City Council - Regular Meeting

The August 27th, 2026 executive session of the Clarksville City Council. As Mr. Tindall makes his way to the microphone, I want to introduce Bridget from Congressman Van Epp's office. She brought her intern, Deanna McLaughlin, with her. Oh, it's the other way around. Okay, I got it. We're glad you're here. Thank you. First item on our agenda is the Planning Commission report as usual. Mr. Tindall, we're on item A, Ordinance 12, 2026-27.

Thank you, Mayor. Good afternoon, City Council. We have a couple zoning cases and one zoning amendment before you today. The first case is Z28-2026 from the Planning Commission. This is the application of Blick Homes LLC. This is .33 acres, currently zoned RM1, which is single-family or mobile home residential district, and requesting to go to R2A, single-family residential district. It's a parcel of land at the north frontage of Eva Drive, approximately 133 feet east of Britton Springs Road in the Eva Drive intersection. It's currently a vacant lot with mild topography. This is in council ward number three. And the applicant statement is they would like to subdivide this into two lots. This attempted a little over a year ago to go to R3 instead. It was supported by the RPC but denied by the council, so they backed the request down to R2A this time. This is the future land use map showing an urban neighborhood to the north and suburban neighborhood in the yellow. And this is the current zoning map. You have a little R3 on the corner, R1 behind it, RM1, which RM1 allows for either a single wide mobile home or a conventionally built home, and a lot of R4 to the north there. This is the property in question today. The home does sit on the property requesting rezoning, so they did build one home on the property. And what they're requesting is basically this half of the lot to build another equally or similar home to the left of it. They left enough room when they built the first home that if they could ever rezone it and subdivide it, they could get two homes on the lot. This is looking down towards Britain Springs Road from the second lot. And looking back up the road, that's the driveway of the current property that was built. All right, department comments. No department comments or concerns, and the school provided the capacities of their schools listed. They did update those for us this month, and we do expect another update in October or November when they count their 40th day population. Historical estimates would be two lots. Again, you already have an existing home on there, so just one additional home. Staff does recommend approval. The request is consistent with the overall goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan. The request aligns with the future land use designation of suburban neighborhood, and the proposed R2A district is in character with the surrounding development pattern for the area. The Planning Commission also recommended for approval.

Thank you, Mr. Tindall. Any questions regarding this zoning case? Councilman Brown, you're recognized.

Thank you, Mayor. Can you go back to the picture of the house that's currently there? So there's no sidewalks currently. Would this require them to put in a sidewalk in front of those? Two-lot minor plots would not require sidewalk. Do we know if this is in this area where we have this ordinance later on about Jordan and Eva sidewalk project?

No.

This eminent domain, so this is not in that area either?

No, Jordan Road is a few blocks to the east of this. Jordan runs north-south from Britton Springs down to the new library.

Okay, thank you. Councilman Clonch, you're recognized.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Tennell, will you remind me how... big of a parcel you need for a home. I know that the whole parcel is .33. What is it for one home?

Sure. For an R2A lot, you need 5,000 square feet, so a combined 10,000 square feet, and at a third of an acre, it's in the 15,000 square feet range right now. Okay.

Thank you, sir.

Also, the frontage, you need the 50 feet of frontage, and they have 100 feet of frontage, so it allows for two lots. No more, no less.

Yes, sir.

Thank you.

Any more comment or question regarding this zoning case? Thank you. We're ready for item B, ordinance 13. Mr. Tindall.

Thank you, Mayor. We're just going out and around the corner here. This is case number Z29-2026. This is the application of Honeycutt LLC. This is .34 acres, currently zoned RM1, and also requesting R2A, single-family residential district. It's a property located on the eastern frontage of Calvert Drive, approximately 360 feet south of Center Road and Calvert Drive, also in ward number three. The applicant's statement is to develop three single-family homes. I'll go over that in a moment. Here's the future land use map. This is over on the western side of the city limits. You can see the line that runs north-south and then goes west there. That's the city limits in the area. Here's the zoning in the area. Again, a mix of M1, R4, and R1 in the area. The lot is currently vacant. This was pretty much directly in the tornado's path back in the day. Department comments or concerns. CDE said overhead electrical lines run along the property and relocation or an easement may be required for construction. We'll handle that as subdivision. And the school system listed the capacities of their schools in the area. Historical estimates would be three lots. The applicant's estimate is three lots. So even though this parcel is only .01 acres larger, it's not as deep and it's wider. And when you're dealing with single-family homes, typically it's the width of the lot that's the limiting factor, not the amount of acreage that they have. So the minimum lot size could be satisfied as well as having 150 feet of frontage for three lots that's why this one's a little deeper a little different than the last one the last one was a deeper lot this one's shallower but wider allowing to get those three lots across the front staff does recommend approval it is consistent with the overall goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan it aligns with the future land use designation of suburban neighborhood and r2a is in character with the development pattern in the area planning commission also recommends approval

Thank you, sir. Any comment or question regarding this ordinance? Councilman Smith, you're recognized.

Thank you, Mary. Mr. Tender, what would be the square footage of each home? It says three homes on this small lot. What would be the square footage about?

We had a picture of one that fits on one of those lots. That's this picture right here. You're dealing with probably just under 2,000 square feet in that picture with the single car garage.

So what size is this? What's the square footage on this?

