that is State of Franklin, West Walnut, those main roads. There's no maximum lot coverage, so they can go property to property line and no height restrictions. So this creates lots that do not, reiterating, meet the parking requirement and cannot because they simply do not have space. The issue with off-premise parking, especially for the site in question, the 400 Ave Street, off-premise parking is a special exception. So it is a use by right, but it has additional conditions within our zoning code. And what that means for these conditions is parking, you can have off-premise parking, but it cannot exceed more than 50% of your required parking. So you have to at least have 50% on site. kind of what I've been saying. These parcels, not just the church, but anything new that would come in a change of use would require to have parking onsite at least 50%. And that's just not feasible in a lot of the B3 and West Walnut district. And so another item, special exceptions per the zoning code cannot be varied. They either meet the requirement or they cannot. So that's kind of why this has been set in motion is we cannot alleviate parking requirements for special exceptions. So currently, and this is also in your packets as well, this, we had a parking tax amendment last year that cleaned up B2 language and B3 language. And so what the commission approved last year allowed for existing buildings that would have a change of use that would be permitted in the B3 to not have to meet the new required parking. given the three stipulations provided. What we're intending to do now is all non-residential uses. So like I said, besides hotels, motels, churches, bed and breakfast would not have to meet a requirement. So it would match that B2 downtown. Residential uses do have to meet it. However, it is a reduced parking requirement. And we are proposing for single family and two family spaces, sorry, one space per unit. For multifamily, so your, Apartments, condos would have half a space per unit, which is in line with surrounding areas and other college towns that have colleges downtown. And we have a slide that kind of does that comparison. And then your hotels, motels will have that one parking space per rental unit. And that's in line with what we are currently doing right now, except it just eliminates employee parking and parking for dining area within that hotel. I won't say too much on this slide because it's been my whole presentation up to this point. But these changes are reflected to allow new businesses and institutions to occupy existing spaces and be more marketable for new development within the West Walnut District and B3. It also encourages residential development in the downtown area with these reduced parking spaces. Because currently right now, residential single family, it's two per home, two per space. I know this slide is hard to read with small print, but this is just a parking requirement comparison that we did with not only surrounding sister cities in Tennessee, but we also looked in South Carolina, in Virginia, to areas that had colleges in their downtown area. And so you can see Johnson City is highlighted. We currently are the ones providing or requiring the most parking spaces for single family and residential. And even with the reduced requirement, we are still providing more parking than other areas. And our hope is obviously the market will determine the amount of parking that a hotel will want to want to park. They'll have that minimum requirement, but they don't we're not going to provide them to over park if they don't have to.

On that slide, are we comparing apples to apples? You know, B2 is our central district. B3 is what, supporting central? Supporting central. Okay. And so, like, when you're comparing us to the other cities, are we comparing their inner core zone or are we comparing their kind of ring zone that we're talking about B3? Yeah.

It was discussed as downtown and they're downtown kind of adjacent. So very similar to what we have for our B3 in West Walnut.

I have one question and it may have been addressed, but I do recall that the parking requirements, the parking could be offsite, but it had to be adjacent or not across. a i'm not sure what the definition was of the street yes um that over there never sat well with me when i look at because that's still very hard to do and there's some buildings that could get redeveloped but you might have to cross over walnut street or maybe buffalo street is that still in there do you know what that definition is because um That makes it hard to find, even if you want to buy some additional property. It's hard to get stuff right adjacent to you.

Yes. So the special off-premise parking for all districts is a special exception, and it has to meet specific requirements. One of them is the 50. It has to be less than 50%. Another one is it has to be within 400 feet of the business itself, and it cannot cross a local road. So that eliminates a lot besides just private drives, private roads, alleyways. And so it is very, the off-premise, what we usually see with requests is, I'm just going to use random uses, a bowling alley wanting to help a bank and have used their bowling alley as part of their parking because they share a property line and parking lot without having to go across the street.

Is that to discuss much?

And maybe now's not the total time to, but it is, I think, as you're looking at this, I don't know if now's the place to add any amendments to it, but it is, makes it hard for a lot of buildings down there.

I think when the original plans for West Walnut Street were being thought about, we talked about some public parking along the corridor, at least one on kind of the west end, one on the east end. Do we have anything in sight for adding any public parking along those lines? Because that would definitely help address, you know, the situation everybody's in.

Good question. The only plans right now that I'm aware of is... parking area right off of West Walnut at the well. It's property that we own. It's right adjacent to the Cherokee Road extension. It's a real small area, mostly for enjoyment of the forthcoming park, right? Okay.

Nothing up at the other end, close to the Ash Street at this point in time? Yeah. Okay, probably something we need to continue to look at if there's possibility with any developments over there that we could add some parking.

Are we exacerbating a parking problem by removing that requirement from the code? This particular petitioner has parking needs that probably don't create issues because they're needing their parking at a vastly different time than when we tend to be super congested. I know when the Walnut Street corridor was being discussed, there was at least conversation about doing a fee in lieu or something that would help fund public parking. Are we losing that leverage or losing that incentive moving with something like this?

I can't speak directly to that. What I can speak of is the amount of phone calls and requests that the planning department has received from Realtors who are trying to work with clients on a B3 parcel and they lose sales because they can't provide parking for that change of use. So this aims to help kind of bring in that business and redevelopment of those areas and bring new buildings in and kind of fix up the ones that need some love and attention.

In this district, West Walnut more so than B3 was designed to have full coverage buildings and zero lot line buildings. So it's very hard to require that, but then also require parking because if you've got to fill you know it it's an oxymoron really but i do like your fee in lieu of idea and um i i don't know how that works but it it would make sense to say hey we'll weigh the requirement if you pay x number for that parking space that could go to a parking fund you know for those listening the challenge is you have a lot of warehouses and old big buildings down there that run lot line to lot line and they have thousands of square feet

And any repurpose of that building is going to imagine significantly more activity than like when Sears ran a warehouse down there. You know, they had five employees in a warehouse. So that's the challenge. And I just don't want to create a bigger problem.

Riley, have you heard any comments, feedback from downtown business owners? I know, you know, many of them are grandfathered in or I don't know, like what kind of dialogue have you all had through this process with our downtown business owners?

So with specific downtown, your East Main Street and so forth, they're B2, so they are not affected by this and they don't have required parking. requirements. The businesses that we have been working with have been specifically Christ Community Church and then an additional development in B3 that is very eager and looking forward to hopefully seeing this pass because it would greatly help them build their addition and development that would bring additional residents and customers.

Can I entertain a motion?

There is a public hearing. No, I'm sorry. I'm back on my concept plan one. There's no public hearing tonight.

I move for approval on the first reading. Second.

I'll second. I had the opportunity to see this in planning and appreciated the presentation there.

Any discussion?

