Committee initiates Midtown Central Business Improvement District; public commenter warns it will fund private security and displace unhoused residents

The Finance Committee voted to initiate the process to create the Midtown Central Business Improvement District and scheduled a public hearing that the sponsor said would be held on Dec. 16.

"My name is Mannen Hall, and I speak in strong opposition to RS 20 25 15 94," Mannen Hall said during the public‑comment period, arguing that the BID budget and proposed spending "allocate a significant portion of the initial $1,500,000 budget for what they call safety and hospitality services and cleaning and safety enhancements" and that such spending tends to "displace and criminalize our unhoused neighbors." Hall said private security contractors operating under BID models act "outside the full scope of public accountability" and are primarily accountable to private property owners rather than elected bodies.

Sponsor Councilmember Coopin said members of a year‑long steering committee of residential and business stakeholders supported the proposal and that the resolution before the committee simply initiates the process to schedule a public hearing and a subsequent ordinance. Coopin said the ordinance would include reporting requirements, including an annual interactions report to Metro Council documenting "use of force, trespass warnings, exclusions, arrests" and other data intended to inform elected officials.

Councilmembers asked procedural and policy questions. Councilwoman Suarez expressed concern about the types of contractors that might be used and whether the model would rely on off‑duty law enforcement; Coopin said no particular company has been hired and that the nonprofit corporation that would administer BID funds could use monies for ambassadors, off‑duty security or other services depending on decisions made by the BID entity. The mayor's office confirmed the mayor did not bring the legislation forward and that the filing was new to administration staff.

Councilwoman Porterfield said she would abstain while she considered the ordinance and asked administration why the project had not been completed earlier; other council members described mixed views and an interest in public engagement. The resolution to initiate the BID process carried; the vote was voice‑recorded as passing and the chair scheduled the public hearing for community comment and a future ordinance vote.

What happens next: the adoption recorded tonight initiates the public‑hearing process; the ordinance with detailed provisions, reporting requirements and operational definitions will be considered at a later date. Public comments at the scheduled hearing will be recorded and can affect the final ordinance language.