# Urban County Council Meeting - September 3, 2009 > Auto-transcribed civic record · Council · September 3, 2009 - **Permalink**: https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/meeting/1027 - **Source video**: https://lfucg.granicus.com/player/clip/1027?view_id=14&redirect=true - **Date**: 2009-09-03 - **Body**: Council - **Last revised**: June 18, 2026 - **Length**: 28,613 words > ⚠️ **Auto-generated content.** Audio from the official Granicus video was auto-transcribed by OpenAI Whisper-1. Structured facts were extracted with GPT-4o; the narrative summary was written by Anthropic Claude Sonnet. Speaker labels and verbatim wording may contain errors. See [methodology](https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/about/methodology) or [report a correction](mailto:editor@lexingtonky.news). --- ## Meeting Overview The Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government Council convened on September 3, 2009, at 7:00 PM in Lexington, Kentucky, with Mayor Jim Newberry presiding. The meeting addressed 2 agenda items, including a zoning ordinance and a new ordinance creation. The Council took 2 votes during the session and heard 2 public comments. Among the outcomes, one ordinance changing a zone from Light Industrial to Planned Neighborhood Residential was approved, while a second ordinance creating Section 5-29.3 of the Code of Ordinances received its first reading. ## Attendance The following members were present at the September 3, 2009 Council meeting: - Jim Newberry - Gray - Henson - James - Lane - Lawless - Martin - McChord - Myers - Stinnett - Beard - Crosbie - Ellinger - Feigel - Gorton **Absent:** Blues No members were recorded as late. ## Votes and Decisions Two votes were taken during the September 3, 2009 Council meeting. - **Approval of Minutes** [timestamp: 0:02]: A motion by Stinnett, seconded by Henson, to approve the minutes of August 13, 2009 passed unanimously. - **Ordinance 0130-26** [timestamp: 1:24:05]: A motion by Lawless, seconded by James, on an ordinance levying ad valorem taxes for municipal purposes for Fiscal Year July 1, 2009 through June 30, 2010 **failed** by a roll call vote of 4 ayes to 10 nays. - **Voting in favor (4):** Lawless, James, Feigel, Gorton - **Voting against (10):** Gray, Henson, Lane, Martin, McChord, Myers, Stinnett, Beard, Crosbie, Ellinger ## Budget and Financial Actions The Council addressed two financial items during the September 3, 2009 meeting, covering a major service contract and an incoming grant award. - **Waste Management Routing Software Contract (Resolution 0073-26):** The Council considered Resolution 0073-26 authorizing a contract with Gershman, Brickner & Bratton, Inc. for waste management routing software and implementation services. The contract is valued at **$1,655,596**. This represents the largest financial action taken at the meeting. - **Kentucky Department of Juvenile Justice Grant:** The Council also addressed a grant award of **$15,275** from the Kentucky Department of Juvenile Justice. No resolution number or specific recipient department was identified in the meeting record for this item. ## Public Comment Two members of the public addressed the Council during the public comment period. **Dr. Melinda Roe — H1N1 Update** [timestamp: 2:10:37] Dr. Roe brought the Council's attention to a significant public health development, informing members that Kentucky had recorded its first H1N1-associated death. She used her time to underscore the seriousness of the ongoing H1N1 situation and emphasized the importance of residents obtaining seasonal flu shots as a precautionary measure. **Cathy Franklin — Neighborhood Issues** [timestamp: 2:13:15] Ms. Franklin addressed the Council to voice frustration regarding conditions in her neighborhood. Her comments centered on what she described as a lack of enforcement related to building permits, and she expressed concern over the broader deterioration of her neighborhood. Her remarks reflected a desire for stronger oversight and follow-through from the relevant authorities. --- These two comments covered distinct but pressing community concerns — one focused on public health preparedness in light of a statewide H1N1 fatality, and the other on local code enforcement and neighborhood quality of life. ## Appointments The Council took action on two appointments during the September 3, 2009 meeting. - **Cyndra Brown** was appointed to the role of **Administrative Specialist Pr.** - **Guy Green** was appointed to the role of **Police Lieutenant** ## Contested Items Two items generated notable disagreement during the September 3, 2009 Council meeting. **Moratorium on Building Permits** Residents voiced frustration over what they described as a lack of enforcement related to building expansions in their neighborhoods. Community members expressed concern that unchecked construction activity was contributing to the rapid deterioration of their neighborhoods. The opposition centered on the absence of meaningful action to address these expansions, with residents pressing the Council on enforcement measures. No outcome details are available from the record. **Ad Valorem Tax Ordinance** The Council was divided over a proposed ordinance concerning the refuse collection tax. Specifically, the disagreement centered on whether to restore the refuse collection tax to its original rate. The split among Council members was significant enough that a motion on the matter failed. No further breakdown of the vote or the specific positions of individual members is recorded in the available data. ## Ordinance changing the zone from Light Industrial to Planned Neighborhood Residential [timestamp: 11:08] The Council took up an ordinance to rezone the property located at **1700 Leestown Rd.** from **Light Industrial** to **Planned Neighborhood Residential**. - **Dennis Anderson** was the key speaker on this agenda item, presenting the case for the zoning change. - The ordinance sought to formally reclassify the designated use of the Leestown Road property, shifting it from an industrial designation to one intended for planned neighborhood residential development. The Council considered the item and ultimately **approved** the ordinance. *Note: The available record identifies the agenda item, the property address, the speaker, and the outcome, but does not include detailed documentation of specific arguments made, concerns raised, or vote tallies from the discussion.* ## Ordinance creating Section 5-29.3 of the Code of Ordinances [timestamp: 1:19:36] The Council took up Agenda Item 16, an ordinance to create Section 5-29.3 of the Code of Ordinances. The ordinance is designed to establish additional fees for work commenced before the issuance of necessary permits. No key speakers are recorded in the available data for this item, and no specific debate, presentations, or concerns raised during discussion are documented in the source materials. The item advanced through its **first reading** at this meeting. --- ## Decisions - **Ordinance 0130-26** — failed (4-10): An Ordinance levying ad valorem taxes for municipal purposes for the Fiscal Year July 1, 2009 through June 30, 2010 - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Motion to approve the minutes of August 13, 2009 --- ## Full transcript Let's go ahead and call this evening's meeting to order. Madam Clerk, will you call the roll? Mr. Gray. Here. Ms. Henson. Ms. Henson. Here. Ms. James. Here. Mr. Lane. Here. Ms. Lawless. Here. Mr. Martin. Here. Mr. McCord. Here. Mr. Myers. Here. Mr. Stennett. Here now. Mr. Beard. Present. Mr. Blues. Ms. Crosby. Here. Mr. Ellender. Here. Ms. Figal. Here. And Ms. Horton. Here. Thank you. We have a quorum, so we will proceed. It is my pleasure to re- welcome to the podium, uh, Dr. Reverend Michael Ward, who's the pastor of the Walnut Hill Church. Dr. Ward. Mayor Newberry and council members and neighbors, I bring you greetings from Walnut Hill Church, uh, founded 1785 for generations, community of prayer for, um, our community and its leaders, and we still offer those prayers. I'm honored to be here and offer this, uh, invocation, which I invite us to begin with a moment of silence. Tonight, we have gathered at the appointed place and time, a collection of citizens and their elected council. May all of us present be aware of the privilege granted us this evening to share in the people's work. May we give this meeting's agenda our full attention. May we be mindful of those whose lives are affected by the actions we take this night. May we have energy enough for the persistent problems, wisdom enough for the complex questions, humor enough for the awkward moments, courage enough for the difficult decisions. As we conduct our business this evening, may we live up to the best ideals that guide our lives individually and together. May we be quick to listen, slow to speak, and even slower to anger. May we extend to others the same respect and courtesy that we expect from them to us. And when we finish this evening's work, may we depart as colleagues, neighbors, and friends. And may we always be aware of how fortunate we are to live in this world, this country, this commonwealth, this county, and this city. So may it be for us. Amen. Amen. Thank you, Dr. Ward. We have some minutes from the August 13th meeting to be approved. Is there a motion to approve them? So moved. Second. I have a motion by Council Member Stennett and a second by Council Member Henson to approve the minutes of August 13th. Any discussion? All in favor, please say aye. Aye. All opposed, no. The motion carries. Uh, let me turn the podium over now to Commissioner Marlene Helm for a, a short presentation. Good evening, um, Mayor Newberry, members of the Urban County Council. It is with, uh, a great deal of, uh, excitement that I report to you that we have had another fantastic, uh, summer youth employment, uh, season. Um, we had over 450 young people, uh, who were eligible to participate to apply, and we were able to actually hire and place 233. These 233 youth aged from 14 to 24, uh, represent every school within our community and every council district. And so we are very excited. We had 108 businesses to participate this year. That was up from last year's number of about 78, and so we are very excited. Um, if you would let me just take a few moments to introduce three people who participated in this year's program, we think it's important for you to hear, uh, their comments about the program that you, uh, gave approval for, uh, budget-wise. Uh, first, I'd like you to hear, uh, a few brief comments from Sebastian Anderson, who was placed at the Goodwill Industries this summer. Sebastian? Good evening. I gained a lot of experience from the Summer Youth Employment Program this year. I've gained... I've understood that through my second year, I have enhanced my confidence with everyday challenges and have strengthened my various areas of everyday life. With the training classes that were provided, I've learned that 100% best is mandatory at all times. This program is very priceless to everything that I've learned this year. It has helped me through my school and through everyday household chores. All I wanted to say was thank you so much for the great opportunity. Next, I'd like you to hear from Sherry Myers, uh, who represents Clark Material Handling company. Sherry. Good evening. I'm, I'm the human resource manager for Clark Material Handling company, and we benefited greatly from this Summer Youth Employment Program and hope that you all will see fit to vote, um, to, um, fund that program again next year. Um, it's, it's Clark's mission to build the best forklift in the world, and along with that, we also, it's our mission to plant seeds of goodwill along the way. And one of the ways that we do that is we, um, give back to the community in various ways, including helping to mentor our youth. And this program definitely helped us to be able to do that by building some workforce readiness skills in these, um, in these youth. We had three, um, youth placed at Clark. Um, hoping to get more next year because it was so successful. We had one in our information systems department, one in our aftermarket parts, and we used one in just office -- in an office clerical role. Um, they were able to provide, um, the manpower and resources, um, to our company this year during this, um, time that we were, um, trying to cut cost and we didn't have any extra financial resources to hire anyone else. So we were definitely able to benefit to have the extra manpower to d- to complete some projects. Um, the owner of our company, SH Bank, was orphaned at a very young age, and he only has a third grade education. Um, through his hard work, um, and determination, he now is the owner of 47 worldwide companies, including he's the, um, largest hat manufacturer in the world. Um, he's a multi-billionaire entrepreneur with his third grade education. Um, education and giving back to the community, um, is one of his, um, business cultures and business philosophies. As a ... One of the companies that he owns, he expects us to report back to him, um, how we give back to our community as much as he expects us to give him a financial report on how our company's doing. So this program, um, allowed us to, um, give back to the community in one more way. So thank you all for allowing that program to be in existence. And finally, Paul Cable from, um, Bluegrass Station Department of Military Affairs. Good evening, Mayor Newberry and members of the council. Uh, Bluegrass Station at Avon, uh, has a, a, a little bit different environment. We have 2600 employees at Bluegrass Station and in our division, uh, that runs and oversees Bluegrass Station, we have about 30. So we were able to, uh, invite two youth to our department this year, and, uh, they really fit in well. They were a lot of fun to work with. I think we learned as much as they did. And, and Lisa Fath, our coordinator, worked with them very closely. And, uh, so we, we just had a good time. But, uh, they worked hard. They worked with our managers in, in both administrative and maintenance branches, and, and, uh, we were proud to have them with us. And so we plan to participate again. We think it's an important endeavor, and we want to thank the, the council for voting to, to maintain this operation and program, and, and we wanna keep, keep it going as well. And, um, this is my first year, uh, i- in the program, and so I'm gonna try to encourage other employers at Bluegrass Station to do the same thing and participate 'cause we think it's important and we wanna support it. And we just wanna thank you again for, for your help in making this happen. So thank you very much. And then finally, I'd just like to recognize the, uh, staff members from the Division of Youth Services who each summer agree to take on this additional workload task, uh, in addition to all of their other responsibilities. Maddie Morton is the, uh, kind of the, uh, the leader of the pack, if you will. Uh, Priscilla Gales, uh, uh, Stephanie Jackson, Maddie, uh, it's not Maddie Morton. Um, Sonya Combs and Pat Sydney. So if you would just recognize their efforts, I would appreciate it. And thank you again. Commissioner Helm, or perhaps Maddie, um, I know the program has evolved a good bit over the course of the last three years. Could you s- just kind of recap for us how it has grown over the course of the last three years in terms of students and, and, uh, employers, both? Over the last, uh, few years actually, we went from, uh, employing 150 youth to this year employing 233. We've gone from about, uh, 83 businesses to 108. Um, we've included an employability workshop this year in which we gave, uh, the 17 to 24 year old youth were given, uh, 15 hours of employability training. The, uh, 14 to 16 year olds were given four hours of employability training. And, um, we have, um, actually enjoyed it. Our staff has, uh, increased a little bit, maybe by one or two people, but not that much. So, uh, but we've, uh, we've really enjoyed it over the years. Thank you. Thank you. You've done an excellent job and we appreciate all the effort that everyone in social services has put forward to make it a success. Thanks so much. Unless there's something further from the council ... Oh, a- one other thing I need to say is it is important to recognize the fact that everyone on the council ought to share in the progress that we have seen in the Summer Youth Employment Program because without your continued funding support through the budget over the course of the last three years, it would not have happened, and, um, I'm very grateful for that. So thanks to all of you. Madam Clerk, we're to the point now where we're ready for a second