The Budget & Finance Committee voted to defer one meeting an ordinance (bill 20 25 11 13) that would establish a Midtown Central Business Improvement District and appoint an advisory corporation.

Public comment produced sharply divided views. "I am requesting a deferral," said Steve Ritter, who argued that scheduling the public hearing after council approval would "basically tie the public's hands." Mike Lacy warned the current BID language could expose the city to legal challenges, saying the proposal "creates a ... procedural claim potentially against the city for the clawback of these funds" if prior transfers lacked authorization. Supporters included Emily Schneller, a resident and board member at the Rhythm of Music Row condos: "I strongly support the creation of the Midtown Music Row Business improvement district," she said. Charles Couture of FirstService Residential also urged approval, saying the district would boost safety, walkability and economic stability.

Council members pressed the sponsor and administration for more details. Councilman Coop, the bill sponsor, said he had emailed a plan and would seek a one‑meeting deferral to give staff and the public time to address concerns; he said the drafting had relied heavily on state law and that he preferred to "get it right second reading versus third." Councilwoman Evan Siegel, while noting BIDs can be helpful, emphasized Midtown already has an active campus police presence, saying "VUPD is a fully functional police force" and urging limits on private security powers in the draft language. Councilwoman Ellis asked whether financials from other existing BIDs would be provided so members could see revenues and what, if any, Metro assets such as parking garages contributed.

Metro Legal indicated it would research outstanding legal questions before the next meeting. Macy Amos of Metro Legal said, "I can certainly look into it," when asked to clarify legal requirements for retroactive budget reporting and compliance.

The committee approved the sponsor's request to defer the bill one meeting by voice vote. The sponsor said outreach to property owners, renters and businesses has already occurred and he invited additional feedback ahead of the next hearing.

Next steps: Metro Legal agreed to investigate the questions posed during the meeting, and council staff and the sponsor said they would provide additional budget and revenue details before the committee reconvenes to consider the bill again.