@startleseasily is a fervent observer of the Metro government's comings and goings. In this column, "On First Reading," she'll recap the bimonthly Metro Council meetings and provide her analysis. You can find her in the pew in the corner by the mic, ready to give public comment on whichever items stir her passions. Follow her on Twitter here.
On Tuesday night, the Metro Council pushed back on one of their own, went on record opposing the state’s bill to cut the council’s size, and continued debate on a proposal to redefine “family” in the zoning code.
Don’t Poke the Bear
Council weighed in Tuesday night on a bill currently under consideration by the state legislature to shrink the council’s size from 40 members down to a maximum of 20, but not without a prolonged debate that laid bare stark divisions among councilmembers on the issue.
It’s no secret that a contingent of conservative CMs has been lobbying the state to pass the bill. The bill’s House sponsor, House Majority Leader William Lamberth (R-Portland), has said as much in his defense of the legislation. So CM Dave Rosenberg thought it important to set the record straight, and he crafted an exceedingly reasonable resolution to memorialize the council’s opposition. Unfortunately, some of his colleagues were so concerned about “poking the bear” that they nearly talked themselves out of taking a stand.
I must admit, I’m baffled by the hand-wringing. I can’t imagine any other local legislative body in the state worrying this much about simply going on record regarding a bill that would amount to a seismic shift in their governance structure without the consent of their own voters.
This is routine shit, people. Local legislative bodies across the entire damn country regularly weigh in on state-sponsored proposals that would affect them or their constituents. The fact that the council spent so much time debating whether they’re allowed to politely register their opposition without fear of triggering a nuclear response from the legislature shows just how fractured the relationship is.
I think At-Large CM Bob Mendes said it best: “We’re not going to compromise our way into a better relationship with the state. If all of us went up there and promised, ‘We’ll stop saying the word gay, we’ll stop saying abortion, we’ll stop saying immigration, bring the RNC to town! Can you please drop all the legislation?’ It would never happen.” His colleagues ultimately agreed, approving the resolution on a vote of 31-3-2. CMs Robert Swope, Jonathan Hall and Tonya Hancock voted no; CMs Larry Hagar and Courtney Johnston abstained.
Hall Monitor
Embattled District 1 CM Jonathan Hall was on the hot seat again Tuesday night. A series of procedural snafus led to a rare third-reading public hearing on a proposed rezoning in his district. The plan was unanimously approved by the Planning Commission, which would typically ensure smooth sailing toward Metro Council approval. But concerns from neighbors about being left out of the process — an unfortunately common refrain from Hall’s constituents — led the council to kill the bill.
Meanwhile, a bill — disapproved unanimously by the Planning Commission — to permit a surface parking lot in Mary Carolyn Roberts’ District 20 passed on second reading amid calls from colleagues to trust her judgment. “This is a district issue, and the councilmember who’s been asked twice to represent these folks — and has done it faithfully — is supporting this, and that’s all it takes for me,” said CM Dave Rosenberg.
CM Tanaka Vercher pointed to this inconsistent treatment in explaining her decision to support Hall’s rezoning. And sure, on its face, the council’s actions here may seem incongruous. But to me, the difference is crystal clear. Roberts has built consensus and coalition in her district, serving her constituents for nearly eight years. She’s accessible, reliable and dedicated. Hall is, by all accounts, none of those things.
Of note, none of the four at-large CMs voted in favor of Hall’s bill. That’s almost certainly because residents who have grievances with their district representation turn to at-large CMs for support. Moral of the story: If you don’t do the work, it’s only a matter of time before your colleagues start pushing back. Trust is earned, and Hall hasn’t earned the trust of his colleagues. Roberts has.
Legalize the Golden Girls
CM Sean Parker has been delayed yet again in his attempt to change how the zoning code defines “family.” Despite there being literally zero opposition from the public at either the Planning Commission or council public hearings, CMs have taken it upon themselves to put the brakes on Parker’s proposal, which has been deferred to the Feb. 21 meeting.
A key argument against Parker’s bill is that the Metro Codes Department will be unable to enforce the cap on unrelated people living together if it increases from three — the current limit — to five or seven, as Parker has proposed. At Monday night’s Planning and Zoning Committee meeting, CM Tom Cash said he’s not inclined to pass laws that can’t be enforced. Call me crazy, but it would seem that by legalizing households of four or five unrelated people, you’d actually free up Codes resources to focus on the more objectionable cases. And hell, if you don’t want laws on the books that can’t be enforced, why not just delete the limit altogether?
At one point during the committee, CM Courtney Johnston encouraged people to break the law, but just be quiet about it and hope your neighbors don’t report you. When that’s the advice from a “law and order” CM, we’ve got problems.
Here’s the bottom line: Virtually no one knows this is illegal. Because why on earth would it be? It’s nonsensical. So by approving Parker’s bill, the council would not create some mad dash to live with four of your closest friends. Most people don’t want to do that! But for those who do, or for those who need to, they’d be removing an unnecessary, antiquated and largely unenforceable barrier.
After three years of faithful service to the Nashville Twitter community, I finally did it: I gaveled in the meeting. I know it might seem silly. It is, objectively, a silly goal to have, this task typically reserved for children (as my friend Whitney Pastorek accurately pointed out on Twitter). But it meant something to me. I spend so much time thinking and writing and tweeting about Metro, because I care deeply about my city and its people. So getting to be up there, in the middle of all the action, was genuinely just so freaking cool. Thanks to Councilmember Ginny Welsch for making it happen, and to Vice Mayor Jim Shulman for allowing it to happen.
