Gallatin council advances Project Phoenix planning, approves revised MOU language after months of debate

The Gallatin City Council on Wednesday voted to advance preliminary planning steps for Project Phoenix, the proposed mixed-use redevelopment in downtown Gallatin, by sending a revised resolution and an amended memorandum of understanding (MOU) to the next council meeting for final consideration.

The council voted to move the revised resolution (filed as R2507-41) forward by a 4-2 margin and to advance the amended and restated MOU to council by a 5-1 vote. The resolution asks the city’s development partner to include plans for a new city hall in Project Phoenix designs so that schematic design, public engagement and additional feasibility work can proceed; it does not commit the city to fund construction.

Why it matters: The votes authorize the next step of technical work that will define the project’s footprint, building program and schedule. Councilmembers and city staff said the additional design work is needed so cost estimates, economic-impact figures and mitigation plans for traffic, parking and downtown businesses can be produced and shared with the public.

Details of the action and timeline

- The revised resolution instructs the developer to include a new city hall in their planning materials (the resolution was amended in committee to remove a contested economic-impact “whereas” line before the vote).

- The amended MOU sets deadlines and parameters for the design period: stakeholder/public meetings are to begin within roughly 30 days of MOU clearance with a set of community meetings and a public outreach phase running into the fall, the project budget is targeted for a March submission, and parties preliminarily intend an exclusivity window that runs into early April (dates are set in the MOU). The MOU also lists provisions for developer reimbursement of some pre-MOU costs if the agreement terminates, with a stated cap in the document provided to council (see text of MOU for exact terms).

- The MOU contains specific design guidance for hotel product on the block: it narrows the previously stated minimum room count and includes a requirement that any hotel conform to an “upscale” brand threshold as defined by Smith Travel Research (STR). The MOU language ties hotel size and brand to what is feasible on the block and to later schematic design work.

Council and developer statements

Mayor Brown said the vote is a procedural step to let designers produce concrete plans that the public can review: “Until we have plans, cost estimates and architectural specifics, we cannot know how feasible any option is,” she said. “This is not a funding decision; it is a decision to let the technical work continue so that everyone — council, stakeholders and residents — can see real designs and real numbers.”

John Harlan, a development manager for Boyle (the private partner that presented Project Phoenix materials to date), told the committee Boyle’s objective is to produce a schematic design that can be priced and vetted: “All we’re asking for is clarity on the next movable steps — to hire architects, prepare schematic designs and conduct public engagement so we can have the data you’ve all requested.”

Public comment and points of contention

Several residents spoke during public recognition and asked for more transparency and for the council to delay action until legal disputes mentioned by citizens are resolved.

- Sandra Kelly read a petition calling for greater public disclosure on “Project Phoenix” (detailed project plans, cost estimates, funding sources, environmental and community impact reports and contractor information) and urged a public referendum.

- Karen Bookout asked the council to delay major projects because several council members are defending actions in a pending Sunshine Law suit and said that, in her view, that situation undermines public trust.

Other concerns raised in the session included the potential effect on long-standing downtown businesses, construction impacts, and the accuracy and timing of economic projections. Councilmembers repeatedly said that a new round of schematic-level economic analysis would be required once plans are more specific.

What the votes do and do not do

- The resolution and the amended MOU authorize further design, public engagement and feasibility work; they do not obligate the city to construct a new city hall or to sign a final development agreement.

- The council removed one explicit economic-impact “whereas” that named projected revenue totals after members raised questions about the study’s assumptions; staff and the developer said a refined economic impact assessment will follow schematic design.

Next steps

If council approves the resolution and the MOU at the next formal council meeting, Boyle will proceed with the defined schematic design and public engagement period in the MOU. Either party may terminate the MOU if the project cannot be agreed, and the MOU includes a reimbursement mechanism for certain documented costs if the agreement is terminated (the MOU defines the scope and limits of those reimbursements).

The council’s decision to move forward drew both support and opposition in the chamber. Proponents said the careful, staged approach allows the city to test whether the development can fund long-term municipal needs and increase downtown foot traffic; opponents warned that more transparency and clearer financial detail are needed before proceeding farther.

Ending note

Council members said they would expect to see more detailed plans, updated economic analyses and a clear public-engagement schedule before any final development agreement is considered.