Probably under 2,000 square feet. I don't know. I don't approve the individual houses. Around 1,500, 1,700. So between 1,500 and 2,000 square feet. How many bedrooms would it be, you think? It's a home. It could have one. It could have three. We don't know what they're going to build yet. They just want to build a home.

A rental? A rental properties? Because I know, and I'm seeing this, they can look like homes, but they will be for, like, rental properties for students, like over there on 4th Street in my ward. Because I thought it was a house. But I go in the house and look inside, and there are four bedrooms. Each one has a bathroom in it. So I know it was set up for rental property. They call them homes. but really they're rental properties. Homes can be wrong too, but when it's set up with four bedrooms before bathrooms, I know that that is going to bring in a lot of rentals and it can bring in disturbance in a neighborhood and we're trying to prevent gentrification in these neighborhoods. And so that's why I asked. I mean, you can say home, but really it becomes a moneymaker, I would say.

We can't regulate whether someone rents it or buys it, and there is a movement nowadays out there to sublease rooms or Airbnb rooms out separately, but that's not zoning and subdivision regulations don't cover that. That's different.

And I thought in your new plan that you put forth, that we will be able to know exactly what they're going to build. As in your new plan that you gave us?

This is a house. It's going to be a series of bedrooms and bathrooms. I understand that, but what I'm saying, Mr. Tender, you hear what I'm saying. I don't.

Go on. You don't understand? you don't understand what I'm saying.

It's a single family house. However, they intend to use it afterward. If they're putting more than the intended amount of people in it, that would go to our friends at the codes department to handle that. But, um, we really, we have a limit on the amount of unrelated individuals that can live together, but it's more than four, five, five.

Well, anyway, I just think we need to regulate what we allow them to be a single family homes that, uh, they're really for families. and not for rental properties. It brings in gentrification in neighborhoods and causes sometimes an unstable environment.

All right. I can't regulate if it's a purchase to rent or a rental only. It's all private decisions by the end users. I hear you.

Thank you.

Councilman Claught, you're recognized.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Tindall, I just want to say thank you for explaining the limited factor depth versus the width of the property, considering that they're almost identical in size. I appreciate that clarification. Thank you, sir.

Thank you. Any more comment or question? We're now ready for Item C, Ordinance 14. Mr. Tindall, please, sir.

Council members, I was able to send you this map, I believe, earlier in the week, just in case you needed to see it up close. It is the entire city that you're looking at there. This is a collection of changes to the zoning ordinance, Z02-2026. It primarily deals with vape shops or smoke shops or tobacco shops, however you want to label it. If you look in the actual ordinance under the definition, The definition of cigar bar, merchandise display area, and smoke shop will be added. And just to get it on the floor, a smoke shop is a retail establishment primarily engaged with more than 25% of their customer-facing merchandise display area and the sale of tobacco products, electronic smoking devices including e-cigarettes, vape pens, and related accessories. hemp-derived edibles, cannabinoid products, and smoking paraphernalia. This includes but is not limited to businesses commonly known as tobacco stores, vape shops, or retailers of nicotine delivery products, but excludes establishments where such sales are incidental, less than 25% of the merchandise area, such as convenience stores or grocery stores. So what we did very similar to the liquor store ordinance that was updated last year, uh, putting limits from churches, schools and parks and playgrounds owned by the city or the county. Um, and we also put in what's considered an anti, um, concentration regulation, just like liquor stores of 1500 between, between uses. So what this map is showing you is that these uses would be permitted in C5, and that's the areas in blue that you see there. There may be some blue under these areas. We didn't make those transparent. And then the existing stores, and we polled, and thank you to the finance department for pulling us all the different business licenses. So between the list of businesses that identify as this, as well as Google Maps search for all those different terms of what these shops could be, and we had to go in a few and check to make sure is it 25% or 100% or 50% of an area just to get an idea. These are known stores that primarily sell over that 25% store area, vape, tobacco, et cetera, CBD stores. Some of them are 100% in the business. Some are 50% in the business. These do not take in what you may consider a discount beer location that has cigarettes or products behind the counter. It's below that 25% amount or may sell gas or snacks also. In the light green, that's the 1,000-foot buffer from churches, schools, and parks. The liquor store, and it actually was 500 feet, but if you look at state law when it deals with hemp-derived products, it's 1,000 feet per state law, so we put 1,000 feet in here because this ordinance includes not just tobacco and vape but cannabinoid and hemp products. We also, while we were doing this, we realized the city has three cigar bars. They're regulated separately by state law. They actually have to be a bar first and then are allowed to have smoking inside of cigars only, no other products. And we added that definition for cigar bars so we weren't excluding them or including them in this regulation. So that's the primary role of this ordinance would be to update the definitions, update the use table, and then add those three conditions, the 1,000 feet, 1,500 feet from each other, and then there is a grandfathering clause as of October 1, 2026, which if this continues, that should be the second reading date of this. If these are existing at the time, they would be grandfathered in should they move in the future? They would have to move to a compliant location. And as you can see, there is some other blue areas around town with C five that they could locate in an area that was compliant with the regulations. The second part of this ordinance deals with under the design districts moving metal panels from appropriate to an accent material. We've heard some complaints recently about a building that's being built and we took a chance to look at that and said it's probably not a bad idea to move metal currently to an accessory which would be 10 to 15% of the area on a building. And then we also noticed back from the LED sign ordinance, there was a duplicate section put in two little paragraphs that duplicate the paragraphs above it. So we're just removing those for redundancy purposes. So again, primarily this deals with the vape shops, hemp shops. In your ordinance, We have originally had another section on site plan requirements. I believe that's been pulled out in the version that we sent you, but if you saw an earlier version, there was a 5.10 that was in there that is not being considered by you all at this time. The Planning Commission split the question and asked for some further study on that. able to answer any questions.

