@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.
It was a scene reminiscent of last term’s public hearing on the new Titans stadium: A ragtag group of loosely organized laypeople going up against a bunch of downtown boosters and lobbyists in suits.
They were all there to comment on legislation that would merge the Gulch Business Improvement District with downtown's Central Business Improvement District. The plan would effectively extend the Nashville Downtown Partnership’s influence over Nashville’s ever-expanding greater downtown area.
In her latest recap, @startleseasily weighs in on a contentious rezoning proposal and the CBID's Gulchward creep
Supporters extolled the virtues of NDP, celebrating its role in creating a clean, safe downtown that is apparently the envy of the known universe. They also worked to counter negative press coverage about NDP’s tactics without actually addressing the negative press coverage about NDP’s tactics — like its contract with Solaren Risk Management, a security firm that employs off-duty Tennessee Highway Patrol officers to harass unhoused people downtown. To hear the supporters tell it, everything is sunshine and roses downtown! Nothing to see here, folks!
Opponents came prepared with lived experience and specific concerns about NDP’s hold over downtown. They’d done their research, and it showed, as speaker after speaker pointed to the real-life impact of NDP’s efforts to whitewash downtown’s streets in the name of tourism dollars. “Please don’t equate cleanliness with equity and justice,” warned Lindsey Krinks, co-founder of homeless advocacy group Open Table Nashville.
I’ll spare you the suspense. As with the Titans stadium, the suits won.
Baby Steps
Councilmember Jacob Kupin sponsors ordinance to expand district, says it will generate an estimated $8 million in tax revenue
There were some minor victories for oversight, though. The council approved a series of amendments to require council confirmation of some members of the CBID board; institute additional reporting regarding NDP’s interactions with unhoused people in the newly expanded CBID; and provide for a public grievance process.
During the council’s committee deliberations on the amendments, downtown district Councilmember Jacob Kupin fixated on the fact that he didn't receive the amendments until Monday morning ... which is exactly when everyone else, save the councilmembers who penned the amendments, received them. It may surprise Kupin to know that the public has to deal with this every single council meeting.
In committee, Kupin opposed East Nashville Councilmember Sean Parker’s amendment to require council confirmation of some CBID board members. Kupin and his allies on the “Common Sense Caucus” fearmongered about a “slippery slope.”
“A slippery slope to what, oversight?” asked Parker. “Uh-oh!”
To be clear, I’m not editorializing here. Parker literally said “uh-oh!” I encourage you all to watch the clip. It’s delightful.
Kupin’s initial opposition to the amendment — which prompted a negative recommendation by the budget committee — had softened by the time it came up for discussion on the council floor. He didn’t support it, but he wasn’t opposing it anymore, and he encouraged colleagues to “vote your conscience.” The council approved the amendment on a voice vote, with a handful of weak nos.
A Last-Ditch Effort
Councilmember Delishia Porterfield, who chairs the council’s budget committee, had mixed feelings about the bill. She’d been waffling in the days leading up to the council meeting, and even on the floor seemed unsure of where she might land.
In an effort to allow time for the council to get better educated on the CBID before taking a binding vote on such a big consolidation of power and influence, Porterfield moved for a one-year deferral. Council Director Margaret Darby, who serves as legal counsel for the council, opined that state law does not allow for a deferral. According to Darby, the council either needed to approve the bill as amended or reject it outright. A rejection would result in a one-year waiting period before the bill could be refiled. And because state law imposes strict timelines on the publication and passage of a CBID bill — timelines that don’t perfectly align with the council’s schedule — Kupin warned that such a wait might jeopardize the whole deal. He loves deferrals, he said, but state law tied his hands here. He just couldn’t risk it.
So Porterfield withdrew her motion to defer. But she had one more trick up her sleeve: a suggestion that Kupin withdraw the bill and refile it at a later date. Darby scrambled to consider the implications of such a move — was there actually a third option? She landed on yes, opining that a withdrawal would not constitute a rejection and would not trigger the yearlong waiting period to refile the bill.
Porterfield had laid the path for Kupin, brick by brick down the proverbial yellow road.
Kupin ignored her request, and the council moved to a vote, approving the CBID expansion easily with 29 votes in favor, six votes in opposition, and one abstention.
Regarding Porterfield’s suggestion that he withdraw the bill, Kupin responds, “I found it hard to consider that, and the consequences of that, after a lengthy public hearing and working through all the amendments.” He was caught off guard, he says, and he worried that Darby’s advice might prove inaccurate. “Even Vice Mayor Henderson was confused by Darby’s ruling,” Kupin says.
Porterfield explains that her suggestion was spurred by a line of questioning by another councilmember about having NDP present to the budget committee as part of the annual budget process. “Since the Gulch BID doesn’t expire until December 2026, I believed a withdrawal option would support further education, rebuild trust, and keep us on track,” says Porterfield. “The district councilmember saw it differently, and I understand that. We each acted on what we believed was best in the moment.”
Good on Porterfield for calling Kupin’s bluff, honestly. He could’ve been a hero. In the end, he looked more like the Cowardly Lion, pre-Dorothy.
V(F***)UMC
Vanderbilt University Medical Center has failed its transgender patients, caving to pressure from the federal government to cease providing gender-affirming care. The council’s four-member LGBTQ caucus is lighting them up for it.
Metro Council's LGBTQ Caucus condemns years-long pattern of rollbacks from hospital
As if by divine intervention, the caucus was given an opportunity to make a statement at Tuesday’s council meeting. On the agenda was a resolution to allow VUMC medical students and physicians to provide care at Metro’s Health Department. Behind the scenes, the caucus was organizing a protest vote. They would vote against the resolution, as a bloc, and some of the more progressive members of the body would join them. Those who weren’t comfortable voting no could abstain or “take a walk,” conveniently absenting themselves during the vote.
Councilmembers sympathetic to the cause were faced with a dilemma: How do you hold leadership accountable for shitty decisions without punishing students and doctors who had no say in those decisions — and who, for all we know, may vehemently disagree with those decisions?
Councilmember Bob Nash, a well-meaning grandfatherly type who has a tendency to wander into sharing thoughts he should’ve left in drafts, gave his take in committee. “There’s no telling how many of these doctors that we might be helping may be part of your LGBT+ community," he said. "We don’t know how many people they’re assisting that may ultimately be part of the LGBT community.”
As the full council considered the measure, there were no grand floor speeches; in fact, there was no discussion at all. The silence spoke for itself, as the resolution passed, 18-9-5.
Parting Is Such Sweet Sorrow
Readers, this has been my final installment of On First Reading.
I’m forever indebted to Scene editor-in-chief D. Patrick Rodgers for taking a chance on an untested, mouthy broad who likes to pop off online. Patrick gave me the space and guidance to grow as a writer and as a human. I quite literally would not be where I am today without him.
And to all the folks who’ve joined me on this journey, I cannot thank you enough. It’s been a blast.
