[{"_1":2,"_94":-5,"_95":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,74,84],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":44,"_46":47,"_48":49,"_50":51,"_52":53,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":59,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":65,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":67,"_71":72,"_73":72},"mediaId",6170172,"mediaKeyId","5398544-895df341f5accebb29cee1997cc87800","parentId",5398544,"title","Commission narrows non-agenda public comments to three minutes and moves them to end of meetings","audioSeconds",0,"startMs",2687000,"endMs","viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5398544-895df341f5accebb29cee1997cc87800&start=2687&end=2687","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5398544-895df341f5accebb29cee1997cc87800/thumbnail_2687000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6170172/Sumner-County/Tennessee/Commission-narrows-non-agenda-public-comments-to-three-minutes-and-moves-them-to-end-of-meetings","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6170172-3a7dc23289c57b2f7aa2cb56efd62253/orig.mp4?Expires=1771149841&Signature=eCWbJzPICrh3ClcERpZVJ6Mwk7C2STxlpupyK5vH-jYZo9CZXxK69jMmbIUrCxv0q0ZGMUvF0~klNr243xWaR~fxXgChfirU5v-bar9Klv7G7q59Lrx92ZK3SM51V1-4ItWT1ozlCt8CPXyBhqHM8FEI2r~Zz1HPCcuXe-x16MN-JK6IdODewNtJ~RboQ24cqdSPuB-5AEiGvI4BcCUpkxf2cemNKwg7SbQ2IjSnIsv5p~597JTC7x3pFk9lKo35GavMuxtnCvyoaiVkbPYZRd1MPbreFPVG5jXzdvJF0~ro70c1Msny21GmyXVwhA2s3kUnin9xsBf4sfUNUvqK6g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Sumner County, TN","date","2025-07-15T13:12:05Z","article","At its July 14 meeting the commission approved changes to the public-comment rules that shorten the time allowed for non-agenda speakers and change when those speakers will be heard.

Under the adopted change, persons speaking on topics not on the published agenda will be limited to three minutes each, and non-agenda comment will be heard at the end of the meeting. Speakers addressing items that remain on the published agenda will retain the existing five-minute allotment; if an item is removed from the agenda during the meeting, staff said the speaker would still retain the five-minute allocation to address that pulled agenda item.

The commission discussed competing concerns: some commissioners and members of the public said moving non-agenda items to the end prevents disruption of scheduled business and reduces the risk that large, organized groups could use non-agenda comment to congest the meeting. Others said moving non-agenda comment to the end of the meeting could discourage public participation because people may not be able to stay for multi-hour meetings. Commissioners debated whether moved items should retain full time allowances; the adopted language preserves five minutes for pulled agenda items and allows the chair discretion under the commission\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t's rules to manage time in specific circumstances.

The motion to limit non-agenda comments to three minutes passed; a later amendment moving non-agenda speakers to the end of the meeting was approved by a 4-2 vote, according to the meeting record.