Commissioner Fowler? Yes. Commissioner Goetz? Yes. Commissioner Weiss?

yes on first reading vice mayor brock yes mayor cox yes mayor item 9.1 ordinance 4943-26 second reading and public hearing an ordinance for the rezoning of 9.52 acres from r3 medium density residential district to r4 medium density residential district for 1170 west mountain view road

Good evening. Me again. This is the second reading and public hearing on the rezoning at 1170 West Mountain View Road. It was heard on Planning Commission on May 12th, where they had recommended approval to the City Commission, and final action would be next Thursday, July 2nd. Just to remind the, for the sake of the public hearing, I'll kind of give a brief presentation, but just to remind the public and the commission of the request, it is a request to rezone roughly nine and a half acres from R3 medium density residential to R4 for the request to accommodate 120 town homes. It is in the area of West Mountain View and Knob Creek Road. Current zoning is R3. Surrounding zoning includes R5, B4 and RP4 and then your single family lower densities of R2B to the north. The site currently is vacant and clear. There are no trees on the property. Residential to the north and east and then agricultural to the west. And this property is within Washington County. A concept plan is required due to it being a rezoning that adjoins single family uses. The concept plan meets the R4 standards. It has attached garages, 259 parking spaces, and open space of dog parks and playgrounds. The one primary entrance will be off of West Mountain View and a gated emergency access road will be off of Fink Drive. And so this is the concept plan, but if you flip it north, this is Fink Drive and this is Mountain View. For the sake of the PowerPoint, we couldn't get it all to fit on one slide. R4 would allow at 9.52 acres a maximum of 133 units. So they are proposing under that maximum amount of 120, which equates to roughly 12.6 units per acre. For visual purposes, this is not binding, but an idea of what these townhomes would look like provided by the developer. They wanted us to show these tonight. Our density comparison chart, you have Berkshire, which is your R2 low density residential, which has 1.6 units per acre. And then your multifamily across the street of Knob Creek and Universal that have 10.4 and 14.2 units per acre. So we still see that this proposed development is under the average of units per acre. A traffic study has been provided and completed. Minor impacts were determined to be at the intersections and it was recommended that a stop sign and right lane, right turn lane at the intersection of West Mountain View Road be installed. A deceleration lane is also called for and that would be at the cost of the developer. And we have traffic and engineering here as well to discuss any questions regarding that and the current work on the widening of Mountain View and Knob Creek. In addition to the traffic, the fire access at Knob Creek will be 20 feet wide, excuse me, Fink Drive would be 20 feet wide and paved and it would be secured by an emergency access gate and knock box. Fire has reviewed this and has agreed to this fire access and any proposed improvements to Fink Drive would be directed through Washington County and the developer since Fink Drive is a county road. Staff still recommends approval of the rezoning based on its consistency with the future land use map and the surrounding area is of R4 and the proposed density is in line with the existing area. And staff is here for any questions and it is a public hearing.

Any questions for staff? Seeing none, I'll go ahead and open the public hearing. If anyone is here to speak in favor or against the rezoning, please come forward. If you don't care to come up, state your name.

Well, good evening. My name is Matt Wilgem. I am here to represent the developer. And at the point of clarity, I want to say that the developer is not an out-of-town group, but five men that live, work, and or have businesses in Johnson City looking to invest in Johnson City. We are committed to a mission of delivering high-quality, family-oriented townhomes and rental communities here in Northeast Tennessee. We are developing projects to own and operate ourselves, and we do not plan to sell them. We and our families live here, and our businesses are here. This is the home we take pride in and the projects that we build in. We continue to want to be proud with them. We have a lot invested in this community, and we want to continue to invest in this community. As mentioned, the proposed subject is 120 units, less than what the max allows. It'll consist of two- and three-bedroom, high-quality family-oriented townhomes for rent. The three-bedroom units, approximately about a third of them, will have garages to accommodate for parking. All buildings will be two-story. I think you saw that in the renderings. We will have a dog park. We will have a play park area with a play structure for kids. As mentioned, our focus is delivering a thoughtfully designed, high-quality living experience for our residences. The units will be nine feet tall on the first floor. We will have large open windows. We will have stainless steel appliances. We'll have quartz countertops, so very nice amenities, places that you would want to live in. The project It sits on nine and a half acres. It's opposite of the two higher density projects mentioned across the street, one zoned R4, one zoned R5. We are seeking the R4. The entrance and development will be on the Mountain View Road opposite the entrance of the Knob Creek Apartments. Of the property structure that's around it, our proposed buffers, all of the adjacent properties will be appropriately buffered. It's within the horizon 2045 future land use. The project density is appropriate for the site as mentioned. Let's see. Make sure I get everything here. Timing. Construction starts in spring of 25. First units we anticipate move-ins in spring of 2028. And so with that, we seek your approval for this rezoning. Welcome to any questions.

Thank you, Mr. Wilton. Anyone else here to speak for or against the rezoning? Seeing none, I will close the public hearing. I move for approval. Second. Any discussion? Seeing none, we call the roll.

Commissioner Fowler? Yes. Commissioner Goetz? Yes. Commissioner Wise? Yes. Vice Mayor Brock? Yes. Mayor Cox?

Yes.

Mayor, the next item on your agenda is 9.2, Ordinance 4944-26, Second Reading and Public Hearing, an ordinance providing for the conveyance of city-owned property in the former Optimist Park located in the 9th Civil District of Washington County to the Vintage Hotel Group. This property is designated as Lot 3A consisting of approximately 2.5 acres.

Good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor, Commissioner, Steve Willis, Deputy City Manager. As you may recall from first reading, just to orient the public more so than the commission, The parcel that we're discussing here this evening is on Novice Drive at the intersection of Novice and Sales. This is part of the former Optimist Park property. We have a sale agreement and are working toward a closing date provided approval by the commission with the Vintage Hotel Group out of Chattanooga for this parcel they plan to build. We're not sure the size. They have not presented their concept plan yet, but they certainly plan to build a hotel on this space. You may recall that we recently entered into a sales agreement with Culver's Restaurant and the adjacent property that has road frontage here on North State of Franklin. So staff would certainly recommend your approval.

Any questions? Yep. Seeing none, we'll... This is public hearing. Seeing none, we'll call it public hearing. So with that, if anyone is here to speak for or against the ordinance, please speak. Seeing none, we'll call it public hearing. Second. Ms. Laffs?

Commissioner Fowler?

Yes.

Commissioner Goetz? Yes. Commissioner Wise? Yes. Vice Mayor Brock? Yes. Mayor Cox?

Yes.

Mayor, next item, 9.3, Ordinance 4945-26. This is second reading. An ordinance assigning low-density residential district R2C... to approximately 13.64 acres located along Hopper Road at 135 Hopper Road and 0 Hopper Road.

Good evening again. This is the second reading, not a public hearing for Hopper annexation and the action tonight by the commission is just for the zoning assignment. The final action and public hearing for the resolution and zoning assignment would happen and occur next Thursday, July 2nd. I'm just going to kind of give a brief background. So the concept plan is for 37 single-family homes on Hopper Road as depicted here with a deceleration lane at both entrances. Two properties would have a shared driveway off of Indian Ridge Road. Washington County has this property zoned R1 low density residential with their requirement currently of being 15,000 square foot lot size. Mayor Cox, you had a question last meeting regarding what could be built currently and staff math calculated roughly 31 lots and that equates to any road work or improvements that would be needed for Washington County. So roughly a six lot difference, which with what they're proposing and what they can currently build. The requested reset.