reading of ordinances. Ordinance number one, an ordinance changing the zone from a light industrial I-1 zone to a planned neighborhood residential R3 zone for 6.93 net 7.15 gross acres for property located at 1700 Leestown Road, a portion of subject to provision of a landscape buffer imposed as a condition of granting the zone change. Dennis Anderson, INV 1700 LLC. Number two, an ordinance amending subsection one of Section 576 of the Code of Ordinances of the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government to increase the fees as follows. Rough wire inspection fee from $35 to $45 for first ten circuits. Rewire inspection fee from $35 to $45 for service change inspection, final inspection fee from $35 to $45 for service and fixtures up to ten circuits, temporary inspection fee from $35 to $45, apartment rough wire fee from $35 to $45 for first unit one building, and from $9 to $12 for each additional unit. Apartments final inspection fee from $35 to $45 for first unit and from $9 to $12 for each additional unit, and changing the term trailer service to manufactured or mobile home service and increasing the fee from $35 to $45 for inspections without state approval, all effective on September 1, 2009. Number three, an ordinance approving and adopting a program amendment for use of home investment partnerships project funds for the 2009 consolidated plan to establish a new project, the Equestrian View Project, appropriating funds pursuant to schedule number 50 and authorizing the mayor to transfer unencumbered funds within the grant budget. Number four, an ordinance amending section 18A1 of the Code of Ordinances creating a definition for special event permit amending section 18A15 providing that the holder of a local taxi cab permit may request a special event permit for a specified timeframe and modify the identification scheme of one or more vehicles of its fleet, and providing that upon expiration of the permit, the local taxi cab permit holder shall have five days to return to the original identification scheme of its fleet of vehicles. Number five, an ordinance pursuant to section 2126.1 of the Code of Ordinances approving the promotion and 12% pay increase for David Loney, Deputy Director of Fleet, grade 120E, due to his experience and exceptional qualifications. Number six, an ordinance pursuant to section 2126.1 of the Code of Ordinances approving the promotion and 23% pay increase for Kevin Bennett, Program Manager Senior, grade 120E, Division of Waste Management, due to his experience and exceptional qualifications. Number seven, an ordinance amending section 2152 of the Code of Ordinances creating one position of environmental outreach specialist, grade 115E in the Division of Environmental Policy. There is a motion on number eight. Council Member Martin. Thank you, Mayor. I move to amend item number eight under second reading ordinances to place the Division of Enterprise Solutions in the Office of the Chief Information Officer, rather than the Division of Computer Services. This is not a material change and does not require a new first reading. Thank you. Do I hear a second? Second. I have a second by Council Member Lane. Any discussion? All in favor... Council Member James. Just, um, Council Member Martin, do you have any further explanation? Was it just a mistype there, or is there a restructuring happening? It was just an error in the, in the original, um, writing of the, of the, um, ordinance. Okay, thank you. Any further discussion? Those then in favor of, uh, the motion to amend number eight, please indicate by saying eye. Those opposed, no. Motion carries. Madam Clerk. Number eight, an ordinance amending section 2152 of the Code of Ordinances creating the Division of Enterprise Solutions and creating one position of Director of Enterprise Solutions, grade 123E in the Office of the Chief Information Officer and authorizing the Division of Human Resources to internally advertise for the position appropriating funds pursuant to schedule number 51. Number nine, an ordinance authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to accept a grant from the Kentucky Department of Juvenile Justice, which grant funds are in the amount of $15,275 federal funds under the Juvenile Accountability Block Grant Program are for programs designed to promote greater accountability in the juvenile justice system, the acceptance of which obligates the Urban County Government for the expenditure of $1,697 as a local match, appropriating funds pursuant to schedule number 52 and authorizing the mayor to transfer unencumbered funds within the grant budget. Number 10, an ordinance authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to accept a grant from the Kentucky Office of Homeland Security, which grant funds are in the amount of $10,000 federal funds are additional funds for participation in assessments of critical infrastructure in Fayette County, the acceptance of which does not obligate the Urban County Government for the expenditure of funds, appropriating funds pursuant to schedule number 53 and authorizing the mayor to transfer unencumbered funds within the grant budget. Number 11, an ordinance amending certain of the budgets of the Lexington Fayette Urban County Government to reflect current requirements for municipal expenditures and appropriating and reappropriating funds schedule number 54. Number 12, an ordinance pursuant to ordinance number 197, 2002 adjusting the salaries of employees occupying the position of administrative specialist, senior staff assistant, senior customer service supervisor, administrative specialist, information system specialist, senior microcomputer support specialist, telecommunicator planner, family support worker, senior laboratory technician, engineering technician, public service worker, public service worker, senior skilled trades worker, equipment operator, senior treatment plant operator and telecommunicator senior in various divisions after review, pursuant to the Pay Equity Ordinance, effective retroactive to the dates described in each item and appropriating funds pursuant to budget schedule number 55. Number 13, an ordinance pursuant to ordinance number 197, 2002 adjusting the salaries of employees occupying the position of telecommunicator, senior equipment operator, senior public service supervisor, senior and administrative specialist senior in various divisions after review, pursuant to the Pay Equity Ordinance, effective retroactive to the dates described in each item and appropriating funds pursuant to budget schedule number 56. Number 14, an ordinance pursuant to ordinance number 197, 2002 adjusting the salaries of employees occupying the position of planner, senior GIS specialist, accountant, senior equipment operator, senior and licensed inspector in various divisions after review, pursuant to the Pay Equity Ordinance, effective retroactive to the dates described in each item and appropriating funds pursuant to budget schedule number 57. Thank you very much. That completes the reading of the ordinances entitled a second reading. Is there a motion to approve those ordinances? Move approval. Move approval. Second. Second. I- Ah, whoops. Okay, Council Member, uh, uh, Stennet has moved approval. Council Member Gordon has seconded that motion. Any discussion? See none, so we'll proceed to vote. Those in favor of approving those ordinances, please indicate by voting "aye" electronically. Those opposed, vote "nay" electronically. And Madam Clerk, please call the roll. Mr. Gray. Yes. Ms. Henson. Yes. Ms. James. Yes. Mr. Lane. Yes. Ms. Lawless. Yes on all, but five and six and no on five and six 'cause I've asked for information and haven't got it. Thank you. That is noted. Mr. Martin? Yes. Mr. McCord? Yes. Mr. Myers? Yes. Mr. Stennett? Yes, ma'am. Mr. Beard? Aye. Ms. Crosby? Yes. Mr. Ellinger? Yes. Ms. Beigel? Aye. Ms. Gordon? Aye. Excellent. Thank you. Those ordinances are approved. We're now ready for ordinances entitled to first reading. Madame Clerk. Ordinance Number 16. An ordinance creating Section 529.3 of the Code of Ordinances, Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government, to establish additional fees to be payable to the Director of the Division of Building Inspection for work commenced before the issuance of certain of the necessary permits, certificates, letters, or other documents required by Chapter Five of the Code of Ordinances, with the amount of such fees established as being additional and equal to the amount of the original relevant fee, but not less than $500 for Sections 5291 through 9, 14, 15, Section 529.1, Section 532, and Section 567 of the Code of Ordinances, and as being additional and equal to the amount of the r- original relevant fee for Sections 529, 10, 11, 12, 13, 16, and 17 of the Code of Ordinances, all effective on October 1, 2009. Number 17. An ordinance authorizing and directing the Mayor on behalf of the Irvin County Government to accept a donation of $250 from Columbia Gas for future fire prevention programs and appropriating funds pursuant to Schedule Number 58. Number 18. An ordinance authorizing and directing the Mayor on behalf of the Irvin County Government to accept a grant from the Kentucky Justice and Public Safety Cabinet, which grant funds are in the amount of $25,000 federal funds, are additional funds for the Ticketing Aggressive Cars and Trucks Program, the acceptance of which obligates the Irvin County Government for the expenditure of $6,250 as a local match, appropriating funds pursuant to Schedule Number 59, and authorizing the Mayor to transfer unencumbered funds within the grant budget. Number 19. An ordinance amending Section 22-5-2 of the Code of Ordinances, creating one temporary position of Administrative Specialist Principal, grade 114E, and five temporary positions of Administrative Specialist, grade 110N, all ending one year from the date of passage of this ordinance, within the Division of Water Quality, and appropriating funds pursuant to Schedule Number 60. Number 20. An ordinance authorizing and directing the Mayor on behalf of the Irvin County Government to accept a grant from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, which grant funds are in the amount of $13,572 federal funds, are for a Juvenile Fire Setter program and the purchase of a fire extinguishers trainer's package, the acceptance of which obligates the Irvin County Government for the expenditure of $3,393 as a local match, appropriating funds pursuant to Schedule Number 61, and authorizing and directing the Mayor to transfer unencumbered funds within the grant budget. Number 21. An ordinance amending certain of the budgets of the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government to reflect current requirements for municipal expenditures, and appropriating and reappropriating funds Schedule Number 62. Number 22. An ordinance authorizing and directing the Mayor on behalf of the Irvin County Government to execute Change Order Number Two to the contract with Wilbur Smith & Associates for the Irvin County Government Wayfinding Program to extend the existing contract for the completion of construction drawings at a cost not to exceed $140,742.52, and appropriating funds pursuant to Schedule Number 64. Number 23. An ordinance amending certain of the budgets of the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government to reflect current requirements for funds in the amount of $875 from Neighborhood Development Funds for the Division of Police for Police Activities League, and appropriating and reappropriating funds Schedule Number 65. Number 24. An ordinance amending certain of the budgets of the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government to reflect current requirements for funds in the amount of $390 in the Division of Traffic Engineering from the Council Capital Funds for culvert signage to be installed by the Division of Water Quality in the 11th Council District, and appropriating and reappropriating funds Schedule Number 67. Excuse me, Mayor. Um, I would like to speak to Number 25, and then I'm gonna m- make a motion. All right. Thank you. Um, I've been, um... For the audience out there and the council members, this is the issue of the, um, refuse collection rollback of 10%. I've been doing a lot of, um, digging and reading numbers and reading documents, and I need a life, but that being said, what I found is that, uh, we have a little under $25 million in reserve. Um, the '04 net was net profit, or net gain over collections was about one for- .4 million. The '09 projected numbers w-, 'cause they're not complete yet, show it at it's either flat or maybe somewhat of a loss. Um, so we're planning to buy 29 trucks at a very conservative estimate of $270,000 each this year because we have not replaced our trucks for the last three or four years, for several reasons, one of which the old trucks don't work with the new recycling system, and the new trucks don't work with the old recycling system. So a little Catch-22 there. They have bald tires. They're, a lot of 'em are in very bad shape. So that's $7,830,000 out of that reserve that will be spent. We also are projecting $4 million pretty immediately in equipment for our old recycling center so that it can, uh, take some of the duct tape and- ... Band-Aids and paperclips out of there so it can be more efficiently run, and they do a great job out there, but it's very old equipment. Um, if we lower this $2 a month, and I know times are rough, and nobody, especially people in politics, want to vote down a tax reduction or increase taxes. I'm the last person in the world, um, might surprise some people, but I'm pretty fiscally conservative and I've lived my life that way. Um, if we reduce that, we will decrease our revenue by $3.8 million. We're also talking about adding 56 new hires, which we need, um, and there are certain areas in this city, and many of 'em are in the third district, who aren't getting the needed services. We have one, um, Herby, um, enforcement officer for the entire county. We could use one just for the third district. And she's wonderful. Hats off to Officer Turley. I wish we had 10 of her. Um, there's only one truck that will pick up mattresses because of OSHA regulations, because of the bedbug problem. Now, I know that in some districts, that's not an issue, but I know in several districts, it's a big issue. Um, so we have a problem. And certainly, there are some neighborhoods that could use twice a week collection. I personally could go every two weeks. Um, but there are a lot of areas where once a week, uh, pickup has caused even greater stress on the, on the quality of life in those neighborhoods. I don't understand, even if everything goes really, really well, and all the projected things happen that, uh, that mayors and the administration propose, I don't understand why we would roll back taxes to the amount of $25 a year, um, when we're also looking at going to a fee-based. Now, the people that will be paying more with fee-based, um, charges will, their taxes, or their fee will go up, because if it's on a percentage of your property value, people with very expensive houses will pay the same fee as people with a house of $150,000. So we're giving them 25, $24 a year back, but whe- if it goes to fee base, their f- their fees are obviously gonna have to go up. That's not rocket science. So we'd spend down two and a half, maybe more, million dollars a year of our reserve, after already bringing it down from 25 to about 11 million, and then we're planning to build a new recycling center and bond it. Now, I don't know any businessperson that would say, "You know what? We've saved a lot of money, so we're gonna lower the cost of our product and take a loss until we use up our, our revenue, our capital, um, and then we're gonna go to the bank and ask 'em to give us a loan to build a new building." Now, it just doesn't make good business common sense to me to do that. So for that reason, um, and I did mention the '09 being flat or a loss projected, and, um, net revenues over cost, so for that reason, I'm going to make a motion that the, on number 25, that it be amended to stay the same for refuse collection, .1590 instead of the reduction of, to .1431. So- Sec- second. We have a motion by Council Member Lawless and a second by Council Member James to amend item number 25. Um, any discussion? Mayor, could- Yeah. ... you restate the motion again, please? Yes. M- Well, my understanding is the motion is to restore the garbage tax portion to the original level, and where it is, is about two-thirds of the way down where you see the .1431 for refuse collection, that should be one, .1590, correct? Correct. Thank you. So that's the, uh, that's the motion. V- Vice Mayor Gray. Mayor, before we begin debate, if we could keep the five-minute timer going- Thank you. ... for this discussion. Thank you. Mine's really a question. Um, I'd like to understand the numbers. Um, Council Member Lawless indicated that there is a projected surplus in fiscal '09 of something on the order of 1.4 million. That was '08. Oh, wait. The projected for '09 is it's flat or maybe lost something. Okay. And so this rollback would represent diminished revenues, diminishing revenues by 3.8 million. Is that correct? Yes, sir. Okay. So then if we- ... Don't have... If our revenues don't increase or they stay flat, then that means, in business terms, we would have a loss of $3.8 million next year. Can somebody... I mean- Well, the, um, there's a issue that we're gonna be incredibly more efficient this year and save a lot of money. So given, let's say we saved 1.4 million, we would still be two and a half million down. That's, that's the way that I read the math, but maybe somebody else can... Mr. O'Mara? The, um, the numbers that you're referring to were in the handout that was presented, um, I don't remember the date, uh, two, three weeks ago in the presentation on, um, work session on the 18th. Um, and the... Looking at each individual year is what we're talking, what is, what Council Member Lawless is talking about, as well as below that is the total fund balance and the presentation was talking about accelerating the spending out of fund balance to recoup for the, um, purchase of trucks that had been delayed in the past. And then there were other assumptions about decreasing the operating cost and increasing the recycling revenue. So there was a combination of assumptions going forward that included the decrease in the property tax, increase in recycling revenue, decrease in operating expenses, um, I've forgotten something. But anyway, there, there were several assumptions going into the projections that they, they presented. So as a percentage, how much of an operating reduction is contemplated? As a percentage of total cost, how much, as a percentage, are total revenue... Are, are total costs predicted to be dialed down or reduced? To offset a $3.8 million decline in revenue, there's gotta be... What, that represents... 