We got them. Councilman Streetman, you're recognized.

Thank you, Mayor. Mr. Tindall, first of all, I want to thank you for all your work on this since I asked you back in June to bring this forward to us. I appreciated, too, that Mr. Bittner was able to locate that so that we could really get our definitions down, but I know that you have spent considerable time taking it to various different groups to talk to them, including the Land Development Advisory Committee. Land Development Advisory Committee, which is also what prompted now the county is requesting of the RPC some similar language to craft for the county as well. But I had asked for this because I had heard numerous things from the public regarding the numerous locations and where these are located. And one of the things I had noted myself when going in there and looking was that these fell under candy shops. So they could go currently as we stand today, these can go anywhere in any commercial district. So this will allow it to be better tuned in to a specific area, as well as like was stated, putting those distance requirements on it that are similar to what we have for our liquor stores. So again, thank you for your work on this and everybody else that contributed as well. And next week when we vote, I'd very much appreciate your support. This did pass unanimously through the Regional Planning Commission.

Thank you. And one other thing I forgot to say, I did talk to a couple other Middle Tennessee towns that have already done this, Goodlettsville, Hendersonville, and this is crafted very similar to how they've passed it. They've had these in for about a year, so they haven't had any problems since then.

Councilman Chandler. Thank you, Mayor. Well, I'm going to be just exactly opposite of the previous speaker. You know, we cannot compare these tobacco stores and cigar bars and stuff to liquor stores. I know that tobacco kills, but I know it's not an overnight thing like a liquor store is. Kids go out and get a hold of liquor and drink it and whatnot. To me, this just seems like another handful of government overreach. You know, we're telling people, you know, I'll give you an example. There's one there at Charlemagne and Dover Road tobacco store. So what if he finds somebody that's going to offer him better rent? And it doesn't fall within this. What kind of now money are we costing these people? I mean, comparing this to liquor stores, I mean, I'm not going to be a hypocrite. Yes, I smoke. I smoke. I raised a backer for years. I'm not going to be a hypocrite and say that I don't. And yes, it's wrong. It's not good. Again, we're going into government overreach. What's the next thing? What about nail salons? What about coffee shops? Eventually, if we continue to start limiting things that are really and truly not that dangerous, look right across the street from the liquor store I mentioned is a church. It's never affected that church. Nothing has ever happened to stop them from holding their church services. Right across the street from the Providence Middle School is a store that sells cigarettes. Nothing has ever come back and said, well, they sell cigarettes over there. You know, that's killed four or five of our kids. And the hemp. No, we need to back up on hemp because the state now has passed it to the point that might as well go out here and get some grass out of the front and roll it up and smoke it. To me, again, we are starting to regulate these people to death. And it's just, to me, it's just, you know, I can say it. Who are we going after next? Gas stations, nail salons, barber shops, cupcake stores. You know, everywhere you turn, there is a strip mall that's got one of everything I just said. A tobacco store, a nail salon, and I don't know, city... Attorney is sitting down here. We've got to be careful with this because if we start cutting into somebody's business, we could find ourselves in some lawsuits over this because what you're saying is it might look good on paper, but what we're saying is that this is detrimental, but we have nothing to back it up with. That's all. Thank you, Mayor.

Councilman Clark, you're recognized.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Well, I appreciate my fellow council members' comments. Removing tobacco and smoke products away from schools, I think, is imperative. This is not – it aligns with the state law as well, if I misspoke on that. Again, the younger generation, they're not smoking cigarettes. They're smoking e-cigarettes and vapes and doing all kinds of things that the impact is significantly greater. I also smoke. I own that. It's a horrible habit. But they're designed for a different demographic. We're dinosaurs. I'm a dinosaur smoking cigarettes. Nobody does that anymore. The younger generation thinks it's cool to have vapes. They have vape detectors in schools now. you can get suspended from school for having a vape in the school. So why would we not remove that possibility within the proximity of our youth? I understand the point of overreach, but again, it aligns with the state law, and I think it's good business to keep that stuff away from our children. That's all I have.

customers treatment you recognize thank you district and i just want to reiterate you also worked with mr bender on this correct yes we bounce this off of them brought up the additional state laws that we might want to look at because of the other products that are included in this now anyone who currently has a business this doesn't affect them correct they can stay where they are as long as they're staying where they are if they ever want to move that would be a time to move to a different location. I forget the exact amount. It fluctuated month to month, but it's in the upper 50s in terms of shops that are primarily selling this type of merchandise. If you apply that to the liquor stores, I think you only have 36 liquor stores max in the city right now. We did not put a limit on... And that was where we were originally going to go compared to other towns was to put a limit on it so there could be no more. We decided that that was not appropriate for this, but to limit the distance between them so that they would eventually over time spread out more equally in the C5 district.