Can I clarify what that means?

Yes.

So if they build 31 lots, they don't need permission from anybody. Like the county can't stop them from doing that. They could just do that.

Through the correct approval process. Right.

But, I mean, the approval process would be what? It's not goes to the commission like this does. What would that approval process luckily be? Building permits, right?

Well, yeah. Now it would just be they would do a plat through Washington County and building permits with the county.

Okay. Would a plat approval go? It would go to planning, I would assume? Or how does... I mean, I realize you don't speak for Washington County, but what... I guess I'm just trying to figure out if the difference is this proposal and 31 lots, is there any way someone can say no to 31 lots?

My understanding with how, with the new law that has been enacted, Washington County would handle the plat and have, if it meets their requirements, similarly to ours, it would move forward with building permits.

And that's the big difference. And we had it on our workshop earlier today of just our, Our regional planning commission is essentially, I mean, the county doesn't see it as existing anymore. So if this is not in the city, if we don't annex it, we have no authority whatsoever on how it gets built or what gets built. And so it could go to the county and presumably they just designed something to the subdivision regulations. And as long as it meets those regulations, They can't deny it if it meets what's in the regulations. Correct. And so then you have kind of this isolated county property that is surrounded by city services. How about Hopper Road? I've heard a little different on county and city street on Hopper Road. Do you have a slide at all what part of Hopper Road is county and what city?

I the best I can probably pull up is one of my aerials and Anthony might be helpful in determining that as well. It's very difficult to see unless it is very zoomed in on a map. But essentially, I'm going to do my best here. Everything that is grayed out, kind of similar to this color, everything that is grayed out is within the county. And then everything that is not, again, this is a really hard map to see this because it's such a small road, but there are a few sections right here that is in the city territory. So it is county, city, county, city quite often on Hopper Road.

So is most of the road in front of this development county?

Currently, all of the road in front of the development is in the county.

But the road in front of the two lots that are kind of inside of the horseshoe, that's city?

This section is city.

So they crossed over to grab those during an annexation? Correct.

What about the road for the two entrances on Indian Ridge? It's one. That is city.

And there would be a shared driveway, yes.

So it's really just a single curb cut.

Yes. Okay.

Okay.

I know we had a great deal of conversation during our work session about the new state law. I think if Blake wouldn't mind to just give us like Cliff's notes for the benefit of those in the room that may not have heard that and how that would or wouldn't apply in this situation, that would be really helpful.

Okay, so this is a voluntary annexation. So under the new law subsection, he contemplates a voluntary annexation for purposes of continuing municipal jurisdiction over what would otherwise be within our urban growth boundary. This is a voluntary annexation, so it would fall under that particular subsection, and we would maintain jurisdiction over that development for the entirety of the development until it's concluded. Does that answer your question?

Well, and just to repeat it for clarity's sake, is right now the developer can build 31 lots without any approval to county standards. If we approve this, it would be in the city with 37 lots, but would have wider streets, sidewalks, You know, the police can respond in there. Fire can respond in there. And that's what has changed in the last two months is before, even if this was in the county, Johnson City Planning Department still had authority over it. And it had to meet Johnson City requirements. And at this point, that no longer is the case. And so it goes back to this regional growth boundary dissolution is a bigger deal than we realize. And with that, I do think there needs to be a little more conversation on this. I would be entertaining the motion from you guys. I think that.

I have another question if I could, Ms. Purdy. We had on the requesting R2C, and we had some pretty good success by doing the lot averaging. I've been out and looked at that development, and it certainly provides some variety within the neighborhood. Is that any discussion? I couldn't tell from the rendering there. It looks pretty uniform, but I think probably these are going to be bigger. homes on that and certainly would like to see that the appropriate size home on the appropriate size lot concept that we came up with in another development. So have y'all had that discussion with the developer?

We have not. The concept plan that they have provided exceeds the minimum lot square footage by roughly 1,200, 1,300 square feet. It is not a zoning requirement for lot size at lot averaging, but it could be something that we pass along to the developer for them to take a look at. We just cannot require it.

Okay, make sure I understand this. On this slide it says minimum size lot 6,000 and that's That's what an R2C is.

Yes, that's the requirement.

But what the developer's proposing here is 72, 34? Yes. All right. Another question with the county city, if we annex this, does the road in front of that property become city road?

As the annexation is written for the ordinance, it would come into the city, yes, the road frontage.

It would be interesting, I think, for us to really know what portions of that road are city and county and that we, if there's any intention of improvement of that road, that we work with the county to help with a project like that.

And right now it's a bit of a patchwork, but if these two pieces of frontage become city, how much unincorporated Hopper Road is left? It would be interesting to see that if you don't have it.

I don't have that with me, but we can get that for you for the final reading on Thursday. Do you have that number, Anthony? Or we can get it to you right now.

I mean, to the neighbors out there, I believe you about the traffic. I also think I've contributed to it. And I know each of us have. And there are some topographical challenges that are concerns. And so I just want to understand who has the right or authority to do something about it.

And what that would be.

Right. And what that means. Yes. Yes.

So the area that's shaded here is the part that is in the city. So these parts are in the city. This is currently in the county. This would become part of the city as a part of this development. You would still have a little section right here that would be in the county that we would work with the county on. I can't see your mouse. I'm sorry. It's not showing on your screen. No.

Oh, there you go.

I should have been looking up there instead of down here. Okay, so this section from this lot to this lot would still be in the county that we would still have to work with the county on.

But it's just that... little section nearest Indian Ridge. Correct. If this were to go through. So it's basically our road with a hundred feet.

And we typically, in cases like that, we'll do an MOU with the county. So we'll basically take over the right of the road.

So when we do a subdivision, there's a sightline requirement for entrances and exits, correct? Does the county have... I know somebody had reached out a few months ago about some tightline requirements and the counties was more lax than the city.

I'm not aware if they have any. I do know what ours are, but I'm not aware if they have any.

So if they don't have any, that sounds very lax.

And so this got developed at 31 lots in the county. Theoretically, they don't have to have any sightline requirements to turning off Hopper Road as far as the hill goes and the grade. I would hate to make a call on that. That's one of the good reasons why I think we need to discuss this. We do have a pretty stringent sight distance requirement. Mr. Todd, is the only solution widening the road or...

As Commissioner White says, we've all been out there on it. It's been narrow.

And hilly.

Yeah.

You can widen it some. You don't want to go too wide and make it too easy to drive fast. But we do have speed humps on there and those are always an option in the city that we can add additional speed humps if it meets our requirements. Ed?

I just think the city, the concern of the neighborhood around that I've heard, I think not annexing. The city at least has some sightline requirements and some other things where if we don't do this or look into it more, it can happen without any of that.

If it stays county.

Right.

They've already turned it down, right?

Turned down 100 and something, I believe. Okay.

You know, like everybody else, I've driven this a couple times both directions and have some, you know, real safety concerns. I know there's a number of planned or in the progress, in the process improvements. Can we kind of talk a little bit about what that looks like, the Indian Ridge and some of those and maybe what that timeline is?