3.8 million is what percentage of X total operating costs? Tot- tot- Mr. Taylor, would you... Total operating cost is, uh, with capital, is varying between, uh, 19.8 million to, to up in the 40 million, depending on the- So- ... purchase of the, um, of the vehicle replacement- Well, the capital... That, that wouldn't be an operating cost though. That's a capital cost, so that wouldn't be an operating cost, would it? So what's the operational cost that w-... I mean, basically these funds translate into operating costs. And, and the personnel is about- I'm just trying to just- ... 11.3. The operating is at 8.6 and projected to go down into the 6.5 range. So the total is what? From about 20 million to about, uh, 18 million. So 3.8 million represents almost 20% of operating cost reduction then. And at the same time, there's movement on the revenue side, because we have assumptions of property tax values as well as, um, uh, recycling revenue. It, it's indicated here in the presentation that was made. Okay. So the question, my question has to do with how much of a reduction in operating costs is anticipated in order to offset this reduction in revenue. I mean, I don't see... I mean, I think these are really good questions and they are coming at a very awkward time, it seems like to me. Okay. Let's try again. You want a percentage? I need to go do that, but I can... Uh, do you have a copy of the presentation- Well- ... we made? Actually, you know, the numbers of, that we have been told, or that I just heard Council Member Lawless suggest, is that we have had an operating surplus, in business language that would be a profit, of $1.4 million last year. This year we're projecting to be flat. In other words, no surplus. Right? I believe, I believe you have to look at the fact that we are spending on capital out of cash. So the movement in a single year is impacted by the capital outlay in that year. Okay. So how much is... With a $3.8 million decline in revenues, what will be the effect going forward? That's a pretty substantial amount out of a $20 million. You know, 4 million is 20, 20% of 20 million. That's a pretty significant decline in revenue. Right. The first year, it's gonna be difficult, because the revenue will go down and -- but the recycling revenue will go up, will start to go up significantly. What we did wasn't just take a snapshot for one year. We projected a five-year model, and we did make assumptions. Um, the assumptions that we made in the first year were that growth would be pretty limited. So, the revenue will go down more because the growth will be limited than because necessarily that dollar value from the tax rate will drop all of that. Part of that is the fact that property values are not anticipated to grow very much next year. So, we assumed a very conservative 1.6% growth rate next year, or the fiscal year 2010. So, we thought that was fairly conservative. We certainly would drop the tax rate, and that would drop the amount of money that we take in as revenue on property tax. But we are looking at other opportunities, the dumpster fees, recycling revenue. Um, those things can offset, as well as, uh, improvements in personnel, efficiency, um... I'm not sure I'm answering your question. I'm sorry. No, I'd just like to see a incoming expense statement and a -- that I can translate, you know, ordinary, the way that I'm accustomed to. That, and, and I'm not... It's very difficult to make a decision like this when so much of the information is based on projections and we are cutting off the income stream basically, or we're cutting the in-... My interpretation is that we're reducing the income stream by 20%. Only one income stream. We're actually going to increase other income streams, which particularly would be recycling revenue. That would be one of the big income streams that will go up significantly. So that's gonna... Okay. And by the end of fiscal year 2010, we'll start to recoup that money, uh. So, it's, it's, I guess, the assumptions that we make going forward, and I'm not sure that you got that particular copy, but we assumed, uh, that recycling revenue was going to increase significantly after fiscal year 2010, because the investment that we're making in the current MRF, $3.8 million will allow us to triple the capacity in that MRF. Yeah, and I appreciate that tour- We have a lot of opportunity out there. There's a lot of material- ... that you gave me a tour. ... that we do not capture today that we could. You gave me a- So, that is a number one reason that we feel confident that we will increase revenue over time. To offset the 3.8 million? Yes. That's gonna happen? That, as well as efficiency improvements. Right now, as you know, we have different types of trucks. And we've talked about this- Sure. ... so I certainly don't wanna repeat something that you don't want to hear, but the trucks that we use today are several different types, they're specialized vehicles, and most of those trucks use two people. You have a person driving and a person on the back. In the future, the trucks we have will be automated. That alone will reduce the need for personnel on the back of the truck and will also reduce, a significant area would be injuries. Right now, we have a lot of injuries, frankly, and that's an expense that we expect to go down significantly, um, as well as keep our employees safer and longer term. I had the opportunity to take a tour this week of, with you, with James Carter- Yes. ... with Kevin, with Calvin, of the center. Mm-hmm. It's very impressive. It's also, it's also impressed me of how extraordinarily limited the capacity is. That's right. There is no capacity. That place is struggling today. So, capital for reinvestment is a very big deal. Mm-hmm. And that's what I think Council Member Lawless was talking about. Right. So, my difficulty with voting on this is not having adequate understanding of the full dimension of the numbers, of the declining revenues that are gonna occur as a result of this change and the projected revenues that are based on the hypothetical of getting into a new facility. That's not gonna happen overnight. That new equipment's gonna be a whole year coming. Right. Well, we do have projections- At least a year. ... up to 2015, and they're projections and they are based on assumptions. And I can go over the assumptions and talk about the numbers and where they came from, uh, but they're projections. Well, I know we're, I know we're at the 11th hour and 30 and 50 minutes on this, and it's, it's, uh, I know how council members are, and I know how an audience is. They don't like to sit through a lot of this kind of thing. But I think it's our responsibility to really carefully examine these numbers and not jump precipitously. Thank you. Um, Council Member Lawless. And Madam, Madam Clerk- Yeah. ... can you start the timer, please? Thank you, ma'am. And thank you, Vice Mayor, for your questions. We have a goal of being trash-free by 2020. The 2040 destination talked about a green community. This is the wrong time and the wrong tax. And if we do realize those savings with the efficiencies, then boy, wouldn't it be great to roll back that tax 20% next year? But to do it on assumptions and guesses and maybes and whatnots, and the equipment and everything in place is gonna take months and months to get all this in place, to me, is financially irresponsible. That's my opinion. I'm not saying anybody is, I'm saying that's my opinion. I would urge the cou- we can always next year lower it by 20%, and I will be the first one dancing the jig to do that. But, um, I would- ... urge the council members to not spend our money, not cut our revenue until we realize those savings that are maybe kinda assumptions, and they may be very well-based, but we don't have 'em in our pocket. And in this economy, we have seen too many times people get in horrible financial trouble by spending money they hope they're gonna get. Thank you. Council Member Beard. Thank you, Mayor. I hate to do this to you council, uh, pardon me, Commissioner, uh, Taylor, but if you might... I'm a little confused about the numbers, as are several of us. If in fact, we, w-, w-, and I guess this is true and accurate, that we lost money preliminarily this year? If you're saying what we spent and what we took in were a little bit offset, I mean, they weren't flat, but the projected this year is that, um, the total revenue was slightly below what we spent. Okay. But we spent money on, um, equipment and capital this year. Uh-huh. And we spent money on temporary labor this year. Okay. Those kinds of things. So, well, that was where I was, I, I was headed, and that was... If, in fact we're trying to increase efficiency, why are we hiring 56 people? Uh, and I assume that, uh- Mm-hmm. ... you backfill those people with, uh, temps? Is it- Not all of them. Um, we have that many vacancies, but we're not necessarily going to fill all those vacancies. We're gonna... Right now, we have a very high vacancy rate in our, in our drivers, equipment operator seniors, and those are the positions that we are trying to fill aggressively. We do need some help, uh, public service worker. We have a number of openings there, but we're choosing not to fill those openings because we anticipate, in the future, that we will not need two people on a truck. So I think by the end of the year, we'll be able to drop the total number of vacancies and we won't need to fill all of them. Okay, and then secondly, the, the new trucks that we're going to purchase, are we purchasing them or are we gonna bond them? Purchase. Okay, thank you. Council Member Lane. Yeah, I have a, I have a couple of questions for you too. Out of the last, uh, 10 years, has solid waste, uh, operations actually lost money or has it always operated at a surplus? I'm double-checking myself. It appears that we've always had some surplus. Uh, if you, um, if you get the opera-, uh, automated pickup trucks you're talking about- Mm-hmm. ... how, how will that increase the operational efficiency for the department? Could you describe that a bit more fully? I mean, will it actually save money? Well, one way I've mentioned already would be labor, because the truck uses an, an automatic arm to pick up material, and the truck will also allow us to put glass. And yet as you all have watched people pick up the recycle, somebody has to get out of the truck or we have to have another person on the truck to pick up the glass. And in some areas of town, we have to use a second truck to come and get the glass. So you're using two trucks to come, one to get the rosium, one to get the glass. And all of that happens because we have vehicles that are designed to specifically pick up a certain type of waste. Either they pick up trash or they pick up recycle or they pick up glass, and we have limited numbers of those trucks. So depending on what people put out on the curb on a particular day, you may have to send a couple of trucks to one location. So those trucks will be, um, automated, reduce labor, reduce injury, and will allow us to pick up the glass in one trip so it'll eliminate quite a few trips and a lot of miles in gas. Those trucks get about 2.7 miles to the gallon. So every mile we can save is money saved, and- Can you, uh, you can pick up both recycle materials and non-recyclable materi- materials that have to go to the landfill in one truck? You can use the same truck to service any of the containers. Now, you'll either be picking up waste or you'll pick up recycle. You won't throw them into the same truck, because they'll have different destinations, but the same identical vehicle p- can be used to pick up any of those materials. All right, now you're currently, uh, I don't know if you have this on order, but the equipment Council Member Laws referred to, the, his recycling equipment, and how, how will that save money and how will that increase the efficiency of our operations for that? Well, the new recycling, uh, equipment that we're gonna put in, uh, Thompson Road MRF, will allow us... First off, I mentioned already, allows us to put the glass in that stream and it'll reduce the amount of labor that it takes us to handle the material. Right now, it takes us 30 to t-, 32 people a day to operate that line, and they operate it for an eight-hour or to 10-hour shift, depending on how much material we have. Uh, with the new line and the rates, we'll be able to do that with about 22 people and about four or five hours. The same volume that takes us to run in eight or 10 hours, we'll be able to run in about four. So it'll definitely reduce the labor cost to handle it. Another thing that it'll include is a much better Eddy current separator. Right now, we, based on the data that we collected from our waste stream characterization study, about 14% of the material that goes into the MRF is not recycled. It's not necessarily because it isn't recyclable, it's because we can't collect it off of the equipment that we have. So we have about 14% of that stream that we lose, at least some portion of that. And based on the data that we have, it's probably close to 10%. So we're losing paper, we're losing aluminum, and we're losing materials that we could collect and market. So the new line will allow us to reduce labor costs. It'll significantly increase our throughput. It'll allow us to collect materials that we previously have not collected. Um, we also, uh, anticipate ability to separate out some streams a little more effectively and get a higher price, particularly for paper. You get better price depending on what you're able to sort out. And then what it does is opens the door for us to be able to bring in more material. Right now, we're really tentative about recruiting recyclers because the more we bring in, the less room. And as Vice Mayor Grace said it, it's, it's busting the walls right now. We have enough material in there to keep the place running much longer than we do. Well, I, I notice my time is running down. And I think, uh, I, I guess, m- my last question is, you've studied this intensely and you're an expert in solid waste and recycling, uh, I mean, I reviewed your numbers. I think they're accurate, but, uh, I like to hear you say that. Do you feel that your estimates and projections are, uh, pretty reliable? I mean, no projection can be 100% exact, but, uh, do you feel very confident about it, and would you encourage the council to go ahead and vote to take the 10% decrease in