Councilmember Jared Porterfield introduced a resolution (RS20251712) opposing The Boring Company proposed tunnels in Nashville and Davidson County and asked the committee to put on record concerns about the project transparency, community engagement, and labor and safety practices. "They need to engage the Metro Council," Porterfield said, asking colleagues to support the measure.

Supporters of the resolution said residents and business owners along Murfreesboro Pike had raised concerns about environmental and flooding risks, potential fiscal impacts on first responders, and the project's track record elsewhere. "Our constituents do have a right to know what is happening in this project," Porterfield said. Other council members cited media reports and alleged histories of environmental violations and wage-related complaints connected to the company and questioned the company's willingness to engage the council.

But several members urged caution about immediately condemning the project without reviewing material the company and Metro departments had recently provided. One councilmember said an environmental impact study and a third-party review were released the day before the meeting and asked for time to review that material. Another argued the resolution's language (which opens by opposing and condemning the company) could close off a productive path for engagement in section 2 of the draft, which lists specific items the council wants to discuss.

After debate, a councilmember moved to defer consideration for one meeting so the company could be asked to appear publicly and departments could present any permit or review materials. Some members opposed deferral, saying the company had not engaged the council in good faith and that the council should put its concerns on record. Councilmember Porterfield urged members to vote against deferral so the full body could debate the issue immediately.

The committee approved the one-meeting deferral by voice vote, recorded as 4 in favor and 2 against. Members discussed expecting the company to meet publicly with council committees and noted that if substantive responses or a public appearance did not occur before the next committee meeting (the sponsor and several members cited January 20 as a target date), the council could revisit and consider passing the resolution then.

The committee did not take a final vote on the substance of RS20251712; it deferred further action to the next meeting to allow for additional information and potential public engagement by the company and Metro departments.