So the roundabout that you see here, if I can get my mouse to come back, would be replacing this curve right here where we have most of our crashes on Indian Ridge Road. So this would replace that. And then we would also, if I can get down here, you will have a little bit of improvement at the end of Hopper Road and improve this intersection, improve the curve on Indian Ridge Road here as well. where we also have some crashes that take place. And so it would be addressing the areas that we have the most crashes. And we would be looking at starting this project next summer. Not this summer, but in the summer of 2027. And we're looking at probably a year's worth of construction.

And the red light, isn't there a planned red light off of Jonesboro Highway?

There is. That is also part of the project, and that is at this intersection here. And that is Indian Ridge.

Is it in with that same next summer project? It is. Okay.

We had to order that red light, right? I mean, those red lights have a lead time.

We are in the process of the design and getting right away right now. So we'll have that done sometime in the spring.

So is that funding out of? the next fiscal year, not this one, but the next fiscal year.

We have some money for the project, but not all of the money for the project.

And would any action that we are discussing here make adjustments to that planned project? And what would that look like?

You can certainly make any suggestions for changes or tell us that you want us to look at some other things. That's always a possibility. We have plenty of time to do that.

I think it would be helpful if there was, you know, some suggestions about step one, step two on Hopper Road that could improve, slow the traffic down, number one. I know there's some people there whose driveways come out on Hopper Road, so they may be forced to back out on Hopper Road and then go across. It's fairly dangerous for them. So if there were some ways, some low-hanging fruit even, that could be done now, that would be very helpful. I mean, you're the expert in that kind of stuff, so what could happen? We can do that.

We can put together a list of things that can be done for the next meeting.

Yeah, can we put flashing lights up on the top of the hill or something where it's a blind hill?

And to that end, I mean, you know, not just talk about widening, but there are a couple of kind of crests in the road that, You know, is it possible to take the worst of that off? I'm not talking about eliminating a mountain, but just flattening it a little bit to improve sight lines.

Our former city engineer that retired on us did look at that a little bit. And so he has put together a little bit of a vertical curve that would improve it. And we'll have to go back and look at his cost figures for what that would cost.

We could just put something together.

Take a look at.

Any other questions, comments, motions? We got public hearings the next meeting.

Staff can be prepared to talk more about the infrastructure and traffic.

And I don't know how to figure out the county site line requirements. I'm looking to that.

So third reading would be next Thursday. We had to move this meeting a week, so we're right on top of each other for next reading. So it's Not a big delay here for the third reading. And that third reading is the public hearing.

And would that give staff sufficient time to get some of these action items researched? Yes, I believe they're already in the works. Okay, great.

So I will move to approve to get us the third reading to hear the other information we need. I'll second.

Ms. Louse, will you call the roll?

Commissioner Fowler?

Yes.

Commissioner Goetz? Yes. Commissioner Wise? Yes. Vice Mayor Brock? Yes. Mayor Cox?

Yes. Mayor, before we move into the next item, we'd like to recognize Ms. Putney. Unfortunately for us, this is her last meeting with us. She has accepted a position in Metro Nashville in their planning department. And Riley has done a fantastic job in serving our community and she will be greatly missed. So we would like to recognize her for her work and wish her all the best and her travels to Nashville. Thank you. But are you sure?

And I will be here for next Thursday's meeting too though. So one more time.

Thank you so much. A little ahead of ourselves.

Next item, item 10.1, ordinance 4939-26, third and final reading, an ordinance to amend the code of the City of Johnson City to increase court costs by amending Title III, Chapter 2 of the Code of the City of Johnson City, Tennessee, and repealing all ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict herewith. Senior Staff Attorney Blake Watson will present.

Good evening, Mayor Cox, Vice Mayor Brock, commissioners, city staff. As Deputy City Manager Willis said, my name is Blake Watson. I'm a senior staff attorney. This is the third and final reading of ordinance number 493926. There have been no changes to the previous or to the ordinance from the second reading, but there was some request for information for this particular meeting related to the data generated concerning municipal court. So bear with me. So this is a breakdown of total budgetary numbers for, you'll see two funds, see the Municipal Court Fund, which is allocated in the budget, as well as the Johnson City Police Department Technology Fund. So you see those two numbers are $168,102.65. And then on the bottom Johnson City Police Department Technology Fund expenses, $193,750. I included the records department because when you talk to the police department, you actually understand how municipal court works. It's not as clear as just saying, here's a hard line municipal court operates with this much money because the records department really helps to facilitate a lot of what goes on in municipal court by receiving payment, by collecting fines from citations. And so I wanted to include that and not say that that total amount is allocated through municipal court and court costs that are collected, but it is something when you think about how court costs work holistically for the city, they help to subsidize general fund, which also helps to pay for all of the records department based on the current breakdown of municipal court costs collected. And so when you think about that large number in context relevant to the actual citations that are issued and the money collected from those citations, you can really see that the city operates at a large deficit based on just those numbers and those three departments. The monetary amounts on the right side of the screen assume that all citations issued collected court costs, which I can tell you from experience of being in municipal court, that is not the case. So even when you double our best year in the last, I think I've got six years up there, 585,000, we're still operating, or in that particular year, we're in a short for the total cost. What I'd like to also point you to is in the consent agenda this evening, there was, it's item 6.2.3, we approved the data-driven software for the police department. That's a $90,000 expenditure for the police department just data to report offenses so that's a portion of what goes into the john city or is paid out of the john city technology fund so if the commission approves this particular agenda item this evening i will ask for an immediate consideration of the resolution that i think is 10.2 point or 10.3 10.2? Okay. So, the court cost resolution, which will recite, as originally contemplated, the court cost increase to $100, which will include the $2 technology fee, and then it will cite the various applicable litigation taxes for both state and local, cash bond amount, and then litigation tax that is set aside by statute for parking. So, with that, any questions?

Just to remind us, Mr. Watson, we're going to $100 from?

So we are going from $100 to $100 from, if you read the current ordinance, it's $53. But three of those dollars are for a sunsetted electronic fee and then the continuing legal education fee, which is still $2. That's what I thought. Thanks.

And would you remind us when those fees were set? Or do we know? The 53.

Oh, so that would have been in and around 2005, 2006 was the last time that we adjusted based on a catalog history of citation notebooks that Connie Hill was able to pull from the records department. It went from $35, I believe in 2004, 2005 to $50 in and around 2005 to 2007.

Second?

Anyone?

Yeah, I guess I would ask, are there other ways of setting these fees that don't allow them to kind of stay flat for 10, 15 years and then require that kind of thing? Like, do other municipal courts look to something that trends up every year, a couple of years?

So I don't know specifically if other municipal courts have a way of tracking court costs. But by doing this through resolution, it would give us the opportunity as opposed to having essentially three readings any time that a fee changes or we see that there's a need for change in the amount collected, it'll allow us to do it by resolution. So if the commission wants and city management advises, we could review this yearly and have, I guess, a committee or some type of standing working group to look at it. But it just gives you more flexibility in the future for these kind of changes if they come about. Thank you. Weak.

We caught the role.

Commissioner Fowler.

Yes.

Commissioner Getz. Yes. Commissioner Wise. Yes. Vice Mayor Brock. Yes. Mayor Cox.