the tax? Well, I can deliver these numbers, and I'm confident that we can do that. We have everything in place to be very successful over the next five years. We have the equipment, we have the people, we're filling the vacancies that we need. Uh, we're adding people, for example, people to help us market materials that we've never had in the past. And, and I'm very comfortable with a projection that asks for a 10% improvement in one year. That's something I'm comfortable with. Well, my time is expired, and courtesy to my other council members, I will pass the gavel back to you. Thank you. Uh, Council Member Stennet. Thank you, Mayor. You know, e- we don't have to remind each other that our whole budget, the whole budget that we operate our city on is based on assumptions. No one in here has a crystal ball. No one in here can say, "We're gonna have this amount of property tax or this amount of revenue today, tomorrow." We don't know. That's the whole point is. Well, what we do know is, and Commissioner, you passed out the numbers a week ago Tuesday at the Budget and Finance meeting. Everyone should have got a copy, but I'll be glad to pass one out tonight if you need one. There are some things that you may do not indicate a $3.8 million deficit in property tax revenue. It's actually $3.4 million is the real number. But yet net revenues are only down 1.5 million. At the bottom line, we all look at the bottom line, they're only down 1.5 million. That's because we, we have a $24 million savings account that you all, I'll use your word, savings account now or surplus, that we can take from. And we're gonna drain that $24 million over the next five years. Is that, is that the anticipated goal? Yes, a lot of that would go for equipment. Um, equipment and replacing equipment, particularly vehicles. That's the number one expenditure. And looking back over the last 10 years, we've had a average, average of a $2 million, $2 to $3 million increase every year in this fund in revenue. $2 to $3 million over the last 10 years since 1998. And in the last three years, we've added close to $11 million to the surplus or savings account, $11 million last three years. You know, $25 is not a lot of money to some people, but I can tell you it's a heck of a lot if you go ask for it. We're giving it back to people. We're just not taking it from them. That's the bottom line every year 'cause we don't need it. If the same people that are running our system say they can do it with less money, then the council's only two jobs is to pass laws or ordinances or regulate taxes. In order to become more efficient, if they can do it on less money, it's our duty to pass that and give the systems back $25 a year. It might not be a lot to some of you in this room, but I can tell you it's a lot to our families who have to buy school supplies and other things to support their family, especially during this time. So Commissioner, thank you for your projections and assumptions, and I appreciate you standing behind them like you did a week ago Tuesday tonight, and Mr. O'Mara, because that's all we have to go on. You're the ones that run the system. That's who we have to put our faith in and, and, and it's a good projection. Thank you, Mayor. Council Member McCord. Thank you. And this may be to Mr. O'Mara or, or Commissioner Taylor, uh, just, uh, one quick question. I- has this division seen any type of, uh, budget reduction in the last couple of years? Have they taken any kind of budget cut in the last couple of years? I haven't been here a couple of years. I know we haven't taken a cut since I've been here. Right. Then the answer is no. And, and, uh, that's a qu- a question I knew the answer to to begin with. Where we've asked divisions of government a- across this government to cut themselves, 10% last year, 10% this year. Uh, we looked at 15%, you know, cuts across the board in every division of government. This is a division of government that, that hasn't, doesn't, doesn't take a cut, hasn't had a cut. And to come in here and, and to basically say, "We feel like we can run this more efficiently, that we're taking in, uh, more than n- is needed and that the numbers bear that out," uh, that, uh, you know, again, Council Member Stennet, we build everything upon assumptions. But th- but in this case, we've, we are l- looking at educated assumptions and, and, uh, you're looking at, uh, uh, multiple sources of revenue. And, and again, something you said earlier, Commissioner, that I think bears repeating, we haven't even turned the spigot on because we can't, we can't run this, uh, at a higher efficiency. And again, I have seen a couple of things just in the last two weeks to where, uh, there may not be a need to buy a facility, but actually people that would, would take this to another facility. And, uh, those are the types of things, again, that I believe w- we can do this more efficiently, that citizens are asking us as a government to run more efficiently and give more of their money back. ... uh, from the federal to state, to us. And here is a situation where we're trying to do that, and, uh, I just, I, I, I, I have to, uh, to stay with the way this motion is written and would have to vote against, uh, Council Member Lawless's, uh, motion tonight. But thank you. Council Member Martin. Thank you, Mayor. I appreciate the financial discussion of my colleagues, and Mr. Lane's, uh, discussion, and, uh, Commissioner She- Cheryl Taylor and Commissioner O'Mara. Um, time and time again, um, we've been up here and Commissioner Taylor has come, and, and I'm just so very impressed that we have someone of this quality in both these positions and both these folks. And so, um, you know, eh, eh, there, there comes a time when we really have to, to rely on the expertise of the people we have, if we trust their expertise, we trust their, their judgment, their good intentions. And, and there's, there, as, uh, Council Member McCord said, the, the, the, the assumptions are educated assumptions. These aren't just pulled out of the thin air. Um, beyond that, i- if, if it's difficult to sit on $25 million and keep taxes high. It's just a lot of money and in these time, kind of financial times, I think that it's appropriate to, um, to, to dial it back a bit. We can always dial it up again next year if, if it turns out that these assumptions aren't correct. But, um, but I think, uh, I'm gonna ha- uh, unfortunately have to oppose... I'm sorry? Dial it back. We can't dial it back up? Well, you know. Within limits. We, we can, we cannot do the next 10%. But in any event, uh, I, I'm gonna have to, uh, to, to not support the motion this time though, but thank you. Thank you, Mayor. Council Member Myers. Thank you, Mayor. Mr. Taylor, can you speak back to when you talked about, um, as, as Council Member McCord said, when we turn the spigot on, on the MRF. Once we do the things that you're talking about doing to gain the efficiencies, then you said that we could process the same amount of recyclables in, that we're doing in eight hours, in four hours or five hours. Yeah, um, that's rounded off, but, but essentially we're gonna go from an operation that only processes eight tons an hour to one that processes 23. So we're almost tripling the rate that we can run through. So if you were running a 12-hour operation, essentially you could operate and, and run the same throughput in about a third of that time. So, um, our goal then would be not to just have idle time and run it four hours and shut down. Our goal would be to fill that back up. Absolutely. In the, in the business strategy, in, in manufacturing, your first option is a no capital option. I mean, the thing that you would do in industry typically is you would run all night. Now, the problem we have with that particular facility, as you know, is we- Noise. ... are right up against a residential neighborhood, so we have noise issues and secondarily, if we tried to run all night, we have nowhere to put the stuff. I mean, e- we are, we are piled to the gills with materials out there and we're getting more and more people participating. You know, the Waste Buster program, for example, has nearly 200 members now. Those are voluntary members, the commercial members that are recycling that don't have to do that. Uh, we're getting a lot of, uh, material from operations, farm operations. Different groups of people are bringing their materials into that center. Plus we have a fairly high usage of Rosies. Um, you know, going to the one day a week pickup, really what that did was take... people began to take materials out of their Herby and put them in the Rosie. Right. So we still get two pickups a week, but you're recycling half of what you're putting out there approximately. So, eh, we have a lot of material coming in that even five years ago we didn't have, and we know based on what we're seeing that the opportunity for us to take in more material throughout Fayette County is significantly higher, first by getting people to stop putting it in the Herby residential, and second, because industrial and commercial have an enormous amount of material that they currently, um, could recycle with us but don't. Another option we have for growth in the future, we did not assume that in this model, but regionally, our neighbors, there are 17 counties in the Bluegrass Area Development District, and all of them are attempting to recycle in one way or another. But even our next door neighbors, for example, in Jessamine County, don't have door to door pickup. So we have an opportunity if we can create a center that would allow them to economically service their citizens, we may be able to provide a service regionally, which again would give us an opportunity to increase revenue. So that's the kinda thing we're looking at. So it's clear that our assumptions are conservative and- I think there, there, uh... You can't guarantee... I, I didn't go so far on the limb as to guarantee that neighbors would want to bring materials to this county. That's- Right, right. ... a totally separate conversation, but what we did assume was that we would grow our, um, inside Fayette County material stream into that center significantly over the next five years and that that in turn would generate revenue. Now, recycling markets obviously are up and down, somewhat volatile. This year we had a, a pretty low year, but we still made almost a million six, um, and that's with pretty limited capacity. Last year it was 2.2. Uh, one encouraging thing though is most of those markets are trending back upward at this point, and a lot of places are finding uses for materials that previously they had no use for. Um, if you've been in, say, a green build home, countertops made out of bottles and glass that have been resurfaced, uh, aluminum, there's a lot of materials used in building today that weren't even available two or three years ago. So we're hopeful that there will be new markets and new uses for materials and that we're gonna be good enough to be able to sort those streams and sell those streams for a new use. Okay, I only have 46 seconds left. So, I wanna say that, you know, when we talk about... ... getting to the point where we can do the fee-based collection, that's another opportunity for people to have a lower rate, because then they'll be incentivized to recycle, which is gonna make more money for the city on top of that. So, um, I'm gonna vote against this motion. Uh, it's clear to me that we're moving in the right direction to do the things that you're trying to do here. And I'll stop now 'cause my time's up. Thank you. Thank you. Council Member Martin, your, this is your second, uh, um, opportunity to speak on this particular issue. I appreciate that, Mayor. The, uh, I, I'm gonna yield my time to Council Member Gordon, actually, 'cause - I'm not on the list. I know. Uh, um, because I, I, I just want the folks at home to understand the nature of the limitation. Uh, you know, we can't, we can increase it, and, and if we, if we cut this now and it comes out that our, uh, our projections are incorrect, we can't take it back, but, but would you mind sort of explaining what the, the limitation on that, that uptake is? Well, my only... And does this count, Mayor? Against Council Member Martin, absolutely. I'm not gonna use this as my time to speak. Okay, this is... Thank you. I, my only point that I was talking to Council Member Martin about was House Bill 44 and the limitations it places on us with taxes. So it is not necessarily true that we could automatically raise it back up 10% if we don't realize the savings. We would have to go to the people. I will jump in then and use the rest of my time to, to clarify. We can, uh, uh, ra- bring it, uh, back up at the ki- but the limitation is 4%, uh, per year. So in, in a three-year period, we could actually bring it back to 12%. Uh, given that we're sitting on a $25 million surplus, I don't think it's p- probably gonna put us in a bind, but I, I just wanted folks to understand that what our ability, that we would be limited to 4% uptake per year. Is, is that, uh, fairly accurate? Thank you, Mayor. Council Member Hinson. Thank you, Mayor. Um, Commissioner, I, um, I know y- your main focus has been on recycling. And I've said several times, would we have money available to take care of the things that, um, C- Council Member Lawless mentioned as far as the mattresses, the, you know, the large items that are left on the curbs. And it's, you know, I just don't see it as being rocket scientist, science to be able to get these items off the curbs. We can educate. We can try to limit it. But I know in the UK area, if it sits there long enough, they'll set it on fire. Um, but li- and, uh, and in District 11, I don't think that's happening a whole lot, but I do see in the, in the apartment communities, I see a lot of large items on the curbs. And I just want some kind of assurance that those kinds of things are gonna be taken care of. Well, we have a program now, and I know that in a couple a areas of the city, um, that's not perceived to be enough. We have stepped up our cycles through the neighborhoods and attempted to do it, particularly in, um, a couple areas of the city where we have a lot of apartment buildings. Uh, one thing, though, that I think is gonna help that quite a bit is we're gonna have to redo our whole enforcement strategy. Um, I think there is certainly a cost to have to go through a neighborhood three times as often as another one, and that fundamentally that the owner of the fa- facility that puts the material on the curb needs to bear some of the brunt of that cost. So the other thing that we're looking at in parallel with the program we have today and trying to improve that program, perhaps we need a second mattress truck, for example. But in addition to that, we're looking at an opportunity to enforce more effectively and increase fines. Um, we do have a very limited ability, one person, and, and essentially you have to violate, uh, uh, set out three times in a row. And by the time we actually can enforce, we're back to pick it up anyway. So we're, sort of our hands are kinda tied on that. So we're looking at opportunities to change the enforcement strategy. We're in the process of advertising and hiring two more enforcement specialists for waste. Um, and we are looking at opportunities to increase the effective use of that truck, so that we can make sure we're prompt when we, when people put things out, that we're there to pick it up and get it out of the way. So, but we're open to, you know, improvement suggestions in any area. I know that it's a challenge in some areas. So. I appreciate that. I, uh, 'cause I know I ride through my district regularly and call 311 myself. We have a clear unit officer. She does the same thing. And I just think that is so unnecessary that we should be doing that. Not that I, I don't mind, but I just, I find it very frustrating that, you know, we have a solid waste department, and I'm the one calling it in. Thank you. Vice Mayor Gray, this is your second opportunity to speak to this issue. Thank you, Mayor. Um, I respect council members, Council Member, uh, Lawless's motion and the, um, intentions of it. However, I'm not gonna support the motion. Um, I guess I'm just a little slow, and I don't understand the numbers. Um, I don't think it'll do much good to support the motion at this point, because it's more than likely that this is gonna go to a f- second reading. ... between now and then, I wanna understand the numbers though. This afternoon, just before I came here, ran into a fella at a meeting of Disabled American Veterans who showed me, he had a plastic bag and inside the plastic bag was his car mirror. It was a broken car mirror. And he said, "This afternoon, I ran into a empty, I ran into an empty, um, Herbie in the street and I had a choice of either hitting the Herbie or hitting the car that was coming the other direction. I chose the Herbie and it broke off my, my, um, mirror." And he said he called Jackie Robinson, who's the superintendent, to tell Jackie, and Jackie said, "Well, I'm, I'm sorry Danny, but you know, we can't do anything about that." And I was sympathetic. I heard the story. I said, "Well, you know, Danny, I'll, I'll talk to the mayor or I'll talk to Commissioner Taylor. It's unlikely that we can do anything." But the context of this is very similar to what Council Member Hanson was just saying. You know, are we doing all we can, with the resources we have, to execute the work? And none of us, of course, want to have the burden of being, of being accused later that this was politically motivated. So between now and the second read, I really wanna understand the numbers. I really wanna understand those projections. It wasn't but a couple of months ago, I think, that commissioner, that Council Member Feigo actually asked the question, which is a pretty good question, should we be in this business? Should we be in the recycle business? We know that Bluegrass Ad and our contiguous counties are doing it. I know that the guys out here, James Carter and his team are doing a great job. But it does beg the question, if we can roll it back 10%, can we roll it back 40%? What's the real number? So I think we're asking some of the questions, but not all of the questions. Thank you, Mayor. Council Member Gordon. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Commissioner. I have two what might be quick questions. Um, in your estimation, what would be the harm in waiting next, till next year to do this when we have more of the data? Do you have an opinion on that? Well, from an operational standpoint, it wouldn't be harmful. I think we're going to go about our business of delivering a better service at a lower cost, no matter what happens here tonight. We're gonna do the same things and we're gonna go after, aggressively, these improved targets. We wanna do more with recycling. We wanna be more efficient with our vehicles. Um, we, we do, we can do more with what we have and we're gonna go after that regardless of what happens. Um, I think probably, sitting on the council, maybe the harm is, is if people perceive that they are paying more for the service than they're getting, that could be damaging from the way the public views our waste department. Um, but it is our intention and our goal to deliver the best value, the best quality service we can at the best cost for the customers. That's our approach. And, um, what sort of, um, response did you get from our division of budgeting about this? Um, well, I guess the, the budgeting group more or less just gave us data. I mean, we had to work with budget. Again, I haven't been here, I'm just in my second budget season. But, uh, the, the budgeting group gave us historical data and worked with us on that. Um, we did, uh, talk with them about assumptions and projections and we did adopt the division of budgets assumptions on growth over the next, uh, five or six years, six years. Um, and so we tried to draw on the data that they gave us so that we were as close to apples and apples as we could get. So they pretty much didn't give us a judgment about it as much as they provided us data and some of the assumptions that we used going forward. I'm not sure that answers your question, but... It does. Um, well, I'm, I'm probably going to support your motion. Um, it seems to me that if I were in a bank or a nonprofit and I had a board that had this many questions and concerns, I would wanna slow down a little and get the numbers. So thank you, Commissioner. Council Member Beard. Uh, sitting here listening to what we're all struggling with, um, in the future, would this not be the best t- time, not now, but would not the budget cycle be the best time to be trying to make these decisions as opposed to the 11th hour and 58th minute? And I'll, I'll throw that at Commissioner O'Mara. Um... Thanks. Um, it is one approach. Um, I would have to say, after surviving my first budget season, uh, that we had plenty on our plate going into it, and, um, eh, if I had it to do over and do the best job possible, I may have entertained it at that time. Um, our plate was full this year. All right. And let me, let me- It's, uh, always full, I understand. Let me add one element to that. The only time during the year that we can change our property tax rates is now. Mm-hmm. And part of the difficulty earlier in the year, particularly back in February and March when the budget was being pulled together on our end, was the absence of- ... satisfactory data to make these kinds of judgment calls. We worked on that pretty aggressively in June and July, so we would, um, have reliable data to bring to you in August when we had to adjust our property tax rates, but that's the reason for being here now as opposed to the- I'm, I'm just, uh, Mayor, sa- saying that it, it, it seems like n- n- not everybody understands the numbers and this type of venue to try to vet the numbers, I don't think, uh, is healthy for one thing. Um, and that, uh, somewhere along the line, we need to get in the loop a little earlier and get satisfied on the numbers. Now, that, whether that's during the budget cycle or whether that's during the phase of the budget cycle when, uh, the links are operating or whether that's, uh, uh, sometime in August. Um, I- s- sitting here, whether it be the work session, uh, Tuesday or sitting here at, uh, 8:15 in the evening on, uh, Thursday is, uh, i- is ma- makes it kind of tight to make a clean decision. Council member, Council Member McCourt. Thank you, Mayor. And I know this is my second time. Uh, just a, a real quick question, uh, uh, Commissioner Taylor, uh, just for clarification because sometimes sitting out in the audience it can seem one way. The, the numbers that we all receive that came to budget and finance were delivered to budget and finance nine days ago, 10 days ago. So every council members, the, that committee had these numbers to look at for basically the last week and a half. So, you know, it's one of those things where you may, we may not have had an opportunity to study the numbers or we may have been busy with other things, but these numbers were made available to us last, last Tuesday, correct? The Budget and Finance Committee meeting? Yes. Okay. That, that's what I thought. So when, when we talk about not having the numbers, just recognize that, that the administration brought these things forward on the 25th, that it's our responsibility to dig into these, to, to ask questions. And, you know, all of us may have other things to do and, and not have the chance to drill into 'em, and that's what the process is for and why it's slow, but at the same time, to, uh, talk about this b- coming at the 11th hour, uh, is, is not quite accurate. Granted, 10 days or nine days is, is, uh, maybe a lot of time or not a lot of time to, to digest some of this stuff, but it is something also that we have talked about, I know, for the last, uh, five years that I've been on council that we've been looking at this as an area of, of reduction and so forth. So it is something that has been out there for a while. Thank you. Council Member James. Thank you, Mayor. I will be voting in support of Council Member Wallace's motion. Um, I've been aware, um, of the savings for equipment and, um, um, potential operating changes in the waste management specifically and really, um, the entire division as a, as a member of the council link, um, that dealt with these, this entity for the past two years. So I was aware, um, I was also aware, um, that there were folks watching the number grow, um, which is, it's kind of unfortunate if that's the case. Um, I think one thing a couple council members mentioned, you know, over the past 10 years that the number has grown and grown. Um, but what they didn't ask is how much has been spent on the things that were needed and how much, how many things have we delayed and put off waiting until the appropriate time. Um, and that's something that we continue to, um, some continue to choose to forget to say. Um, you know, I, I think to give a reference to our citizens that we base our budget on assumptions is wrong. Um, our budget, if you do it right, um, during the budget time, um, you look at trends of spending in particular divisions of government and you base that, um, down to salt. We look at the, try to look at the trends of salt, um, even though it's hard to predict. Gas, we have to look at that. We, we, we make assumptions, but we're making educated guesses. Um, it's not just we don't close our eyes and accept what is coming before us. Um, the same as, um, I respect the administration. I respect the mayor. Um, but things, if, if we were just gonna do everything the administration wanted to do, we wouldn't need us. Um, we're here to, to look deeper at issues and look at it from a, a different perspective at times and to have these conversations and questions, so I don't want anybody to think we do everything based on assumption because we don't. We look at personnel expenditures for each division of government. We look at cost of training. We look at all that. Um, if done correctly, the budget time is our most involved time in this government, um, and we should be spending a majority of our hours on that because it's supposed to direct the rest of our year. Um, so I, I nearly resent the statement that everything we do is based on assumption because, um, what are we working for ? Why are we spending so much time here and talking with our citizens if we're just gonna make wild guesses, um, when it's time to do something really crucial like this? So I will be supporting the motion. Um, I, I favor all of the trend, uh, everything we've talked about. I support Commissioner Taylor as far as changing equipment, moving, getting a new recycling center and all of that. I believe all that can happen and I believe we may see efficiencies in that. But as Council Member Gordon said the other day, "Let's see the efficiencies so we can base the fee on an accurate number and be able to show our citizens the efficiencies that we've made, um, not based on wild assumptions and guesses and numbers that I- I don't see a lot of people, um, really standing behind and ready to come up behind this horseshoe and push this button for us. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you. Uh, Council Member Meyers, this will be your second opportunity to speak on the issue. Thank you, Mayor. For me, the bottom line is, it's not the role of government to create savings accounts. And any time the government is stockpiling money, it is basically an over-taxation of its people. We've got $25 million that's been racking up in the bank for years that is not being used. We need to give that back to the taxpayers who put that money in, find efficiencies in the system to decrease cost while doing more with what we have, and that's what this program is gonna do. And so for me, the bottom line is, we've got money sitting in the bank. That's not the role of government. We need to give the money back to the people. I'm gonna vote against this motion, and I call to question. Thank you, Mayor. I- I'm sorry, did you make a motion? I'm s- uh, I didn't hear it. I'm sorry. I call to question. You call for the question. Uh, a call for the question won't terminate debate. A motion, uh, for the previous question would do that. That requires a two-thirds vote. Is that the motion you're now making? So the motion is to terminate debate by, through a motion for a previous question. Second by Council Member McCord. Second. Uh, it's non-debatable. Those in favor of, uh, the motion for the previous question, please indicate by voting aye electronically. Those opposed, vote nay. Madam Clerk, if you'd set the machine. Th- that motion, that motion fails by a vote of six- Sorry. Okay. Fails by a vote of seven to seven. Um, did you have anything further, Council Member Meyers? Thank you, Mayor. I think it was Council Member Gordon. Council Member Gordon. I was the only one left on the list to speak. So thank you for giving me that opportunity, colleagues. Um, I just had one more comment, and that is that I do not believe, and this is based on 11 years here, that our government was building up a surplus for no reason. We were building up a surplus to pay cash for our recycling center. This is a fact. And those of us who were here back then went to the presentation to hear it. So, you know, lots of people like to pay in cash for things when they're strapped otherwise and they're bonded, and I- I do believe that if some of the people were here in waste management who were here back then, they would tell you the same thing. I see no one else indicating a desire to speak, so if there is no further debate, we're prepared to vote on the motion to amend Ordinance Number 25. Um, the motion is to amend Ordinance 25 so as to restore the refuse collection tax to fif- .159 rather than the currently proposed .1431. Those in favor, please indicate by voting aye electronically. Those opposed, vote nay electronically. The motion to mend fails by a vote of 10 to 13. Have all council members voted? Okay. Ten to three. Excuse me, 10 to three. Missing one. Call for the question. Uh, a call for the question won't terminate debate. A motion, uh, for the previous question would do that. That requires a two-thirds vote. Is that the motion you're now making? So the motion is to terminate debate by, through a motion for previous question. Second by Council Member McCord. It's non-debatable. Those in favor of, uh, the motion for the previous question, please indicate by voting aye electronically. Those opposed, vote nay electronically. The motion to mend fails by a vote of 10 to 13. Ha- have all c- council members voted? Okay. Ten to three. Ah, excuse me, 10 to three. Missing one. Council Member James. Yes. She said yes. Yes. Okay, Council Member James votes yes. Yes. And so the- the motion to mend fails by a vote of four to ten. Unless there's something further with regard to Number 25, we'll proceed. Madam Clerk. An ordinance levying ad valorem taxes for municipal purposes for the fiscal year July 1, 2009 through June 30, 2010 on the assessed value of all taxable property within the taxing jurisdictions of the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government, all taxes on each $100 of assessed valuation as of the January 1, 2009 assessment date, as follows. General services district .0800 on real property, including real property of public service companies .0990 on personal property, including personal property of public service companies, non-commercial aircraft, and non-commercial watercraft, .1500 on insurance capital, .0150 on tobacco and storage, and .0450 on agricultural products and storage, full urban or partial s- urban service districts based on urban services available on real property, including real property of public service companies, .1431 for refuse collection, .0210 for street lights, .0094 for street cleaning, .0920 on insurance capital, .0150 on tobacco and storage, .0450 on agricultural products and storage, and levying an ad valorem tax for municipal purposes at the rate of 0.8, I'm sorry, .880 on each $100 of assessed value on all motor vehicles and watercraft within the taxing jurisdiction of the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government as of the January 1, 2010 assessment date. Number 26, an ordinance levying ad valorem taxes for purposes of support of the soil and water conservation district for the fiscal year July 1, 2009 through June 30, 2010 on the assessed value of all taxable real property within the taxing jurisdiction of the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government, including real property of public service companies at a rate of .0004 on each $100 of assessed valuation as of the January 1, 2009 assessment date. Number 27, an ordinance levying ad valorem taxes for purposes of support of the Agricultural Extension Office for the fiscal year July 1, 2009 through June 30, 2010 on the assessed value of all taxable real and personal property within the taxing jurisdiction of the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government, all taxes on each 100 dollars of assessed valuation as of the January 1, 2009 assessment date as follows, point zero zero three two on all taxable real property, including real property of public service companies, point zero zero three five on taxable personal property, including personal