Well, and then also you referenced state law. That was even a recent change, correct? The state law putting the distance?

Yes, that was this year, I believe, actually.

Okay, so it's nothing new that we're coming up with here. And this, to verify, this does not affect any businesses that sell cupcakes, right? Because I love some cupcakes. I want to make sure we're not affecting that. But this is strictly regarding vape, everything that you listed. Yes. Okay. Thank you, sir.

Councilman Holliman. Thank you, Mayor. So, you know, I guess I need to think about this one a little bit.

Is there an echo in here?

Yeah. Yeah, okay, well. We'll just roll with it. That's a little bit better. Roll with it. Yeah, roll with it, I guess. That's unintended. It's too easy. But a lot of these shops and stuff, I mean, they don't know what kind of chemicals are actually in them, you know? Some of them, I've heard reports of marijuana farms that are run by Chinese, and then they spray them with chemicals and pesticides, and then they sell it to people as good stuff, I guess. We don't know exactly what is in the products that they are buying. And so kids, yeah, that's the important thing, is to protect the youth. Greater accessibility does lead to increased consumption. I mean, like, there's no other way to look at it. Like, if you have the product and you can just reach across the aisle and grab it compared to, oh, I got to drive 30 minutes to go get it, like, you're if you like that product, you're going to use that product more, no matter what, if it's a substance or, or what it is. Um, I know it was talked about, you know, what's next, the gas stations. Like, yeah, I think, I think we should regulate gas stations. Like they sell drugs in gas stations, you know, like, um, just go to, go to the counter at a, at a, a map co or a locally owned place. I mean, you'll, you'll see all kinds of stuff. I mean, like this stuff is being pushed on us on a wide scale. It's not a, It's a very serious problem within our society. I'm not speaking against marijuana. I'm not speaking against alcohol or anything. What I'm saying is when you add in all the elements and all the different substances within our society, you have what our society looks like, and that's a bunch of crazy people that are addicted to their phones. That's all I've got for my rant. Thank you.

Councilman Brown, you're recognized.

Thank you, Mayor. couple of the previous speakers have brought up some some points also about not being close to the school okay I understand that but this is but engaged in greater than 25% of merchandise sales is that that don't mean they can't go across street to the convenience store that sells gas and this is just a little part that's still gonna be able to be built right across street from from a school so if That's not going to stop it being available by a school. It's just targeted for the full shops, practically, that sell mostly that. But we still have convenience stores across from the school where they can just walk up there and grab it. It may not have as big a selection, but this is not going to stop that from being sold close to a school, church, park. It still could be sold right next door at a convenience store. It's just the quantity of availability, the options may not be as great. So it's still going to be available right next door, just not at the volume.

I agree with you in the sense of it is available. You can go to Walmart and get this as well or even some grocery stores. When the original sponsor was speaking at the Planning Commission about this, I think it's more about the optics of seeing these stores. When you pass a gas station, it doesn't say vape shop. It may have a little sign somewhere on there that they sell that, but they also have other things and beer and Pepsi and other things on the signs. This was more about the optics of a vape-only shop or exclusive vape shop in proximity across from a school or near a playground where it was right there. So I don't want to put words in your mouth, but I think that was some of the early discussion. We know this is available in other places, but it's the concentration of it being a primary use.

Right. And the ones that focus more on this are more colorful lights and all that may draw the attention of kids. The convenience store, most of them aren't just advertising all that stuff. So that's kind of my look at it, and also like one of the previous speakers about where does it stop? Where do we not nail salons, whatever else it may be, Maybe restaurants. Maybe there's too many steakhouses in this block or something. I don't think there could ever be too many steakhouses, but I'm kind of a meatitarian. That's just my current thought on it. Thank you.

Councilman Chandler, you're recognized.

I've got a couple of points and then I promise you I will not even do nothing but vote on this next week. If If I want to build a smoke shop if this passes, say on Dover Road, well, I'm going to get turned down because of my location. But a kid can get in a car and drive all over town. Just because you're making it Instead of two miles, you're making it ten miles. I mean, every one of us in here has been guilty when we were underage of drinking. And, you know, back when I was a kid, you had to go to Kentucky. It didn't bother me. Let's go to Kentucky. And the last thing is... Just because it's a state law doesn't mean we, it's a state law against murder. So does that mean we need to go to our legal counsel and say, well, you know, it's a state law against it, so we're going to have to write a city ordinance against murder. If there's a state law against it, it's already in place. And we just need to find out what the enforcement tool is. That's it.

I'll just make one clarifying statement on that. The state law just deals with cannabinoid, THC, CBD products, not vape tobacco and other stuff. So it's that side of the products.

So as crazy as our state legislators are, they didn't even bother to fool with tobacco.

Pretty strong lobby up there. Councilman Holloman, you're recognized. Thank you, Mayor. This will be the last thing I say on that. Our society has a very serious drug problem. Obviously, there is a vast amount of these vape stores, weed stores, whatever we want to call them, around our city. And the fact of the matter is that they exist. We live in a free market. The reason that they exist is because people shop at them, and we care about money more than anything in our society. So they do exist for a reason. Thus... Thus, the amount of smoke shops is actually evidence of a greater problem within our society of a drug problem. And, you know, is this the right solution? Is it the wrong solution? You know, I'm not one to say right now. But I do think we need to take steps to heal ourselves as a society.