Yes. Given your approval of that item, we'll move to 10.2, which is consider approval of a resolution to set court costs and other fees for Johnson City Municipal Court.

Move approval. Second. Ms. Lause.

Commissioner Fowler?

Yes.

Commissioner Goetz? Yes. Commissioner Wise?

Yes.

Vice Mayor Brock? Yes. Mayor Cox?

Yes.

Mayor, your next item, 10.3, Ordinance 4942-26, third and final reading, an ordinance to appropriate funds and adopt a budget for the fiscal year July 1st, 2026 to June 30th, 2027. Budget Director Dustin Thompson.

Thank you, Mr. Willis. Like you said, this is third and final reading. There have been no changes on the previous two readings. I am happy to answer any questions that you may have on the budget. Otherwise, we await your discussion and vote.

Yeah, I do have a question. But we do have other public comments requesting or other.

Is that now or after? After. After. Okay.

Okay. That's fine.

May I have a couple of comments if I can make them? Okay. Thanks. Thank you. I want to thank everybody for, we've received a lot of public input both for and against. raising taxes. I just want to comment just a little bit and bring this from a little bit different perspective that I hope everyone can think about. You know, tax is just, you know, for some people is a four-letter word. And when you stop and think about municipal and county governments, it is the only way to be able to provide the services that people need both living in the county and in the city. I want to talk a little bit about our tax rate in Johnson City. As you've heard from some people, it's one of the lower tax rates actually in the state of Tennessee for a municipality of this size. I want you to keep this number in mind. We're $1.37. That's our tax rate here in Johnson City, $1.37. And we provide all the services for you who are sitting in here who are city residents for $1.37. But I can tell you it's a real stretch for our employees. We have about a thousand employees to be able to deliver all those services. Chattanooga's tax rate is $1.93. Knoxville is $2.15. Nashville is $2.81. Memphis is $2.71. Germantown, $1.78. Jackson, $1.61. And I could go on down the list. to demonstrate that all of these cities are setting tax rates to do the exact same thing that we do to be able to provide the services. Now, that includes services that are amenities. A city, in order to both provide a quality of life for its residents and then to be appealing for other people who may be looking to move here. Now, I know people are going to say, we don't need anybody else. We can't keep people out. But these are features that we get told all the time that are very, very attractive to our people and the things that our own citizens are very proud of. What we do is build the environment, the built environment. It's things like Somebody brought up the Tweetsie Trail tonight. That is a project that extends 10 miles into our neighboring city that has had so much value to this broader community. And there were a lot of people who resisted that, that that was just, you know, it was a waste of money. What it has done has brought a lot of recognition, number one. But it's also, I mean, the Tweetsie Trail won a mobility award from the state of Tennessee because of the number of people who use that to get to work, either in Elizabethton or in Johnson City. And if you go out there a lot, you'll know people who are riding their bicycles in a little bit different way than the recreational ones. Another project that we did was Founders Park. Now that was a part of a flood mitigation project. And you know what happened down there. A big warehouse covered that entire block. We bought it, we tore it down, opened up the creek. At that point, and this was one of the first votes I took when I joined the commission in 2013, 2014, was what to do after that. We had a big flat surface, a lot of dirt everywhere. And the choice came to the commission, do we put an extra one and a half to $2 million to turn it into a park? Or as some people thought, that was a waste of money and all we needed to do, as I like to call it, put a hole in the ground with a fence around it, and that's a detention pond. The commission at that time, we didn't put it on referendum, we didn't do anything like that, thought the value of what we do with those stormwater fees that we were collecting was to turn it into a park that was designed to flood. And so the park would flood first before the water went to downtown. And for those of you in here who are long-term Johnson City people, we would have one, two, or three floods downtown every single year. And people would not come and start businesses because they're likely to get flooded. Immediately after we did that and showed the plans on what that park would look like, the first business that came was Tupelo Honey. Wish they were still here, but They came on faith that downtown was going to change. And so a lot of our investment is just that. There's a return on it, and it would be very difficult to figure out what that return of Founders Park and now King Commons, which is the same concept, They are the two panelists that started the, you know, resurrection of downtown Johnson City. We're not all there yet. There are other things that need to be added. But we have a downtown that is on the ascent. But it really takes investment of dollars as well. Now, a lot of the discussion about resetting the tax rate has revolved around an aquatic center. Um, This is an amenity, and when you say a city of our size, 75,000 people, what are the features that it needs? Does it need a public golf course? Most likely it does. We had two, but we closed one, and we've invested in the other one. For those of you who are golfers, you know it's hard to get a tee time now on Pine Oaks Golf Course, and some other improvements are being made there. We have some of the best schools in the state of Tennessee, and the city of Johnson City adds an additional $14 million to help fund our schools so they can do extraordinary things that they couldn't off the just general funding that it gets through the state and the county. You know, with that, that's one of the things that attracts people here. And so we're very proud of that. And I think this commission and the ones I've served on before this finally realized that education is an investment. It's not an expense. And we can see what it does for us. Education is probably one of the best economic drivers that you can have when you've got a good educational system. So does it need an aquatics program? I believe it does. I absolutely believe it does because it is the built environment that is attractive to our young people. And so the plan, we've had a lot of people say that, gee, this is knee reaction to Freedom Hall. It is not. We commissioned Parks and Rec to do An aquatic study three years ago, this commission did. And to really begin to plan on how we replace the legacy aquatics features that we have in the city. You know, we know the problems with Freedom Homes. We haven't talked a whole lot about the problems of Legion Street, but they are vast and they are many. And we've spent a lot of money, you know, dealing with the leaks in that pool. That pool was built in 1960 or 1959, opened in maybe 1960, 61. And it wasn't designed with the features that you need for better safety in a pool today. So the new aquatics program would address all those things because Legion Street could be taken offline tomorrow with a major leak. They have every winter they work on trying to patch the leaks and the cracks in it. to be able to keep it online just one more year. So with that being said, we do all that for $1.37. And at the same time, many in the city are not happy with the services they get at $1.37. They want more paving. They want more potholes repaired. They want more expansions of the road, just like we're talking about on Hopper Road tonight. And that requires funding to do that. I think this city, I love the Toyota commercial, we're not perfect, but we do a lot right. And I would stand behind the decisions made by this commission, by our administration any day of the week. If we want more than $1.37 services, we have to create the opportunity to up our game, and it's going to take resources. And so at some time, we have to adjust the property taxes in order to meet the needs that the people are telling us that they have. So for that, I will be voting for this recommendation.

Any other discussions, thoughts, motions, conversations?

Yes. One of the reasons I ran for city commission 10 years ago was to make Johnson City a better place. I have five kids. I had one that had stayed in Johnson City and four that had moved away. And to try and make Johnson city a nice enough place for them to want to come back here was what I wanted because I wanted to stay here. I've been here 33 years now. I've been a physician here for 33 years. Um, what Ms. Davis said today reminded me of why I ran, why I wanted to do this, to make, Chunt City stronger and safer and healthier and a more attractive city for many reasons. Health, kids coming back here, and those kind of things. And when Freedom Hall went down and we couldn't use it, that just made it more come to light that we don't have a great aquatics center. And we have 75,000 people here. We're bigger than Jackson. We're bigger than yeah. We're the sixth biggest city in the state of Tennessee. We need a good aquatic center, even if we do. And I think we will fix Freedom Hall. That'll last us for a few more years, but you can't dive in a meet in Freedom Hall because the three meter board it's not deep enough for it. We can't have diving competitions there. That's the only one we have in Johnson city. There's an outdoor one that helps us in the summer, but not in the winter. So I'm, I'm agreeing that I think I'm going to pass this with everything included. So thanks.