property of public service companies, non-commercial aircraft and non-commercial watercraft and excluding inventory in transit, insurance capital, tobacco in storage, and agricultural products in storage, and levying an ad valorem tax for purposes of support of the Agricultural Extension Office at the rate of point zero zero three two on each 100 dollars of assessed value on all motor vehicles and watercraft within the taxing jurisdiction of the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government as of the January 1, 2010 assessment date. Number 28, an ordinance pursuant to a request received from the Lexington-Fayette County Health Department levying an ad valorem tax for purposes of support of the Lexington-Fayette County Health Department for the fiscal year July 1, 2009 through June 30, 2010 on the assessed value of all taxable real and personal property within the taxing jurisdiction of the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government, including real and personal property of public service companies, non-commercial aircraft, non-commercial watercraft, and inventory in transit, and excluding insurance capital, tobacco in storage, and agricultural products in storage at the rate of point zero two eight on each 100 dollars of assessed value as of January 1, 2009 assessment date, and levying an ad valorem tax for purposes of support of the Lexington-Fayette County Health Department at the rate of point zero two eight on each 100 dollars of assessed value on all motor vehicles and watercraft within the taxing jurisdiction of the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government as of the January 1, 2010 assessment date. Thank you very much. If there are no motions, Madam Clerk, please proceed to give second reading to the resolutions entitled to second reading. Resolution num- resolution number one, a resolution accepting the bi- uh, bid of Office Depot Incorporated establishing a price contract for office supplies for the Division of Central Purchasing. Number two, a resolution accepting the bid of Mary's Cleaning Service establishing a price contract for custodial services, Gainesway Police RC/PAL Empowerment and Community Center for the Division of Facilities and Fleet Management. Number three, a resolution accepting the bid of Terreblue Incorporated in accordance with the provisions of ordinance number 240-2008 creating and offering for sale a franchise for the operation of a non-exclusive telecommunications system in Fayette County through December 8, 2011 and authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute a franchise agreement with Terreblue Incorporated incorporating the terms and conditions of ordinance number 240-2008. Number four, a resolution accepting the bids of Asplund Tree Expert Company, Virginia Turf Management Associates Incorporated, Lexington Tree Service Incorporated, Big Beaver Tree Service Incorporated, Tree Pro Incorporated, Core Services LLC Classic Cut Lawn & Landscape Service Incorporated, Tree Tech Services Incorporated, and Schwartz Mowing Incorporated establishing price contracts for tree removal for the Division of Streets, Roads, and Forestry. Number five, a resolution authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute an amendment to agreement with Commonwealth Inspection Bureau Incorporated for electrical inspection services to provide for a reduction in the minimum number of inspectors and vehicles in certain instances at no cost to the Urban County Government. Number six, a resolution authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute an amendment to the software product license agreement with Granicus Incorporated for maintenance and support of the video web streaming and council chambers voting system for fiscal year 2010 and an additional year subject to sufficient funds being appropriated for the additional year, reducing the cost to $29,640, $2,470 per month. Number seven, a resolution initiating a Land Subdivision Regulations Text Amendment for Planning Commission consideration and recommendation to amend the utility standards in Article 65A of the Land Subdivision Regulations to require utility lines to be installed below ground with the exception of major facilities and providing standards for such installation. Number eight, a resolution authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute an agreement with the US Department of Justice Drug Enforcement Administration for continuation of the DEA task force at no cost to the Urban County Government. Number nine, a resolution authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute a memorandum of understanding with the University of Kentucky for reimbursement for traffic control costs at no cost to the Urban County Government. Number 10, a resolution authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute agreements with Lexington Local Investment Commission, LexLink, 550 dollars, American Lung Association of Kentucky Incorporated, 350 dollars, YMCA of Central Kentucky Beaumont Center Branch, 400 dollars, ACT Ministries Incorporated, 650 dollars, The Temple of Prayer and God in Christ Incorporated, 475 dollars, Windbird Neighborhood Association Incorporated, 500 dollars, and Russell Cave Church of Christ Incorporated, 300 dollars for the Office of the Urban County Council at a cost not to exceed the sum stated. Number 11, a resolution ratifying the probationary civil service appointment of Syndra Brown, Administrative Specialist/Principal, grade 114E1467.20 biweekly in the Division of Community Development effective August 17, 2009, ratifying the probationary sworn appointments of Guy Green, Police Lieutenant, grade 317E2937.03 biweekly in the Division of Police effective August 31, 2009, Christopher Morrow, Police Sergeant, grade 315N27.755 hourly in the Division of Police effective August 31, 2009, approving the unclassified civil service appointments of Eldar Agayev, Tyson Carrol, Robert Chen, David Collins, James Cox, Ira Duncan, Daniel Florence, George Halls, Jonathan Holliday, Olivia Lloyd, Danny MaGuire, Ryan Raker, Doman Ruggles, Michael Steele, Eric Stroude, Joshua Talbert, Bryan Vaal, Chad Wilson, Ricky Yates, Junior, police trainee, grade 311N17.135 hourly in the- That's fine. You're honored. ...Division of Police effective August 31, 2009, Logan Stricker, police trainee, grade 311N17.135 hourly in the- Here's your order. ...Division of Police effective September 2, 2009. Kilt garbage. Number 12, a resolution approving the report of the audit examination of the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government Sheriff's Settlement 2008 taxes, for taxes collected as of April 23, 2009 and granting the sheriff a quietus. 13, a resolution authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute Change Order Number One to the contract with HH General Contractor Incorporated for the Police Health Care Center, increasing the contract price by the sum of $39,505 from $75,950 to $115,455. Number 14, a resolution authorizing and directing the Mayor on behalf of the Irvin County government to execute a maintenance agreement with New World Systems Corporation for software maintenance at a cost not to exceed $221,178. Number 15, a resolution changing the street name and property address number of 241 Clark Street to 240 Coral S- Corral Street, of 240 Clark Street to 105 Spruce Street, of 609 through 611, 615, and 619 through 621 Tipton Alley to 532, 536, and 535 Poplar Street, of 1764, 1768, and 1772 Alishiba Way to 3000, 3008, and 3009 Atkinson Avenue, of 2747 Liberty Road to 1744 Alishiba Way, and of 2545 Georgetown Road to 2420 Spur Road, changing the property address numbers of 807 Oakhill Drive to 809 Oakhill Drive, of 427 Stoll Pool Court to 423 Stoll Pool Court, of 721 Shropshire Avenue to 717 Shropshire Avenue, of 1424 High Lawn Avenue to 1428 High Lawn Avenue, of 120, 121, and 234 Ford Place to 215, 221, and 224 Ford Place, and of 332 and 601, 603 Chestnut Street to s- 330 and 601 Chestnut Street, and changing the street name of 220 Clark Street to 220 Corral Street, all eff- effective 30 days from passage. Number 16, a resolution authorizing and directing the Mayor on behalf of the Irvin County government to execute an agreement with Kathy H. Witt, Sheriff of Fayette County for the collection of the Irvin Service District taxes for the 2009 property tax year at a cost not to exceed $350,000 with payment net from collections. Number 17, a resolution authorizing and directing the Mayor on behalf of the Irvin County government to execute a paramedic training program agreement with the City of Paris Fire Department for participation by the City of Paris Fire Department in the program at no cost to the Irvin County government. Number 18, a resolution amending Section One of Resolution Number 465, 2009, which authorized and directed the Mayor on behalf of the Irvin County government to approve Collins & Company Incorporated as the third-party claims administrator to provide workers' compensation claim services for the Irvin County government for fiscal year 2009 at an annual cost of $139,200. Number 19, a resolution accepting the bid of Gershman, Brickner, & Bratton Incorporated in the amount of $1,655,596 for waste management routing software and implementation services with the Division of Waste Management and authorizing and directing the Mayor on behalf of the Irvin County government to execute an agreement as necessary with Gershman, Brickner, & Bratton Incorporated related to the bid. Number 20, a resolution authorizing and directing the Mayor on behalf of the Irvin County government to execute agreements with Black Church Coalition of the Bluegrass Incorporated, $1,275, and Blue Grass Blue Bombers Sports Incorporated, $300 for the Office of the Irvin County Council at a cost not to exceed the sum stated. Number 21, a resolution authorizing the Division of Human Resources to internally advertise for a GIS specialist position in the Division of Computer Services. Thank you, Madam Clerk. Um, that completes the reading of resolutions entitled to second reading. Is there a motion to approve those resolutions? So moved. Second. Is there, is there a motion from Council Member Ellinger- Yes. ... and a second by Council Member Crosby- Second. ... to approve those resolutions? Any discussion? Seeing none, we'll proceed to vote. Those in favor of approving those resolutions, please indicate by voting yes electronically. Those opposed, vote nay electronically. And Madam Clerk, please call the roll. Mr. Gray. Yes. Ms. Henson. Yes. Ms. James. Yes. Mr. Lane. Yes. Ms. Lawless. Yes. Mr. Martin. Mr. McCord. Yes. Mr. Myers. Yes. Mr. Stennett. Yes. Mr. Beard. Aye. Ms. Cosby. Yes. Mr. Ellinger. Ms. Figal. Yes. And Ms. Gordon. Aye. Thank you. Those resolutions are unanimously approved. That takes us now down to the resolutions en- Mayor. ... titled the first reading. Council Member Martin's returned. So any vote on the- Yes. Council Member Martin, we voted to- No hand raise. Thank you. We'll record a yes vote for Council Member Martin. Thank you. That's fine. Second. They turned and looked off. Yeah, she did. All right, Coun- Council Member Feick. Thank you, Mayor. Uh, I just, for the record, I would just like to say that, uh, that I pushed the wrong button on the vote on the amendment for, um, 25, Council Member Lawless's amendment. I had intended to vote no on that, and I pushed the wrong button apparently and voted yes. So I'd like for the record to show that I voted against that amendment. And that w- was that consistent with your voice vote? Did we do a voice vote? So, we d- that's right, we did not do it. Um- We can go back in and change that in the record. Well, we can take it to the board at the meeting. I'll ask the parliamentarian for a ruling. Normally, you can't change a vote, but if this was an electronic issue, we've never had that, honestly. So we'd, if this council de- deems that that's changing her vote rather than an error, then it would not be allowed. There was no voice vote though. That, that, on that particular- Right, just electronic. We've never had the issue. We only had these machines about a little over a year, so this never came up yet. Now it has. Well, I suppose a motion to suspend the rules in order to grant permission to alter a vote would be the means by which that could be permitted. I make a, I have a question. Second. Have a motion by Council Member Crosby and a second by Council Member, uh, Martin to suspend the rules. Uh, Council Member Gordon has a- A question. Point of information. Thank you, Mayor. Um, my question is that in the past when the vote is closed, which it was closed, we have never allowed someone to change their vote for any reason, so I -- I guess this will open us up to anyone who says they accidentally pressed the wrong button, we can grant them changing their vote. I mean, is this not true, Mr. Parliamentarian? Is there -- was -- is there a reason there was no voice vote on that issu- on that particular issue? Uh, the only time we take voice vote- votes and, and do the, uh, electronic vote as well is when we're actually voting on resolutions or ordinances. And usually routine things are done by voice vote. Close matters we go ahead and vote electronically. Um, actually a motion to suspend the rules is non-debatable. Um, unless there's some point of order or point, point of information, we ought to proceed to vote, and let's do this electronically. We can all stand the practice here. Um, those in favor of suspending the rules to allow Council Member Feigl to change her vote, please indicate by voting I. Those opposed to suspending the rules, please indicate by voting no. It requires a two thirds majority. And if all council members voted, motion fails. All right. Um- Thank you, Mayor. ... the vote will stand as is, but we'll note your, your position. Council member, uh, excuse me, Madam Clerk, we're ready for resolutions entitled a first reading. Number 22, a resolution accepting the bid of Bluegrass Contracting Corporation and the amount of $1,225,006.25 for the Bonds Branch Flood Hazard Mitigation Project for the divisions of community development and engineering and authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the Urban County government to execute an agreement with Bluegrass Contracting Corporation related to the bid. Number 23, a resolution accepting the bid of Allen Vanguard Technologies Incorporated establishing a price contract for ballistic ensemble for the Division of Police. Number 24, a resolution ratifying the probationary civil service appointments of Susan Fluger, municipal engineer senior, grade 119E, 2771.60 bi-weekly in the Division of Water Quality, effective September 14, 2009, Jennifer Bass, telecommunicator senior, grade 113N, 17.131 hourly in the Division of Emergency Management 911, effective September 14, 2009, Paulette LeDuke, telecommunicator senior, grade 113N 17.206 hourly in the Division of Emergency Management 911, effective September 14, 2009. Number 25, a resolution authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the Irvin County government to execute change order number one to the contract with Denham Blythe Company Incorporated for the Lyric Theater project, increasing the contract price by the sum of $16,313.12 from $5,560,322.66 to $5,576,635.78. Number 26, a resolution authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the Irvin County government to execute change orders to the contract for the Lyric Theater renovation edition with Denham Blythe Co- Company Incorporated subject to specific conditions. Number 27, a resolution authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the Irvin County government to execute a memorandum of understanding with the Department of Veterans Affairs for emergency responses at no cost to the Irvin County government. Number 28, a resolution authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the Irvin County government to execute an additional software license agreement with New World Systems Corporation for use of software at a cost not to exceed $58,560. Mayor. Mayor. Council Member Crosby. Uh, Mayor, I have a motion on number 29. Um, several of us have discussed this, and, um, we've talked with Council Member Lawless, and at this, um, moment I'd like to make a motion to remove number 29 from the docket. Second. ... a- okay, I'll stop there, and we can, we can just discuss it. Also, the reason why we're moving this is, uh, Council Member Lawless has gotten, and I think all of us have gotten, a lot of, uh, community input regarding number 29, and, um, I think that Council Member Lawless and most people up here believe that she might be able to come up with another resolution to bring back to the council