Council presses administration on why Murfreesboro Pike was reprioritized; Boring Company tunnel cited as a factor
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
Several council members pressed Metro staff to explain why Murfreesboro Pike — described in the referendum as a top transit priority and a highest‑ridership corridor — was moved down the implementation list. Staff said multiple factors informed prioritization and that the Boring Company tunnel was one factor but not the sole reason; administration officials said they did not know about the tunnel plans before the referendum.
Council members used an information session on Choose How You Move implementation to press the administration for a clearer explanation of corridor prioritization after staff identified Nolensville, Gallatin and downtown corridors as the program’s earliest focuses.
Councilwoman Ellis, referencing the referendum promise that Murfreesboro Pike would be a top priority, asked bluntly: “Why has it been deprioritized, and when did the administration know the state's tunnels project would conflict with a voter approved plan?” Her line of questioning framed the larger concern: constituents who voted for the referendum expect work on the city’s highest‑ridership corridor sooner rather than later.
Sabrina Sussman, chief program officer for Choose How You Move, told the committees the administration undertook a scheduling exercise in August and used multiple data points — including safety data, the degree of prior design work on Gallatin, and alignment with TDOT planning — to identify the earliest corridors. She said the Boring Company tunnel “became a part of that” analysis but emphasized it was not the only factor.
On whether the administration knew of private tunnel plans before the referendum, council members sought a direct answer. "Council member, no. We were not aware of it at the time of the referendum," said Mister Rosenberg when asked whether the mayor’s office had prior knowledge of Boring Company interest in Murfreesboro Pike. That exchange directly addressed concerns that the administration withheld material information from voters.
Staff also told council members that many all‑access corridors are state routes (staff said roughly 89 percent), which limits Metro’s permanent design authority and makes coordination with TDOT important to schedule and deliver work. Sussman said the administration has not finalized the remainder of the schedule and that Murfreesboro remains a high priority even if it was not placed among the first three corridors.
What council asked for: multiple members requested a clearer timeline for Murfreesboro, transparency about how the prioritization was decided, and confirmation of whether any material information about external projects had been known before the referendum.
What officials said next: staff repeated that they will return with additional details and that the prioritization beyond the first funded drawdown is not yet written in stone. The committees did not take a formal vote on corridor order; the exchange ended with staff promising to follow up with more information to the council.