Well, I'm, Well, I've got a lot of thoughts too. And I think before there's not emotion out there, I have circled this a thousand times in a thousand different ways. I think I'm such a cost oriented person trying to figure out how things weigh everything that's included. And this one is very hard for me because it is an expensive conversation. But when I step back and really do the math, yes, this will, you know, at first it's how much is this thing going to cost to run and operate and the capital requirements to maintain it going forward. And then you sit back and look at the aquatic study that, you know, you hear all these conversations and nobody really comes up here and says the good and bad of both sides. We hear, hey, this is going to cost $750,000 a year. But those same people don't say, eh, you're already spending $500,000 on two facilities. that are well beyond their lifespan. You know, say both sides of the argument. And that makes, I mean, it is hard when we're only hearing one from everyone. And so we're deciphering both sides, what makes the most sense. But we do, we have two pools that are well past the end of their life. And you can't change that. And they do cost us four to $500,000 a year in operating costs. And some of those are shared with our schools heat and air like you can't even measure what other costs are also the capital cost to repaint legion street every year right i mean there's capital costs that aren't included those so you know that 750 number can look a lot different when you measure it against what we're already spending um trying to figure this in our four goals that is important that we've established, economic vitality, quality of place, and future ready infrastructure. I mean, this hits all three of those. Future Ready Infrastructure, this whole Freedom Hall conversation, a lot of the feedback I got of do not do this aquatic center were the same people that did not want to fix Freedom Hall 25 years ago. Same people that turned our streetlights off at 8 o'clock at night to save a dollar. Same people that did not want to do Founders Park. so i've tried to take out the noise of who just does not want really any improvement future ready infrastructure but i could go on about also this serves as an anchor for our downtown and when we try to figure out how to keep taxes as low as we can for as long as we can we need to figure out how to develop our property that has blight that is not on the tax rolls The city infrastructure is already there. We don't have to talk about widening streets. We don't have to talk about New red lights. Everything is there. We have two interstate exits. There's a lot of things that I've thought about on why this could be more successful in a different way. But then it can incorporate into our baseball stadium and you can watch a game, potentially how it is developed in it. This is where I had a lot of heartburn is if you do something that needs to be special and be a show place, but there's room for improvement. retail and hotels and different ways to have a conversation how to make it work i do agree with one speaker tonight that came up towards the end mr edwards of just you know this feels like it's moving fast i am a little more comfortable knowing that freedom hall's numbers may be more reasonable and this could be more of a planned facility instead of a design build. That really would speed up. That's something I had a little heartburn over, but this might be a way to get funding in place, but slow down and make a good plan to help sell help understand the whole economic picture of it. So.

Yeah. Mr. Mayor, you know, I think as we're talking about the budget, we really have kind of two separate questions. And the discussion and the items in front of us, I think, the project, it deserves further discussion. So for the purpose of that discussion, I would like to move to amend the budget to remove the Aquatic Center and its associated funding less one penny, which would then be designated for Parks and Rec, Aquatics, Planning and Capital for the purpose of looking at this kind of in two pieces. So that is my motion.

Is there a second? That's not a bad thing to discuss. Is there a second?

Well, not to leave Commissioner Goetz hanging, I will second that.

Well, and I remember before, can I just clarify that is this a motion to amend the budget or a motion to amend the budget as proposed? Just for clarification and records purposes.

My intent is to offer an amendment to, oh, I'm sorry. To ordinance, sorry. Thank you. Ordinance, this is my first time doing this. Thank you. Amend ordinance 4942-26. As I've described this, if staff feel that my motion is not in line, please make recommendations.

Yes, I would just remind the commission that with a motion and a second, this is for the amendment only, for the amendment only, not for the ordinance as a whole. You'll be voting to amend the ordinance.

Which is by intent.

And to clarify, a vote yes on the amendment would remove the aquatic center, would then leave us still needing to vote on third reading on the budget, but the budget would be modified by the terms stipulated in the amendment.

Yes, sir. And with the funding less, the one penny, as I understand, Commissioner gets, that would result in a 20 cent tax increase. Okay. Twenty even cents. As Herman was presented and.

That that one cent would stay in a line item for the. Parks and Rec capital and to correct.

Yes, sir.

Discussion. I know I had a lot of thoughts about that, maybe slowing down and trying to understand. but there's so many good points to this aquatic center.

Yeah, I guess I would say as one who's been observing this for several years, the aquatic study was commissioned three years ago. We started talking about the Freedom Hall pool and its issues late last year around Halloween, I think it was sometime in late October. And I think sometimes what's happened is I think on our part, we've not always appreciated that the nature of the coverage that exists out there is not telling a full picture of the story when the story is happening. And so we have a public meeting, we have public presentations, we commission these reports. And if a tree falls in the woods and no one is there to hear it, did it make a noise? And so some of these things seem like, well, where did this come from? Well, it's kind of been being deliberated over for literally years. This is not something. And to the mayor's point, I remember 25 years ago when a former mayor who's recently resurfaced was involved and the Freedom Hall pool was a major issue then and nothing was done about it. And so here we are today. And I remember 25 years ago when the streetlights were turned off. And I remember 25 years ago when we dedicated a new library and there was a man being interviewed on the street who said, I can't believe the waste of money this library is. It's big enough for Atlanta. These are the same voices that were opposed to the Tweetsie Trail and the Wing Deer Park. And like the vice mayor said, King Commons and Founders Park. I think we have done significant work over the last six months in budget workshops. And I know there have been some public comments that have said, well, this process hasn't been transparent. And I would encourage you to come to the meetings where the cameras aren't on. Come to all the meetings. They're publicly noticed. And really see the deliberative process. And, you know, to commend our budget director, to let you know, most of the stuff that came to us didn't make it to this stage. Dustin and his associate put together a spreadsheet. We could pull line items in, put line items out, and we could watch how it would affect the budget downstream. And if you're really a geek and into Excel spreadsheets and formulas, it was great fun and highly productive, but a considerable amount of work and deliberation went into getting us here. And so though I made the second on the vote for the amendment, I will not be supporting it because I think this is the right issue and the right time, and it's time to move forward with it.

Well, I may just go ahead and call a vote for the amendment removing the aquatic center.

So just to clarify, a motion to amend the ordinance by removing the Aquatic Center and its associated funding less one penny to remain for Parks and Recreation Capital. That's what we're voting on.

And a yes would alter the budget and a no would leave it intact.

Yes. Commissioner Fowler?

No.

Commissioner Goetz? Yes. Commissioner Wise?

No.

Vice Mayor Brock? No. Mayor Cox?

No.

Would you entertain a motion to approve the budget on third and final reading? Second.