probably within a week that, um, we all might be able to agree on. And, um, she might be able to meet with all parties who are interested, and that might give her a little bit more time to come up with something. So with that, I'll make this motion. And, um, obviously, if we remove it, we're able to debate that. So, um, thank you for my second, and I'll stop there. The motion is to remove it from the docket and, um, for an unspecified period of time. Just is that clear? It- it's, um, it's just to remove it. I believe that Council Member Lawless probably has a timeline of when she'll be bringing something back, which will be very shortly. I- I don't want to put a timeline on her, but it's my understanding that she's meeting with people next week. Since we are not in session next week, uh, I- I'm hopeful that it'll probably be the following Tuesday at work session, and then we'll be doing the reading the next Thursday. Okay. And, and let me ask, just a procedural clarification here, this sounds like a motion to table. No, it's a- it's to remove it, and it com- she'll be coming back with something completely different to replace this. All right. Uh, motion by Council Member Crosby is to remove item 29 from the docket. Council Member Meyers has seconded that motion, and, um, it- it is debatable. So, does anyone wish to address the -- the motion? Council Member Law-- a -- a -- let me make sure. Council Member Gordon, I have you on the screen, but that's a stale- I just wiped it over from there. Council Member Lawless. Thank you. Um, I've had a lot of discussions with a lot of people over the last few days, and, um, we can do a first and second reading, if we want to, at the next council meeting, when this would have gotten a second reading. But clearly, it is not the -- a perfect document, so a lot of people, including Council Member Crosby, has been working, uh, have been working hard to help me, uh, get input from different places. Uh, the Remodelers Association, uh, Mr. Johnson and I, they had a meeting yesterday. I had spoken with him briefly before I introduced this. I don't think this is well-written. Um, there is a very vague, uh, definition of structure, um, and, um, so it - it definitely has problems. And, um, I didn't write it 'cause I'm not an attorney , thank God. And, um... So, I'm meeting with, uh, several folks on Tuesday. I'm firmly pushing this and supporting this, but if we don't have s-... a good document to bring forward, we won't get anything passed. And so, with, uh, a lot of good and helpful council input from around the horseshoe and all of the emails from both sides of the issue, um, excited to have a better written document that addresses... So, it will do exactly what we want it to do, no more and no less. Nobody wants to put anybody out of work, and nobody wants to override deed restrictions that are already there, or ND1 or H1. It's not meant to do that, and all of that is left out of this document. Um, so thank you to all the council members and to all the people in the community that have addressed this. I appreciate your support, and trust me, I'm going forward as hard and fast as I can with this, but we have to be able to have something that works, and works well. We don't want unintended impact. So, all you folks that are here tonight, please feel free to talk about it and address the council, but I - I want you to know this is a collaborative effort, not a, uh, blind side , if you will. So, thank you. Council Member Gordon. Thank you, Mayor. Um, I'm in agreement with what you said, um, because, um, I thought it was quite inappropriate that this included the entire urban service boundary. Um, I would ask that when you meet with folks, you include some neighbors. Oh. Will you do that? Absolutely. Okay, thank you. I always include neighbors. Thank you. Council Member Lane. Thank you, Mayor. Uh, I took the, uh, some time and I drove through your neighborhood and, you know, I feel just from ou-... looking at the property from the outside that some of those improvements are not appropriate for the neighborhood. And I... You know, I'm not in favor, though, of putting a moratorium on all renovation in Fayette County, because we have hundreds of, uh, home builders and remodelers and thousands of craftsmen that work on houses that will be without work, and I just don't think that's the right approach. I would like to encourage you to, uh, look at page 821 of the zoning ordinance. Um, and, uh, there's several sections in here, but in the R1Z zoning, there are very limited, uh, uses that are permitted. And if, in fact, the people that have renovated the homes there are, you know, renting to people and are running more of a boarding house, that is not permitted in the R1C zoning category. And under the ordinance, uh, the zoning ordinance, that anybody in the neighborhood could file a complaint, uh, with the building inspector, and then they're obligated to do an inspection of the property and see what the application is. That's what I would recommend as an immediate, uh, effort on behalf of the neighbors, to have the government actually come in and inspect the property. Because, uh, even if we granted a building permit for a single family residence, but the person that owns the property is renting it to others, uh, I think you can have two boarders in a single family residence, but that's it. Uh, then it seems like there might be action where we could restrict the rental of the property. Now, I'm not a real estate attorney, I'm not a zoning expert. I'm just a... an average citizen like you guys, but that's what I interpret in the ordinance, and I would encourage you to take that approach, see what our billing inspection department has to say about it. Thank you, Mayor. Council Member Figal. Thank you, Mayor. Um, I too have gotten lots of emails and phone calls and have talked with, uh, a lot of folks about this particular item on the agenda. But this is, in fact, why I did vote to put it on the agenda, so that it would generate a lot of input from people in the community and that we could have a good debate on it and that we could come up with a, uh, an ordinance or a resolution that would actually do what it was intended to do. Um, I, I think the idea was to walk it on tonight, and I felt like that there needed to be some advance notice to everybody in the community. Well, when I talked with Council Member Lawless, uh, that was one of the options, was to - to either bring it up at work session or walk it on tonight, and I encouraged her to bring it to - to bring it to work session. And so that -- that it could be on the docket for tonight, and that everybody would -- would get notice that -- that we were going to be deliberating this issue. So I'm very pleased to learn that, uh, the input has caused us to step back and take another look at this. Thank you, Mayor. Council Member Martin. Thank you, Mayor. I -- ... I still think these structures are being used as, uh, apartment buildings in single family zones, and I agree that we've got a problem. We need to figure out a way to fix them. Um, I agree with Council Member Lane's observations about our zoning ordinance. There are tools that we have to try to address this, and I -- I'm looking forward to working with, uh, with, uh, our folks here in the city to try to make sure that we can put that in place. Um, we -- we have a -- a -- a zoning code that is still a little bit out of date. It's, uh ... And we're gonna hopefully take a look at that and -- and -- and see whether we can make some changes to the zoning ordinance so that it -- it -- it -- it's even more clear than it is that you can't have an apartment building in a single family r- r- zone. Um, I -- I -- I -- I don't think that a moratorium on renovation is the solution here, because that -- that's a very broad brush, and -- and a lot of, um, uh, contractors and -- and craftsman would -- would be hurt by that. Uh, I think there's a more creative solution that we can find. Lexington's not the only college town in America. And someone someplace has come up with a -- a way to fix this. And so I think a -- a smart, creative investigating about how other folks have solved this problem is what we need, and that's what we need to -- to do as quickly as we can so that we can sort of get this in place. So thank you, Mayor. Council Member Lolis. Thank you, Mayor. Um, uh, again, I appreciate the help, and, um, there will be a better document that doesn't hurt people that we're not trying to hurt and we don't wanna hurt. Um, but it is so frustrating for me right now that, as I sit and I hear, um, Council Member Lane, and, uh, talking about boarding houses and et cetera, and so I would invite you, Council Member Lane, to call Building Inspection and talk to 'em about it. And, uh, Council Member Martin, I appreciate your, um, support for this not being right. We know that, and we've tried all those things you've suggested. I'm very excited that everybody's very excited now about doing something about it. And until we can, uh, know a moratorium isn't ... It would be really nice if we could have all the answers tomorrow, but by then, last Tuesday night, this past Tuesday night, while we were here, a yard was blacked up and a curb cut put in on Elizabeth Street. So perfectly legally, and it was done when we were here at work session. So I invite all of you all to come and, uh, uh, please call Building Inspection and talk to 'em about it. And, um, I invite you all to ... I would love to have you all join me for a tour of some of the neighborhoods impacted by this. So, um, I'm very excited that everybody's real excited about, uh, passing ordinances and making changes and, um, all that. That's extraordinarily good news 'cause this has been going on for years and nobody's done anything about it. Thank you, thank you. Vice Mayor Gray. Thank you, Mayor. Um, I just wanna acknowledge Council Member Lolis' leadership on this issue, and the patience, the extraordinary patience, probably too much patience of the -- these neighbors and these -- and these neighborhoods that are experiencing, um, really what amounts to economic destruction. There's no other way to put it. It's happened. We've ignored it. University's ignored it. And, uh, it's like that old fellow on Network. What was it, that movie from the '70s? He said, "I'm mad as hell and I'm not gonna take it anymore." And that's what these people are saying. And I -- I think that we all -- we recognize that the tension has risen on this issue. That's part of problem solving. And thanks to Council Member ... Acknowledge Council Member Crosby for relieving the tension to some extent, but not dialing it down so far that we're going to avoid the problem. That's what Council Member Lolis has said. She says she's gonna hang in there and stay in the ring, and the rest a- and many of us are as well. Thank you. Council Member Lane, this will be your second opportunity to speak on -- on the matter. Thank you, Mayor. Well, um, if we don't enforce the ordinances that we have, it doesn't really do any good to add new ordinances. And I'd like to read two paragraphs out of the zoning ordinance, which says, "Building permits or certificates of occupancy issued on the basis of plans and applications approved by the building, the Division of Building Inspection authorize only the use, arrangements, and constructions set forth in such permits, plans, and cert- uh, certificates, and no other. The use, arrangement, or construction at variance with the authorized -- with that authorized shall be deemed a violation of the zoning ordinance." And then, for the record, any person who so violates the zoning ordinance, or fails to comply with any of its requirements, except as provided in Section 5.8), shall upon conviction thereof, be fined not less than $10 and not more than $500 for each conviction. And each day of violation shall constitute a separate offense. So, uh, $500 a day penalty for violating the zoning ordinance to me is a substantial penalty. And I -- and I still say that, as your neighborhood, I ask you to file a complaint on the property owners that you feel are in violation of the zoning ordinance, and see if our government can, uh, can apply the laws we have on the books before we go and place a moratorium on the entire urban county government, that we can't build anything. I, I think that's just totally inappropriate. And I, you know, I'm opposed to what's going on down there, but I think we have to do it in a reasoned, uh, well-judged manner and not try to do some kind of blanket moratorium. That is not good government policy and it's not good economic policy, and we're in a, you know, recession right now, and we don't wanna throw some of our fellow Lexingtonians out of work because they can't, uh, remodel a house. I just think this is a bad, bad policy- ... that we have at hand right now. Uh, thank you. M- Mayor. Mayor, point of order. We need to keep the discussion to the question, and the question is, do we remove it from the docket, not whether or not we're for or against moratoriums, but should it be removed tonight from the docket? Your point is, is well-taken, and I'll ask council members to confine their remarks in that general framework. Council member James. Thank you, Mayor. Um, I am... I'll support removing it from the docket knowing that there's gonna be a lot more research, um, going into it. Um, and it's not just the third district or issue, it's in the first district too. So I'm, I'm watching it closely. Um, it's not just a student housing issue. It's a affordable housing issue, um, or people trying to make money off of a lot of people living in one place issue, or whatever. Um, so I will support, and I would like to give some input as far as first district is concerned, and I hope that it's not limited to only the third. Thank you. Council member Myers. Thank you, Mayor. I guess I just want to say briefly that I'm glad that we are, uh, removing this from the docket, because bad legislation is never the answer for anything. We do have problems out there. We need to solve the problem, but putting blanket moratoriums on is not the answer. We know that back a few years ago, we had a moratorium that lasted for two and a half, three years, that was supposed to deal with this issue, and the people who were in office then, planning commission and all those different things, failed us and didn't find a correct solution, and so here we are again today. So we don't just put moratoriums on there that put people out of business, hoping that we come up with some good legislation somewhere along the line. So I've got some questions that I want to ask. I know this isn't the time to do it, but, um, I just want to say I'm glad that we're doing this. I think we had the votes to do it either way, to remove this, and, uh, again, bad legislation is never the answer. Thank you. Council member Martin. Mayor. This, this will be your second opportunity to speak on this issue. Um, eh, once again, I find myself agreeing with Council member Lane. Um, but, but in a, but I also agree with the frustration of Council member Lawless. Th- this is a failure of enforcement. We have rules on our books which should be... give, give us the tools to, to take action ag- against impro- you know, apartment buildings on the back of single family cottages in, in, in a residential zone. I think we can improve our rules, and I think we're gonna look at, uh, trying to find smart solutions, uh, hopefully that have been developed in other college towns. Um, but, but we have to enforce the rules we have if we're gonna be a, a, a city and we're gonna have, have laws and that people follow. We cannot allow, uh, this c- type of neighborhood, an- and it's a neighborhood my, my sister lives in that neighborhood, and we can't allow it to deteriorate. Uh, and we can't allow this kind of creeping to continue, and, and we do that through the enforcement of the laws that we have. If we don't enforce our laws, we're not a civilized society, and we can't do business the way people expect it to be done. So, uh, not only do we as a council have to find a, a, a solution, but also, we as a city government have to enforce the rules we have. And I've had, um, houses in my district where we've met with everybody under the sun trying to figure out how to, how to solve this kind of an issue, and we've been told, you know, that it's not, just not against the rules, and actually, it is. So, uh, we, we've got work to do. Thank you, Mayor. Does any other member of the council wish to speak on the motion to remove item 29 from the docket? Seeing none, we'll vote. All in favor of removing item 29 from the docket, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries unanimously. Um, let