Ending: The rule change will be incorporated into the commission's public-comment procedures; staff said they will refine the draft language for final placement in the commission rules and clarify sign-up-sheet procedures to reflect the new sequence and time limits.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Legislative Committee (Cam2) 7/14/25","oneSentenceSummary","The commission voted to limit non-agenda public comments to three minutes and to move non-agenda comments to the end of meetings; agenda items retain a five-minute limit and pulled agenda items keep their full allocation.","taxTitle","Sumner County, Tennessee","taxId",19115,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":75,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":76,"_41":42,"_43":77,"_45":77,"_46":78,"_48":79,"_50":80,"_52":81,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":82,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":83,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":67,"_71":72,"_73":72},6170175,"Commission takes up term-limits resolution; supporters and opponents split over continuity and turnover",146000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5398544-895df341f5accebb29cee1997cc87800&start=146&end=146","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5398544-895df341f5accebb29cee1997cc87800/thumbnail_146000.jpg","/articles/6170175/Sumner-County/Tennessee/Commission-takes-up-term-limits-resolution-supporters-and-opponents-split-over-continuity-and-turnover","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6170175-3ed618ce0018c3a6991ae1dd5d835107/orig.mp4?Expires=1771149841&Signature=ckTWdXctnjnqvuNJentgEZNMsfqBbLaTVg2zr3lU1YqG7P2OHWfI7DSqn5Y-gwDi6St1qzjujwjZUd8OYZSmO66oHIqrdtTCGKKD0yB72ozQir1BwQKYPZ4GolZw2frwzQ9~w2TmgD6mGMEJSLjbjtrAbTQY9ARYkulyChZbrpHOuU4MkUArmufGAVh6kqZJrSIHfnj8z9ik34ju-YdDQXgzY-ARZTBoWzIgt7VNmIgU2PJtzuHjfDP9Ub1FuaegnQaIygTr8ubKwEYcTha0Up8C2yCzKjyokeXNeGMDPw8z6EaHxTVFvlvqldKGucSi5kMxwg-YMMtoG1BNVnVaIQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The county commission heard extensive public comment and engaged in prolonged debate July 14 over a resolution to impose term limits for county commissioners.

Residents and community members spoke in favor of limits. Mike McLeod, who gave his address for the record, told the commission, \"the only way we're gonna save this country is if we put our limits in at all.\" Another commenter raised retirement-system concerns tied to long service and outside appointments, saying, \"that's just wrong. You know, talk about bettering your own bed,\" when describing how long legislative service can affect retirement benefits.

Commissioners responded with a range of views. Some said term limits would bring new ideas and increase public participation; others warned limits could reduce institutional knowledge and continuity on complex items such as budgeting and capital programs. Several commissioners suggested compromises to preserve continuity while imposing limits. Proposed amendments included:

- Staggering initial terms so odd-numbered districts would have a two-year initial term and even-numbered districts a four-year initial term, then moving to four-year terms thereafter, to avoid wholesale turnover in a single election cycle.
- A cap of two four-year terms for commissioners (an organization-level maximum), with a separate proposal to allow three terms in areas where recruiting candidates is difficult.
- A separate future proposal to prohibit county employees or spouses of county employees from seeking commission seats (commissioners said they would consider that language in a later draft).

A motion to reconsider Commissioner Becker's initial amendment was made and put before the body during the meeting; commissioners also discussed precise language complications caused by staggered two-/four-year initial terms and how the proposed language would count short initial terms toward the term limit.

No final adoption of a term-limits ordinance or resolution was recorded during the July 14 meeting. Commissioners agreed to continue work on language and scheduling, and several said they will return with revised language or bring separate proposals (for example, the employee/relative restriction) at a subsequent meeting.

Ending: Discussion and multiple amendments produced no final vote on the term-limits resolution on July 14; commissioners requested refined draft language and further review before any adoption vote.","Public commenters urged term limits and commissioners debated staggered terms, employee eligibility and maximum terms; multiple amendments were proposed but no final adoption was recorded during the July 14 meeting.",{"_33":85,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":86,"_41":42,"_43":87,"_45":87,"_46":88,"_48":89,"_50":90,"_52":91,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":92,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":93,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":67,"_71":72,"_73":72},6170180,"County staff warns switching adequate-facilities tax system could cut revenue and require state action",943000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5398544-895df341f5accebb29cee1997cc87800&start=943&end=943","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5398544-895df341f5accebb29cee1997cc87800/thumbnail_943000.jpg","/articles/6170180/Sumner-County/Tennessee/County-staff-warns-switching-adequate-facilities-tax-system-could-cut-revenue-and-require-state-action","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6170180-8e2fd9586c61349259d9ee2524cfd25a/orig.mp4?Expires=1771149841&Signature=omJLEAsluUbwfQi~qbwU~m2rOWlxP4RGyASMD6euoK4gk-BrV2WCvI~if7iBTnzJa4DtuGI1Mv5i05LYICqKy3~thtkehvJ9d17C3ZY5vBsR6YGegnbkgjBdfeQBunI6I19V5yYBSEgwxcfG4y5GZPMq8D-ozz2D39RNQ~dY39W7q8ir4kXgTyMA1CeMZy26ozlf6MkXyqbZN-LpSyLGAjDfHsl0HkGw846JGVJ5xli~tnBHo4s8mKlcV9brgQR-5ZSlsT8rO-AjCaxGLROk0iTVrufQgV6IT6y49mUCK7hy2qLmz1JdFSQbiFZK1oW6QAzObvzDkpXPE-H-SeWgqw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","County commissioners spent more than an hour on July 14 reviewing options to replace the county\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t's current adequate-facilities tax (AFT) system with a new statutory framework referenced in recent legislation (HB2426). Staff and counsel warned the change would be legally and administratively complex and could reduce collections unless the county meets several conditions.