Any discussion?

I'd like to say a couple things. This is my first go around and first time being involved in this process. I have heard the voices of residents, individuals I have a great amount of respect for. I know aquatics has been a big part of the discussion and I understand the vision behind this. I understand the vision and the intent and the value that recreation and amenities bring to a community. I understand that there are some very valuable elements in this budget, investments in people and infrastructure. But I've also heard from residents about affordability. and individuals that are struggling. And for me, at this point, while I, you know, while I support concepts, I just think it's not the right time. And I will be opposing the budget as presented.

Any other comments?

So this is a motion to approve the budget on final reading as proposed. Yes.

So I see call the roll.

Commissioner Fowler.

Yes.

Commissioner Goetz.

No.

Commissioner Wise. Yes. Vice Mayor Brock. Yes. Mayor Cox.

Yes.

Mayor, your final item is public comment requests that came in that were not regarding agenda items. Our first speaker is Chris Coraggio with a desire to discuss Freedom Hall pool bids.

It'll turn on.

The guys start the time right. Chris Garage, you're still at 1 Saddlebrook Lane unless I've been, my house has been burned down. First, Commission, I know you've gone through a lot. I appreciate the efforts you've all put in. I appreciate you listening. I appreciate responding. and sharing your vision and going forward with the vision of a better Johnson City. You've shown foresight and leadership, and that's respected by me and by many here. There are many items in the budget besides the Aquatic Center, and some people seem to lose sight of that. And those items will also have many benefits for our community. In two or three years, when the aquatic center doors are opened, I hope that the city will see fit to honor you by having you take the first lap of the pool or the first cannonball off the board. And as it's said, no rest for the weary. I'd like to, first of all, appreciate Mr. Willis and the work of the city staff in addressing the repairs of Freedom Hall Pool. And going forward, understanding that we still have two, maybe three years that we are not going to have this nice aquatic center. And it's important that we still meet the needs, the aquatic needs of the constituents here. Just to let you know how dire the situation is. By combining the Freedom Hall pool and Memorial Park pool programming, Science Hill High School and Johnson City Middle Schools have lost 36% of water time. The club team, the Barracudas, which is the speeder system for Science Hill and the middle schools, have lost 87% of water time. and the city has lost 100% of availability to host swimming meets for the schools. That's how important it is. Mr. Willis and city staff, I urge you as legally as possible to move forward with great haste to get the bids in for the latter part of the project and to get started on the project the sooner the better. Again, thank you for your time. Thank you for showing a vision to the city looking more at what the community can have, what the community can achieve rather than just dollars and cents. I appreciate it. Have a good evening.

Thank you.

Our next speaker is Claire Arnold who wishes to discuss the Aquatic Center.

Good evening. As you said, my name is Claire Arnold. I am a 13-year-old student at Liberty Bell Middle School, and I'm here tonight to support the proposed property tax increase, a small portion of which will help fund the new aquatic center for Johnson City. I am both a club swimmer and a school team swimmer, and I've seen firsthand the challenges that come with not having enough aquatic facilities in our community. Johnson City Schools is the only area school system without access to an aquatics facility for its school teams. While surrounding school systems have facilities available to support their students, Johnson City swimmers must compete for limited pool space and travel elsewhere. But this issue is much more... about things in competitive swimming. Earlier this month, I have a little sister and she attended a summer camp at ETSU. One day the camp decided to go to Legion Street Pool. When they arrived, three other city camps had also come to swim. There were so many children there that the camp directors felt the overcrowding created a safety concern and they had to leave. Her experience highlights a larger problem. Many children in our community rely on the public pools because they don't have access to private facilities. Public pools are where they learn to swim, they stay active during the summer, and they spend time with friends in a safe environment. Yet our city has very few options available to meet that need. For those who may oppose building a new aquatic center, I encourage you to visit Memorial Park Community Center. On any given day, you will see one facility trying to serve an entire city. Young children are taking swim lessons, senior citizens are participating in aquatic therapy, and elementary through high school students are trying to train and lap swim. Everyone is sharing the same limited space because there is nowhere else to go. The Johnson City Parks and Recreation Department does an incredible job, but our community is growing and our options are simply not enough. My generation and the generations that follow are the future of Johnson City. When families decide where to live, they look for communities that invest in their people. They look for quality schools, safe parks, athletic fields, playgrounds, and recreational facilities that help children learn, grow, and stay healthy. I understand that asking taxpayers to contribute is not a decision to take lightly, but I believe that an investment will benefit Johnson City for generations, and it is investment in public safety, public health, youth development, and the future of our community. And also, practicing at Legion Street at 7 o'clock in the morning is kind of cold. Thank you for your time and your consideration.

Thank you, Ms. Arnold. I should have let Claire make my remarks. They were better than what I said.

Our next speaker is David Moulton. Forgive me if I mispronounced your last name, sir. He would like to speak on the need for aquatic safety and programming in Johnson City.

So my name is David Moulton and I'm a lifelong swimmer. I'm a retired internal medicine primary care physician. And what I really want to talk about is the health and welfare of Johnson City in Tennessee. And I'm not sure if everybody's aware of the present state. In Tennessee, 40% of adults are obese. 35% are overweight. 13% are meeting exercise goals. Childhood, ages 6 to 17, we have a 20% obesity rate, and we have a 20% overweight rate. And 18% are meeting exercise goals. So where does Tennessee stand in the United States? We're the sixth worst state when it comes to obesity, diabetes, heart disease, and premature death. And so obviously, That has been my focus in primary care. I have seen patients for 36 years with these diseases. Motivating these patients to make a difference and motivating our citizens is going to be key, whether we fix the Freedom Hall pool, whether we get an aquatic center, I think you've heard from people, how do we affect the greater public? How do we affect those single moms with kids? How do we make an opportunity to help their health? There is a recent study out of England with 150,000 People, a 30-year study, and it showed that if you did 90 minutes of resistant training, push-ups, squats, weightlifting, it decreased the dementia rate 27%. It decreased heart attacks and strokes 19%. If you combine resistance training, that 90 minutes a week plus 150 minutes of endurance training, which would be walking, running, swimming, cycling, you reduce premature deaths by 58%. So I'm here to speak and promote programs that can impact the health of our citizens. Obviously, I agree as a lifelong swimmer with aquatics, but I think it's a much bigger piece that we need to look at as a city in getting everybody involved. Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Our last speaker, Mayor, is Mr. John Hughes, who wishes to speak regarding the Freedom Hall pool repair bids.

John Hughes, 1604 Idlewild Drive, shocked. The man that puts his daughter's face on his shirt is going to talk twice in one night for his daughter. Cool. You know, 90% of what I was going to say has now turned into a thank you for believing in us. We look forward to helping you guys expand the city as a boomerang who did come back. Both my parents worked for the city. My mom worked for a police department. My dad for public works. My brother works for the city. My wife and I both worked for the city and it's, um, I won my first bike at a city picnic. So I I'm here and Pepsi brought it all out of me, all the fields, but I just want to say thank you for believing in us. And then I wanted to bring up one last thing, which is, um, my daughter is part of the Barracuda swim club. She's not old enough to qualify for the, um, middle school place. So if we could keep that in mind, maybe about when we talk about MPCC or keeping them for hours, this has become our thing. I mean, I can tell you, and if my teachers are still alive and they haven't all had premature cancer or something for what I did to them as a child, they will say athletes, you know, without that, I don't know what that guy would have done. And I just say, my daughter is following in that track. And Just thank you for supporting us, and please keep us in consideration either through Freedom Hall, MPC Center. Just keep the fish in the water. So thank you guys, and look forward to seeing you guys. I'll swim a lap with you. Thank you. Thank you, guys.

