After months of following closed-door negotiations between the Titans and Mayor John Cooper, Metro councilmembers finally have a chance to vet the team’s proposed $2.1 billion new stadium. Late last month, the mayor’s office filed three pieces of relevant legislation with the council. Two — a pre-lease terms sheet and a request for quote about stadium-related construction — were deferred in council committees. The third, an ordinance to bump the city’s hotel tax 1 percent and direct the revenue toward a new stadium, passed on first reading Tuesday night.
Agreements between the team and city exist publicly as a terms sheet, filed as a council resolution meant to facilitate ongoing discussion. Its framing by the administration has raised the hackles of several councilmembers who are worried that a council endorsement of a nonbinding outline will be spun as a blanket endorsement of any future deal. The most in-depth discussion of the nonbinding outline came a day after it was filed, in the Oct. 26 East Bank Stadium Committee, an ad hoc body set up by Vice Mayor Jim Shulman to expand council’s bandwidth around the multibillion-dollar project. Councilmembers — united in their skepticism — expressed alarm about the position they were in, showing an early glimpse of the emerging friction between the mayor’s office and the legislative body around a deal that has come to the council mostly already baked.
“The thing says: nonbinding, nonbinding, super-duper nonbinding,” said Councilmember At-Large Bob Mendes, who chairs the committee. “Any notion that a vote from us means anything more than ‘continue the discussion at your own peril’ would be unfair to us."
“I’m not going to apologize for bringing this early to you to get your reaction,” said finance director Kelly Flannery, one of a handful of individuals who appeared at the meeting to explain the administration’s stance. Others included Jeffrey Oldham of Bass Berry and Sims, Metro’s bond counsel; Sam Wilcox, a senior Cooper adviser; and Tom Cross of Metro Legal. Flannery told councilmembers that the team deserves a nod of confidence from the body before it begins to put money toward a new stadium. Councilmembers reiterated that they don’t want Titans’ risk management to come before their responsibility to represent taxpayers.
“This whole part of this conversation has been a little bit alarming to me,” responded Councilmember Courtney Johnston. “I think we’re putting the cart before the horse.”
The East Bank Stadium Committee has no formal legislative power but acts as a hearings court to better inform colleagues ahead of votes. On Oct. 31, the council’s Budget and Finance Committee officially deferred the resolution two meetings. It will come up ahead of the Dec. 1 Metro Council meeting. Councilmembers Zulfat Suara, Bob Mendes, Courtney Johnston and Sharon Hurt supported the deferral, while Councilmember Emily Benedict pushed back, citing a rushed and confused timeline. “The administration right now is pressuring us to make a decision,” she told her colleagues. She implied that an up-down vote would relieve that pressure and get more clarity from the administration.
The administration also asked the council to approve its request for quote (RFQ), a solicitation to gauge the price of certain aspects of stadium-related development on the East Bank. It was deferred one meeting, setting it up for more discussion later this month.
Mendes — a commercial litigator by day — has taken up stadium scrutiny as his legislative crusade, guiding stadium discussion at both committees. He has published extensive analysis of the deal as more details emerge.