County staff said the switch would require repeal of the county\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t's current private act and adoption of a capital-improvements program before implementation. Staff also said the statutory framework discussed in the briefing carries new rate caps and growth requirements: a cited cap of $1.50 per square foot (residential and commercial/industrial) with a commercial cap applying to the first 150,000 square feet, an initial four-year period after which increases could be limited to 10% and would require a two-thirds vote, and a requirement that the county sustain a roughly 20% growth rate over each decennial census period to remain eligible for the new structure.

Those requirements matter because, staff said, the county\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t currently collects an average of about $2.8 million a year from the AFT (the budget line shows roughly $3.1 million in a recent year). If the county cannot sustain the required growth, staff warned, the county could lose its ability to levy an adequate facilities tax under the new scheme. \"Once we repeal the old one, the old one's gone and we can never get it back,\" a county staff presenter told commissioners during the briefing.

Staff also described a shift in collection responsibility under the private-act framework the county now uses: if builders fail to pay required AFT charges, the municipalities that issued the building permits can be responsible for reimbursing the county under the current act. Staff said that distinction already has practical consequences: Hendersonville currently owes the county $225,841 for building permits issued without the AFT being collected, staff said.

Commissioners asked detailed procedural and fiscal questions. Staff emphasized several procedural preconditions to implementation: (1) repeal of the current private act or other enabling action; (2) formal adoption of a capital improvements program before implementation; and (3) two separate county legislative readings each adopted by two-thirds vote to set new rates under the statutory framework. Staff also said the statutory language limits commercial collections for very large projects, which could reduce revenue from projects that previously generated higher AFT receipts.

Budget impacts were discussed in rough terms during the meeting. Staff noted the county currently averages about $2.8 million annually in AFT revenue and that the proposed statutory approach could increase collections in some scenarios but also carries downside risk if growth requirements are not met. One speaker estimated a possible 10-year yield of tens of millions of dollars under optimistic assumptions; staff cautioned those estimates were sensitive to growth and to statutory caps. The codes director and county legal staff were cited in the presentation as having reviewed aspects of the change.

No final policy action to change the tax structure was adopted on July 14. Commissioners and staff agreed to continue work on the matter and to move detailed consideration to the county budget agenda for further review and action in a later meeting. The county\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t's staff recommended additional legal and financial analysis before any repeal or adoption steps.

Ending: Commissioners directed staff to return with more detailed legal and fiscal analysis and to consider the question as part of upcoming budget work, leaving any formal repeal or adoption decisions for a future meeting.","County staff told commissioners that moving the county onto a 2024-era adequate-facilities tax framework would require repeal of the county\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tprivate act, a capital improvements program, and sustained population growth or risk large revenue losses; Hendersonville currently owes $225,841 under the existing system.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Commission narrows non-agenda public comments to three minutes and moves them to end of meetings

Commission takes up term-limits resolution; supporters and opponents split over continuity and turnover

County staff warns switching adequate-facilities tax system could cut revenue and require state action