Before we move too far, Dr. Moulton's comments bear, I think, adding to, when I was on the county commission nine or ten years ago, we were engaged in an ongoing conversation with an industrial recruit that had done site selection. They'd had people come. They'd looked at sites. They brought corporate executives to town. They seemed on the cusp of making a commitment to Washington County. And at the last meeting, they started talking about overall health statistics for our population. And that was the end of the conversation. And they didn't come to Washington County. And so if you think things like health and wellness, says a guy who's probably in that overweight statistic, don't have consequences, they absolutely do. And it's when 100 jobs decides to go somewhere else because the risk is too great. And to Mr. Hughes, you don't just work for the city. You're a teacher in our schools. And so your life centers around children, as does your wife, who was one of my children's teachers. And I want to thank both of you for that commitment. Thank you for supporting us.

That's what I have to say. If you're talking about schools, transit, the whole thing, we are directly investing in our future. Plus the saying, if it's not a crime, it's not. So...

Yes, sir. Thank you. Can I say one more thing about Dr. Moulton? When we were going through COVID and all, he paid, I think, out of his pocket for hand sanitizers in the athletic area at Science Hill High School, in the training room, hall, locker rooms, all those places. So he has been not just an internal medicine doc there. He supported health for people outside of just his office. So thank you for doing all that, too.

I'd like to add one thing too to Commissioner Wise's statement and to Dr. Moulton. Thanks for coming with the statistics. They are frightening across our state. The thing that makes me feel somewhat hopeful here in Johnson City is that we have so many of our children involved and engaged in activities through Parks and Recreation through travel ball, through school activities that stay fairly active. A challenging group are a lot of those who don't have access to those programs. And one of the things that Parks and Rec is proposing for this next year, and it's really exciting to me, is to go into neighborhoods where many of these children live and take programming into the neighborhood and so the big thing is to get them up and active and moving now the aquatic center i know i know what legion street pool meant to people when i was growing up here it was it was a big deal and so having the aquatics function that over there which will be a competitive pool that's only one concept of it but the recreation pool is so exciting to get our children and families engaged. It's going to be a place that has zero entrance, so you don't have to crawl up and down ladders, and then all sorts of features that are fun activities to do. It's not just a square swimming pool. But it's a place, I think something called family slides, that the whole family can slide down together. But it begins to get them active and engaged. And as they get into the water to feel like, you know, well, maybe this is something I could do. And we've got next steps for them. So taking some of our programming into their neighborhoods, I think it's going to be a great thing. I mean, they'll do things like soccer camps and just basic activities. skill camps in the different activities. The big thing as a city we need to think about is how we get those children transported so they can play regular league in the league system. That's one of the factors that keeps many children inactive and home and nothing to do. So it's that transportation of getting them there. But I think we have, you know, we have the fundamentals in place for our children to be more active, but it still is a problem, you know, in our, in all communities in Tennessee. I think we really started upping the curve a number of years ago, and Dr. Moulton, you probably remember it, when they took physical education out of the school systems. And then they said, okay, classroom teachers, You have to do 90 minutes of activity a week with your kids. And it's like, OK, well, what do we do there? So we've done a lot of this to ourselves by decisions that have been made by adults. And we may not be able to change the rest of Tennessee, but we can change Johnson City. And I believe it.

Mr. Mayor, I just wanted to say one more thing. This has been really hard, as you could probably tell from my voice. I want to thank everyone for being engaged throughout this process. You've been so kind and so thoughtful. I think regardless of how we've fallen on aspects or the entirety of this, we all love Johnson City. That's what we have in common, and I appreciate that. the engagement and the dialogue throughout this process. And just wanted to make sure I said that. Thank you.

Well, I can't leave without saying something. The audience has thinned out, but I love Johnson City so much. And I think there's five commissioners up here that all love Johnson City. This is large. I mean, There's a lot of time. There's no country club memberships involved. There's no... They did give me this bottle of water. Yeah. And I'll be a little personal in this process because this has been a big deal to me. Parks and Recs is a big deal, but it's a lot of money. How do you spend it? What's the smartest way to do it? Last week, I just had a terrible night of sleep. And I prayed the whole time. I was like, I need to settle my heart on what to do. And I woke up the next day and had this great day. And I'm like, I know what I feel is right. No question. Then I get texts of some billboards that get put up about me that are completely not true and not fair. And I got discouraged. Then somebody running for city commission decides to post storm damage on a building I tried to secure as I'm polluting downtown, which I've spent 20 years volunteering on a regular basis to improve. Then they held a cleanup today at four o'clock. You know, when I hear there, there's no, we cleaned it up immediately, but I got discouraged. I got discouraged. Well, thank you for doing that because when there's storm damage to a neighbor, you should go help your neighbor. You don't post it on social media. You call and say, I need to help somebody that loves our town.

Out of curiosity, how soon after the reported damage did you have somebody?

I had somebody there within an hour and a half of me knowing. I was out of town. I've been there every single morning since. It was some plastic that had broke down on a roof. And you may have found six bags. I was there this morning. I probably picked up a bag of other people's trash this morning. So I've been there every day. And I'm telling you, I got discouraged. And I think I changed. They almost beat me. They almost changed the way I felt about this. And I'm like, this is ridiculous. This is, it's not worth it. Why am I serving the community this way? I've got a family that I love. And somebody here gave me a Proverbs quote, but essentially, you know, don't be a weak man. And this commission is not a weak commission. We've made some difficult decisions, not because it's anything other than a lot of time and thought and stress. This vote, we have all had more conversations than anyone in here can imagine than just the emails. We also reach out to people that are different spheres. We don't live in the same world. And we hear different conversation from lots of people that have. And another part that interested me was a few phone calls I got this week when I was part of, I got one particularly and it was like, no one is gonna, I will never use this aquatic center. It serves such a small part of our community. You don't need to do it. And he had just left Pine Oaks Golf Course. And I just thought to myself, it's like, wait, maybe I need to step back and make sure everything is filtered through just a love of your neighbor. the love of your neighbor because you may like golf and you can't build a golf course in your yard. You may need a city to do that. You may want to swim and you can't do an aquatics facility for competitive swimming in your yard. The city has to provide that. There's no one else that can provide these things for your community and you should be okay with supporting good activities that your neighbor will do. And so, um, I love our city so much. Our commission loves this city. We're making hard decisions. Other people are moving here because they love this city. The one good thing is people that love the city want to be engaged. I don't want to see people get engaged in a hateful, bad way. But being engaged is important for all of us to do. Just be respectful to your neighbor when you do it. So with that, I'm closing the meeting.