And that's all. Thank you.

Any more comment or question? I do have a question. I know the liquor store... Ordinance was referenced and that is a severe taxation on our city clerk's office to monitor that everything from lotteries Pulling permits certificate of compliance. It's really time intensive. How is this to be implemented?

That's a great question and the sponsor and I specifically went in without trying to tax the clerk's office anymore. So when we first started looking at, can you limit this to one to 5,000, one to 6,000 residents, it then becomes a permit. This becomes just a use permitted, uh, with conditions, which means you're either going to get a conditional use permit through the code department or when you pull your business license, you'll be said, Nope, you're not meeting these regulations. Here's the three regulations to follow. So, It should be handled through the code department through either of those processes.

Okay, so no special permit is required? No. It's just purely a review by?

Of the conditions by the code department.

Okay, all right, good. All right, any other questions regarding this ordinance? All right, thank you, Mr. Tindall.

Thank you, and please contact us if you have any other questions about this. I know it's a little different than normal, but we'll be able to answer your questions.

All right, we're now ready for the consent agenda. Madam Clerk.

All items in this portion of the agenda are considered to be routine and non-controversial by the council and may be approved by one motion. However, a member of the council may request that an item be removed for separate consideration under the appropriate committee report. Ordinance one, 2026-27, second reading. ordinance amending the zoning code a map of the city of Clarksville application of Lewis contracting for a zone change on a parcel of land located on the western frontage of Evans Road 350 plus or minus feet south of the intersection of Britain Springs Road and Evans Road from our m1 single-family mobile home residential district to our three three-family residential district Ordinance for 2026, 27 second reading an ordinance amending the zoning code and map of the city of Clarksville application of a regional planning commission for a zone change on properties. East of public square, south of college street, north of Madison street and west of south fifth street to also include property on the Northeast corner of south fifth street from CBD central business district to CBD central business district and H one historic overlay. Ordinance 5-2026-27, second reading, an ordinance repealing chapters 9.3 and 9.5 of the city zoning ordinance of the city of Clarksville and replacing them with new chapters with regard to the Regional Historic Zoning Commission, Common Design Review Board, Historic Overlay, and Downtown Overlay Districts. Ordinance 6-2026-27, second reading, ordinance approving commercial driveway access for applicant Bill Mace to Ted Crozier Boulevard with access points designated on survey of McKay Burchett and company engineers dated July 20th 2026 resolution 13 2026 27 a resolution approving appointments to the common design review board Housing Authority and parking Commission resolution 15 20 26 27 a Resolution approving a retail liquor store certificate of compliance for Kiara partners Nick and by Patel sole member for top dog liquors located at two eight nine six Wilma Rudolph Boulevard and repealing the certificate of compliance for nine three one liquors also at two eight nine six Wilma Rudolph Boulevard and the adoption of minutes from August 6th and

Thank you, Madam Clerk. Any comment or question regarding the consent agenda? Councilman Claunch, you're recognized.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'd like to register a no for Ordinance 01-2026-27, Ordinance 06.

When we get there next week.

Apologies.

Not a problem. You're always ahead of your time. We like that. Okay. Any other comment or question regarding this consent agenda? Okay. We're ready for the Finance Committee report. Chairman Streetman, you're recognized.

Thank you, Mayor. Ordinance 08-20-26-27, first reading, an ordinance authorizing the mayor or his designee to conduct negotiations and to enter an agreement for purchase of easements and or rights of way or should negotiations fail to pursue condemnation through use of eminent domain for acquisition of property for a public purpose for Jordan Road and Eva Sidewalks Projects. Finance Committee voted in favor of approval. Transportation Streets and Garage Committee voted to postpone to the September Transportation Streets and Garage Committee meeting. Mayor, can we ask Mr. Smith to come up here and talk about this?

Yes, we can. Mr. Smith, if you don't mind, come up and share with us about this project, please.

Sure thing. So you guys may have heard some of the chatter. Community Health Foundation awarded a sum of money to the Parks and Recreation Department through Bikers Who Care for a skate park. We also received an award near $800,000 for a project that our grants writer, Ms. Winters, thankfully applied for. It's a capital project that the city council established post-tornado. It's been hot for about two years. We've got about 100K in it already in design. So we thought, you know, let's go after some of this money, and thankfully we were awarded. The trouble is we have one calendar year to complete this project, and knowing how much was involved, we omitted at this time the Eva Drive section of this, and this is just Jordan connecting over to Fort Campbell Boulevard. Last year, last fiscal year, we completed the Minglewood connection to the new library. This would be a connection from the new library all the way, believe it or not, to Ringgold Elementary because we just did that capital project recently. This is a great project. We're partnering with Kiwanis on this. It's a storybook trail. So we've got partnerships with the library. This is just a really, really neat project. That being said, if it's postponed, we'll go through kind of the brass tacks of that. This is going to be an absolute scramble to finish in a year because the money that we were awarded will only allow us to do this work in-house. We can't sub it out and get it done for the money that we've got. We've got to buy the property. Now, this is abstract. I will say this is abstract. Councilperson Lovato kind of pointed out this is a little different than we typically do our projects. Typically, we have the appraisals done, and we're ready to go, and we know what those values are and whatnot. In this case, we own all the right-of-way. So we already own the land necessary where the sidewalks will exist. What we need is to be able to slope the yards behind. So this is easement acquisition. Right now, those yards, if you guys have been out in Jordan Road and whatnot, they're all ditches. They all convey stormwater. We intend to build sidewalks over top of that. So in order to make this work, we've got to move those ditches behind. We've asked the developer, is there a way we can make that a little more gentle where they can manage and mow those areas so instead of ditches behind the sidewalks, we'll have swales or more gentle conveyance of stormwater. The average price that we're going to pay for those properties is around $3,500. There are 32 involved. We think that's going to be, depending on where it lands, somewhere in the $120K range for property acquisition. We have money in the budget for other sidewalk projects that we'll use to do this. We're just going to shift the priority. Before this award, the priority was North Liberty Church in Appleton, so we're just kind of shifting that for acquisition. Some of the months we're talking about are winter months, so a year's time is not really a year's time, and believe it or not, the Kiwanis signed the contract, so we're already a month into that year. So if I lose another month to postpone and discuss and whatnot, I can't complete this project, and we should probably give the money back. So this is no match on this. This is $800,000 free. Usually we have 80-20 splits and stuff like that. So I would appreciate your support on this. Thank you.

