The City Council on Tuesday night approved the latest version of a controversial Business Improvement District (BID) on first reading. A public hearing and final vote will be next Tuesday.
Voting in favor were Carol Berz, Anthony Byrd, Jerry Mitchell, Chip Henderson and Erskine Oglesby.
Ken Smith and Russell Gilbert were opposed and Demetrus Coonrod abstained. Darrin Ledford was absent.
Councilwoman Coonrod had an amendment to take the Paty property on Patten Parkway out of the BId. The Patys have strongly opposed it. The motion failed.
The council earlier Tuesday announced changes to the public hearing next Tuesday on the BID.
The BID narrowly passed earlier on first reading. Another first reading was required due to a number of changes in the proposal.
Business owners in the zone will be allowed to speak at the public hearing in addition to the state-mandated property owners (people who have businesses within a building in the district). There will be one business owner per property allowed.
The council will allow a total of 60 minutes for the public hearing with 30 minutes for each side -- support and opposition.
There will be sign-up sheets outside of City Council chambers and will require those wishing to speak, and who meet qualifications, to sign up before the beginning of the 6 p.m. meeting.
Each speaker will get up to three minutes.
Under a BID, all property owners within the district are assessed a fee that provides for additional services in the district.
Rivercity Company officials said total assessments of $1 million would be levied.
In council discussion on Tuesday afternoon, Councilwoman Carol Berz had questions about the power the BID board would have over the project, and the power the council itself had.
“We’re giving a group of people permission to have an area in our city for special purposes,” said the councilwoman, “I’m not so sure that everything else shouldn’t be at arms length. What should be simple and straightforward has been complicated more than it should be. This is not a board appointed by us, so we shouldn’t be over this. Because there’s an audit over this. If we’re reviewing something, we can’t be over the behavior of it. Please, keep it clean.”
When she asked City Attorney Phil Noblett who would be allowed to speak to the board, he had answers. He said, “It has to be affected property owners. This is the only opportunity to speak about it if they’re a property owner. It’s folks who are required to pay something in relation to that board.”
Councilman Chip Henderson wanted to make sure every side had a chance to voice their opinion at the public hearing.
He said, “Here’s what I think we need to be careful of. If we’re going to set a time limit of 20 minutes, then divide the time up between the people who want to speak, so they can all be heard. Whether that happens to be one minute apiece, or five minutes apiece.”
Councilman Russell Gilbert didn’t quite agree with the time limit, and voiced his objection.
“I think it should be three minutes,” he said, “You know you can’t get out much in one minute. We know there’s going to be more people there trying to speak and affect it tonight.”
The council finally agreed upon the three minutes for each person, and 30 minutes for each side in support and dissenting.