Councilman Brown, you're recognized.

Mr. Smith, you answered one of the questions I was going to ask was how many properties it was. You said 32. Yes. But there's nobody's houses involved in this. It's just their frontage, you know, pretty much the ditch line, put a sidewalk in and than having to redo their drainage.

Exactly that. It's slope and construction easement because in order to manipulate that area, we have to walk or damage the ground, and so we have to compensate for that and bring it back to a certain level. The construction easements we have to pay for are temporary. The slope easements are permanent, but it's not a taking. Eric could probably talk about that. If we take right-of-way, we own it in fee simple and whatnot. This is just reshaping land. We don't own it after this.

All right. So if it did have to go to – and eminent domain is the last resort on all this. I know it's put into each one of the ordinances just in case it gets to that point. But if it did have to go to eminent domain, I think that would put us past the year of being able to do the job anyway if it went to that extreme.

Well, our city attorney is very crafty. and there's an inverse condemnation that he's, I don't know, there's big words, and they're well above my pay grade, but there's a way that we could move forward anyway while that condemnation process was within the courts, and the court would decide what the value owed to that person would be post-construction.

All right, thank you. Thank you. Councilman Smith?

Thank you, Mayor. Mr. Smith, has the residents been notified about this?

No, we don't have first reading yet. I think it would be premature to talk to them.

No, we don't have first reading, but I'm thinking we should probably give them an idea that this may happen to get them ready to be deciding whether they want to do this or not. That way we can know Are we going to obtain all 32 of these properties through easements, taking their easements? So I was just saying that we should always notify the residents before we even make a decision as to whether we're going to do this or not. That way we know if it's really going to be 32 properties that we're going to have to take, isn't it?

Sure, and I think some of that's already been accomplished through the establishment of the capital project and the amount of public meetings that we've had here in this chamber that that's occurring. As to the unique amount of capture on each property, we have a negotiation team that will go out and sit in the evenings in the living rooms with each of these families and walk them through. It's a third party that does that, and it's a really, really good process.

Okay. Thank you.

Any more questions for Mr. Smith? Thank you, sir. Chairman Streetman?

Thank you, Mayor. Ordinance 09-20-26-27, first reading. An ordinance amending the official code of the City of Clarksville, Title 12, Streets and Other Public Ways and Places, Chapter 3, Drainage, Section 12-304, Land Disturbing Activities, Paragraph 2G, and Chapter 3, Drainage, Section 12-309, Non-Stormwater Discharges, to provide needed updates. Both the Finance and the Transportation Streets and Garage Committees voted in favor of approval, and Mayor, I'm not really sure why he walked back, but could we ask Mr. Smith to take a couple steps back up to the microphone?

We can ask him. I don't know. Mr. Smith. Sure thing. So TDAC did their typical audit, and they had two findings this time around. The one finding was It's all verbiage. The first said that we and we'll talk about waivers later, I think. But one of those things said that the director of streets, the street department could waive permit requirements. And it's been that way for, you know, it's survived the past several audits that they had. But this time they took issue with it in essence that somebody could extrapolate that. we would also be waiving state permit requirements. So they asked us to amend that language to identify only local permits were within the purview of our waiver. And the second relates to illicit discharges. Believe it or not, it kind of reads this way, that the street department could allow somebody to illicitly discharge material. So I'm not saying dumping motor oil down the drain or something like that, but I agree 100%. Let's take that language out. I can't think of a circumstance where that would be permissible.

Questions for Mr. Smith? Thank you, sir. I'm not going far. Chairman Streetman.

Resolution 09-20-26-27, a resolution authorizing a memorandum of agreement between the City of Clarksville Police Department and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives pertaining to reimbursement of overtime salary costs and other approved costs incurred in connection with Joint operations, both the finance and public safety committees voted in favor of approval. If you want, we can bring up Chief Burdine.

You want to bring up Police Chief David Smith?

No, that is not the police chief. I think I'd rather have the expert, the police chief, type word on.

That'd be Chief Montgomery. All right. Chief Burdine? We'll get around to you in a minute.

you don't mind explain what we're doing here well we've had to be honest with you we've had an MOU with ATF for many many years it's they've contacted us and we need to update our MOU and part of our MOU is always part of the reimbursement if we do an invest investigation and So bottom line is that we have detectives here, and they go through to become what's called a task force officer. And the TFO is what we call those, and they will be – credentialed with the ATF. Now, they'll spend their time here, their offices are here, and they don't spend much time anywhere else but Clarksville. But on occasion, when specifically if we have violent crime that is going on, we will leverage ATFs and force multiply with them to potentially even take people federally with charges. So why it's coming through the FNA from public safety is that there's a money component to this that allows us to get reimbursed if we have officers that are working on an ATF case so we can get reimbursed for that money while they're working for them. But the MOU and the partnership with ATF is certainly nothing new, and we've used it frequently over the past several years.

Questions about this resolution? Thank you, Chief. Okay. Chairman Streetman.

Thank you, Mayor. Resolution 10-20-26-27, a resolution of the City of Clarksville, Tennessee City Council declaring the identity of certain cybersecurity vendors to be confidential pursuant to TCA 10-7-504-I3C. The Finance Committee voted in favor of approval. This is just allowing us, as far as the Tennessee state law already allows us to be able to do this, but it allows us to be able to redact where we are purchasing equipment from and the exact equipment and brand of equipment that we are purchasing. That is beneficial to us because when hackers and different individuals like that are able to get that information, they can find easier ways to be able to find the holes to be able to get into our system. So this is just allowing us to redact that information to not make it as readily available to those out there who might want to commit criminal activity against our system.

Questions about this resolution? Chairman's treatment?

Thank you, Mayor. That concludes my report.

Okay. Neighborhood and Community Services Committee. Chairman Shekinah, be recognized. Thank you, Mayor. I'll have a report next week. Thank you. Parks and Recreation Committee. Chairman Zacharias.

Thank you, Mayor. I'll have a full report next week, but we do have a couple events that the registration is closing soon. Play in the Past is an event designed for kids to learn about historical parlor games, and that's at Fort Defiance on September 5th. Dips and Sips is healthy food and fellowship at Crow Recreation Center on September 9th. And then the award-winning farm-to-table dinner will be held at Freedom Point on September 12th from 5 to 8. Registration is required for all those events.

If you're going to get to the farm-to-table dinner, you better get your tickets now because it sells out quickly. All right, we're ready for Public Safety Committee. Chairman Lovato.

Thank you, Mayor. I'll have a full report next week.

All right, we're ready for transportation, streets, and garage committee. Chairman Smith, you have an ordinance?

Yes, thank you, Mayor. I have a report on September 3rd, but I do have one ordinance to bring forth, and that's Ordinance 10-2026-27, an ordinance amending the official code of the City of Clarkshire, Title 12, streets and other public ways and places, Chapter 1 in general, Section 12, 124, sidewalks, to add paragraphs L and M regarding exemption and sidewalks appeal. During the TSG committee, all members present voted to disapprove this ordinance. For the simple fact, we feel that everyone deserves a right to live in a safe neighborhood and have sidewalks in their neighborhood. And if we make a decision, allow someone to make a decision to say, hey, we're not going to put sidewalks in this area, this area, or this area. We think that this is... will not allow people to have the benefits of having walkways in their neighborhoods. They won't have active living, such as safe paths to encourage people to walk and exercise outside, or just anything that they need to do to get to school or to work or to shop. We think that sidewalks should belong in every neighborhood, regardless of where someone lives. And so this is why it was disapproved.

Councilman Brown, you have a question or comment?

I have a comment on this. I'm on the Transportation, Streets, and Garage Committee also, and I think the big issue here is that whoever the director of the streets department may be now down the road, this just gives them the authority to say, you don't need sidewalks where you're at. I understand the point of this coming is a business is trying to get a site plan together, but our ordinance says they have to have a sidewalk on 374, on 101st, because that's where the property meets up. The state's not going to let them. So I do see an issue there, but it's not just restricted to commercial. This is also attached to residential. So... I can see a point to it, but I think, uh, you know, as like the second part on there says, sidewalk appeal can be heard by the transportation streets and garage committee where the exemption can be just given by the street department director. I think if it actually came to this transportation streets and garage committee for the exemption at least it would give us the input on saying yay or nay where the way it's written is we just get told about it afterwards and you know we've put the the ordinances in that require the sidewalks but at least if the exemptions came to the transportation streets and garage committee also i could see it you know going along with it then then that way it doesn't have to come to the full council, but it would be representatives from the council that would be voting to give them the exemption. Like the one that has come up with this. The state's not going to let them put sidewalks on that road because there's not going to be an entrance on that road. So I could see that exemption being done, but nothing's to say that another one comes up and the street director says, well, We'll let you not have the sidewalks here, or at least if it came to the committee, we would have the input, at least the members of that committee, to address this there. So the way it's written, I just can't go along with it, but if we made a few changes, which may be an amendment next week or something, I can see it a little bit more.

That's all. Councilman Lovato, you're recognized.

Thank you, Mayor. I do not have any questions, but for the sake of transparency, would we like Mr. Smith and Mr. Tindall to come up and explain why this is in front of us?

Yeah, that's a good point. Mr. Smith, if you don't mind, come and walk us through this ordinance and try to address some of the concerns maybe.

Sure thing. So Mr. Tyndall's office is in a bit of a tight spot the way the ordinance is written. It says that sidewalks have to be on any one of those frontages. Sidewalks have to, in essence, depending on your perception, exist on alleyways. And we just know that those aren't for conveyance of sidewalks. So the circumstances, and I get it, it could be carte blanche, that we would be waiving sidewalks are those kinds of circumstances. I can tell you that we already have the ability in transparency to wave sidewalks, given certain circumstances, including ownership and other features. We have the ability to wave stormwater, and none of that is presented to a committee for review, and that's all in ordinance and that's all codified. who are not asking, we're actually increasing transparency by bringing it to the committee. And I get, I understand, it could be for approval, but bringing it to you is more than we're already presently doing in either of those circumstances. And then, to Mr. Bittner's point, creating an appeal or due process for folks that feel that either the Planning Commission, myself, and, you know, in joint are incorrect, and then having the board in that due process fashion appeal. So... His hands are tied sometimes. Sometimes he and I disagree about the different classifications of roadways and whether sidewalks belong. Main Street's a good example. We would require sidewalks on Main Street, but not on Grand Alley behind. So the way that he interprets the code, it's required in both cases. This helps clear that up. It would give us the right to waive the sidewalks. Again, they're within the street department's purview.

Questions for Mr. Smith? Thank you. Chairman Smith.

Also, we need to think about smart growth. We know that smart growth means that pedestrian infrastructure is very important for child safety. They need sidewalks to walk to school, and we know that. It also reduces accidents. So we have to think about when we're saying, hey, we're going to exempt sidewalks in certain places. This could affect the child's Safety. It can cause a lot of problems, such as a child getting hit by a car, for instance. But having that sidewalk will reduce maybe the accident. And so we need to think about smart growth when we make decisions on whether we're going to exempt sidewalks in a neighborhood. Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you. Any other more comment or question regarding this ordinance?

Mr. Gould.

Okay, thank you. We're now ready for the item under New Business Resolution 14-2026-27, a resolution approving the official designation of North 2nd Street from Riverside Drive to College Street to be designated as the Sergeant John W. Hunt Memorial Boulevard. Members, this came from me. Sergeant Hunt served this city more than 30 years as part of the Clarksville Police Department. Upon his retirement, he was appointed to the Beer Board and then eventually the Clarksville Housing Authority Board. During the Clarksville Housing Authority Board meeting, he suffered a medical emergency and was unconscious and never recovered. And his family and I and his fraternity brothers would like to recognize and honor his memory by designating this stretch of road in his memory, it's fitting that we do that. So I'll be glad to answer any questions. Councilman Smith.

Mayor, I just want to know how was the street decided, which street decided to put his name on? We designated his name under his name. How was it decided to pick Riverside Drive to College Street?

It's a good question. Austin P was near and dear to his heart because he was a graduate of Austin P. We wanted something close. We couldn't do College Street in front of the campus because it's named after Evans Harville. So we got close. Okay. Councilman Chandler.

Thank you, Mayor. I was fortunate enough to work with Sergeant Hunt for many years. And of all the people I worked with in my 30-something years on law enforcement, He was always the one that I never had to worry about being there when I needed him. He was a great man and an exceptional police officer.

Thank you. Any more comment or question regarding this resolution? Next week we will read into the record the report on debt obligation of the debt issuance that we just did, the bond anticipation note. No actions required on that. We'll just enter it into the record. We are now ready for public comments. We allow three people five minutes each. Any member of the public wish to address the council? Okay, looks like we're ready for mayor and council member comments. Councilman Zacharias, you're recognized.

Thank you, Mayor. I just wanted to let members of the community know that Habitat for Humanity of Montgomery County is hosting its 20th application preparation class for 2027 homeownership program. And that is on Saturday, August 29th at 1.30 at Loaves and Fishes. That's at 825 Crossland Avenue. And if you are interested but can't be there, there will be a Zoom link and emailed materials for those who register but can't attend in person.

That's all.

Thank you. Thank you. Councilman Streetman, you're recognized.

Thank you, Mayor. I would just like to... Make sure everybody is aware that Austin Peay State University is kicking off their season tonight, their first game of the football season. They are playing at home, so I am going to be rooting for our governors, and I say let's go, Peay.

Let's go, Peay. Councilman Peters, you're recognized.

I just want to add to that. I think they let veterans and... and ID card holders, soldiers, and for free now, I think. So I heard that on the radio.

Awesome. Awesome. Councilman Smith, you're recognized.

Yes. I want to thank whoever put together that black rodeo. I guess the horses and I tell you, I'm going to say this. There was two things going on in this city that African Americans really loved, and that was the black rodeo and that Southern Soul something, and I went to that, and I wish they hadn't have. I mean, it was good. Don't get me wrong. Don't get me wrong. It was awesome. It was packed. The rodeo was packed. And I think Closhville outdone itself. Well, where I went. I had a front seat ticket. VIP ticket. I didn't know. I thought I was going to be hearing some gospel music, but it turned out to some other kind of music. I kind of left a little early, but it was really nice. Thank you, Closhville, Montgomery County, what you've done for the African Americans having some stuff here. Everything was beautiful. Thank you for that.

Is that where you caught your cold?

I think that's where I got it.

All right. All right. Okay, that concludes our business. We're adjourned. See you next week.