me, let me chime in just on a couple of things here. First of all, everybody should be aware this issue came up in the planning committee about two years ago. It's wound up in the student housing task force for the last couple of years. I know there is a draft afoot. But I'm going to be asking the student housing task force to try to wrap up its work immediately so that Council member Lawless can have the benefit of that work as a part of the whole process. And, um, I hope we will, uh, as a, as a government, work diligently to try to bring this to some resolution promptly. Madam Clerk, if you'll start with item 30 then. Number 30, a resolution authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the urban county government to execute a modification of an agreement with the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet for operations and maintenance of traffic signals through June 30, 2010, at a cost not to exceed $300,000. Number 31, a resolution authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the urban county government to execute and submit a grant application to the Kentucky Emergency Management Agency, and to provide any additional information requested in connection with this grant application, which grant funds are in the amount of $108,750 federal funds and $17,400 Commonwealth of Kentucky funds, and are for the Lexington Fayette- ... County Comprehensive Hazard Mitigation P-- Plan. Number 32, a resolution authorizing and directing the Mayor on behalf of the Irvin County government to execute an amendment to agreement with Reach Incorporated for an additional $100,000 for the First Time Homebuyers Program at a cost not to exceed an additional $100,000. Number 33, a resolution authorizing and directing the Mayor on behalf of the Irvin County government to execute an agreement with Metropolitan Women's Club Incorporated $450 for the Office of the Irvin County Council at a cost not to exceed the sum stated. That's flushing No. Speak. Thank you, Madam Clerk. Are there any -- any motions? Councilmember Henson? I have a motion, Mayor. Uh, I don't know if- Uh, I don't believe your mic- I move to place on the- ... your microphone is on, Councilmember Henson. Oh, sorry. It's getting late. I'm sorry. I move to place on the docket for first reading a resolution authorizing and directing the Mayor to execute a contract with Kroger Limited Partnership I to supply and administer influenza vaccinations to the Irvin County government employees. So moved. Second. Have a motion and second to add that item to the docket. Is there any discussion? All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Madam Clerk, would you give it a push? May- I have another one to walk, walk on as well. All right. We can, we can go ahead and deal with them all at once. Okay. Councilmember Gordon. Uh, thank you. I, I move to place on the docket for first reading a resolution authorizing and directing the Mayor to approve a closing agreement between Vulcan Lands, Inc. and the University of Kentucky which obligates the Irvin County government to construct, maintain, operate a fence and pedestrian bicycle trail to be known as the Legacy Trail that will be located in close proximity to Vulcan's Georgetown Road Quarry. So moved. Second. Have a motion and second. Any discussion? All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. The motion carries. Anything further? Madam Clerk, if you give first reading to both of those matters. Number 34, a resolution authorizing and directing the Mayor on behalf of the Irvin County government to execute a contract with Kroger Limited Partnership I to supply influenza vaccine and administer vax-inations to Lexington-Fayette Irvin County government employees at a cost of $22 per employee, not to exceed $24,300. And number 35, a resolution authorizing and directing the Mayor on behalf of the Irvin County government to execute the approval of a closing agreement between Vulcan Lands Incorporated and the University of Kentucky which obligates the Irvin County government to construct, maintain, operate and fence a pedestrian bicycle trail to be known as the Legacy Trail that will be located in close proximity to Vulcan's Georgetown Road Quarry. Councilmember James. I'd like to suspend the rules, Mayor, and give second, or ask for a suspension of the rules to give second reading to number 35, 25 and 26. 35, 25 and 26, correct? Yes. Thank you. Any further, uh, Councilmember Henson? Mayor, I'd like to add number 34, please. All right. Others? Councilmember Hen- uh, McCord. Yes, I'd like to add number 35 in the, uh, this will allow us to move into this construction season, uh, thus saving money. And this is the project we wanna have done for the World Equestrian Games, so- We, we al- we already have it on the list from Councilmember James. Any others? All right. Got a motion by Councilmember James, and I'll take a second from Councilmember Henson to suspend the rules for purposes of giving second reading to items 25, 26, 34, and 35. There's no further discussion. We'll proceed to vote. Those in favor of suspending the rules to give second reading to those four items, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Madam Clerk. Number 25, a resolution authorizing and directing the Mayor on behalf of the Irvin County government to execute change order number one to the contract with Denham Blythe Company Incorporated for the Lyric Theater project, increasing the contract price by the sum of $16,313.12 from $5,560,322.66 to $5,576,635.78. Number 26, a resolution authorizing and directing the Mayor on behalf of the Irvin County government to execute change orders to the contract for the Lyric Theater renovation addition with Denham Blythe Company Incorporated subject to specific conditions. Number 34, a resolution authorizing and directing the Mayor on behalf of the Irvin County government to execute a contract with Kroger Limited Partnership I to supply influenza vaccine and administer vaccinations to Lexington-Fayette Irvin County government employees at a cost of $22 per employee, not to exceed $24,300. And number 35, a resolution authorizing and directing the Mayor on behalf of the Irvin County government to execute the approval of a closing agreement between Vulcan Lands Incorporated and the University of Kentucky which obligates the Irvin County government to construct, maintain, operate and fence a pedestrian bicycle trail to be known as the Legacy Trail that will be located in close proximity to Vulcan's Georgetown Road Quarry. The floor is open for a motion to approve, uh, those four. Second. Second. Councilmember Crosby has moved the adoption of those four resolutions. Councilmember Gordon has seconded the motion. Any discussion? All in favor, uh, please indicate by voting aye electronically. Those opposed, vote nay electronically. And Madam Clerk, please call the roll. Mr. Gray. Mr. Gray: Passes. Ms. Henson. Yes. Ms. James. Yes. Mr. Lane. Yes. Ms. Lawless. Mr. Martin. Yes. Mr. McCord. Yes. Mr. Myers. Y- yes. Mr. Stennet. Yes, ma'am. Mr. Beard. Aye. Ms. Cosby. Yes. Mr. Ellinger. Yes. Ms. Feigel. Yes. Ms. Gordon. Aye. Aye. Mr. Gray. All right. Those resolutions are unanimously approved. You have some, uh, communications under item nine. They are for mem- for information purposes only. Are there any announcements? See none. We have a number of people who have indicated a desire to speak during the public comment section. Um, I'm not entirely clear whether they are all still here, but I'll just start at the beginning, and we'll go through the list of about 19 folks who have signed up. Um, Dr. Roe. Melinda Roe, Lexington Fayette County Health Department. Thank you, Mayor, and thank you, Council. Um, I wanted to make sure if you'd not seen the media today, the governor had a pan flu summit in Frankfort, and he announced, um, the first H1N1 or the new swine flu associated death in Kentucky. And, um, unfortunately, that was to a Fayette County woman in her 50s who had significant underlying health conditions. And I wanted to make you aware of that 'cause last time I was here and I talked to you about H1N1, I told you that I would keep you updated. So I brought you a packet of information because we wanna make sure that people, um, get education about this. Um, in any given year with seasonal flu, we will see 300 to 400 deaths in Kentucky just from regular seasonal flu, and across the nation we'll see 36,000 deaths. That's seasonal flu. H1N1 has been acting, um, like seasonal flu so far. We have seasonal flu vaccine and we want people to get those shots, not just the health department, but a lot of healthcare providers, a lot of the, uh, pharmacies, uh, Kroger, different places like that. So we really wanna encourage people, especially people with underlying health conditions, 'cause this lady like I said, had serious, uh, health conditions. What do I mean by that? I mean, things like asthma, lung disease, heart disease, kidney disease, liver disease. Um, if you've got, um, any sort of, um, like cancer, immune compromising situation, get that seasonal flu shot. But we basically want anybody between six months of age o- on, if you want to avoid getting the flu, get the seasonal flu shot. We do not have the H1N1 vaccine yet. We hope to get that, um, in October. And again, we're gonna use a lot of community partners to get those shots given, 'cause the vaccine is the best weapon we have, um, against the H1N1. We have a flu hotline, if, if any of your folks wanna call or that they've got questions. We've also got community outreach teams that will come out and talk. They'll come to your neighborhood associations. So, um, there's just a lot of information. I won't go through all of it, late hour of the night, but I just wanted to make sure that you were aware. Thank you. Thank you. Are there any questions for Dr. Roe? Thanks for keeping us up to speed. Next on the list is Cathy Franklin. Ms. Franklin, if you'll step to the podium. You'll have three minutes. Okay. I'm here about the moratorium. I guess things have changed a bit, so I guess my comments are gonna change a bit. Um, let me just address a few things. Uh, we do talk to anybody we can about what's going on in our neighborhoods. It has not worked, okay? Just so you know. You can tell us to go do it. We've done it, just so you know. The other thing is, uh, recent addition on Westwood Court, called about it. They said, "They got a permit, it's okay." It's about twice the size of the original house. The black topping on Elizabeth Street, "They got a permit. It's okay." I don't know where the disconnect is here, but there's a disconnect. And if you're encouraging us not to put a moratorium on to just stop this now, so we can collect and enforce these rules, enforce these ordinances, um, that's what we want, is just to make it stop. So my point is that it ain't working, we can't make it work, and obviously y'all ain't making it work either. So if it's out there, and we can't do anything, and we've tried, and we've asked, go ahead, make it happen. That's what we want. Make it happen. And I don't know what the rest of them are gonna say. And you know the place, I mean, you know these neighborhoods are going downhill, downhill. And we really need to stop it soon. Um, and so if in the next, before this, before whatever happens, happens, someone walks into planning or zoning or building or whatever and says, "I'm building a 3,000 square foot addition on the back of a 1,500 square foot house." What are y'all gonna t- What are they gonna tell them? "Go ahead." That's what they're gonna tell them. And there's plenty of houses that are slated for that in my neighborhood. So maybe you could tell whoever it is who gives these permits to stop giving these permits, because that's what's happening. Since we've all established now that that's not the right thing and that's not what the ordinances say, I don't want to see it happen, because now we all know, and they need to know too. Thanks. And thank you all for thinking about this and for... I know we're a little disappointed, but if it's gonna be better, we want it to be better. But just do it soon. Thanks a lot. Council- Council, let's refrain from the applause, if you would please. It will enable us all to leave a little earlier, and, um, uh, I'm sure everybody has their supporters here tonight. And the third person is Kate Savage. Ms. Savage? Do- No. I'm Kate Savage, I live at 619 Columbia Avenue. I'm president of the Columbia Heights Neighborhood Association. I don't necessarily represent them, but I do have some credibility as that particular person. I think pictures tell a thousand words, so I'm gonna give you some pictures. This is on Columbia Avenue last year. It took no time at all to demolish this house. One big bulldozer and it was gone. There it is, nothing between two houses on Columbia Avenue. This is a lot on Hollywood Terrace that was, uh, bulldozed about five years ago during the H-1 process. It still sits empty and now it has a Ray Rector sign erected in it. I suspect the person, because of the downturn, has not been able to sell this piece of property. The grass is long. We report the grass. Can't really see this very well, but this is by Kroger's on Marquis. This is up for an absolute auction in the middle of September. A huge lot. What are they gonna put there? We have no idea. Everybody on the street is very concerned what they're going to have to live with on Marquis. Talking about big boxes, big vinyl boxes, this is also either on Columbia or Park, I'm not sure. There's only about 400 houses in my little neighborhood association. Um, about 50% owner occupied. Some streets are better than others. This is just a modest home from the outside, from the front. This is the back. This is the back of the same property. Now, these are illegal boarding houses. These are not single family residences, and nothing has been done about them, and reporting them accomplishes nothing. Again, sorry, the picture's not very good. This is, um, graveled and, and backyard problems that continue behind your back, behind my back, behind everybody's back. We wake up, there are no trees. Now, when you were looking out on a bucolic view from your kitchen window, you're looking at blacktop and cars and listening to them rev up at 3:00 in the morning. Again, a modest house. And there's the addition, that big white piece is the addition to that little cottage. Another one on Columbia, 561 Columbia. And that's the back of it. Illegal boarding houses, ladies and gentlemen, that going on right in District 3. We're sick of it. Another one. Nice little brick house. Look at that huge monstrosity attached to the back. What are we gonna do, report them? Tell them to tear it down? Ms. Savage, you have about 25 seconds left. Thank you. I think I'll just run through. This is my favorite house. Cute, on Marquis, dead-end street, little yellow house. And that's the addition on the back. No backyard. About six or eight kids live there and they use it as a fraternity house off campus, so they can drink, and now when they go smokeless, I guess they'll be puffing up as well in there. So we need your help. We need it now. We're sick of waiting. We've waited long enough. We need some deadlines and you need to impose them on yourselves. Thank you. Thank you. Again, please refrain from applause for the balance of the meeting regardless of the comments, whether you like them or not. It'll make us get through the process much quicker. Uh, council member... Uh, excuse me, uh, the next person is Janet Callan. Ms. Callan? Not a council member, but I play one sometimes on TV. I'm Janet Callan, I live at 612 Columbia Avenue and two years ago, I stood here and I was promised by most of you on this council when we were fighting in H-1, pro, con, we're all together on something needs to be done, I was promised by most of you that something would be worked out. I contacted the mayor's office several weeks after that because I heard nothing, and I was told to contact Char- Charlie Bolin. I did. He knew nothing about the issue, but I knew Charlie because you see, in 1999, I served on a, I don't know, student house force, student housing task force with, um, which I, I gave Kate actually a copy of that. Same stuff. Same stuff. And 10 years ago, 10 years ago, understand my frustration tonight. It's not... I- I know all of the numbers, Mr. Lane. I have them on speed dial. I get nothing. I have a small house across the street from me that houses six, eight, ten, has parking for two. Guess where they park? In my driveway. They block my driveway, they knock my wall off, my, uh, retaining wall over. I call the police, "Well, was anybody hurt?" Come on. Mr. McCord, Mr. Stennet, Mr. Meyers, Mr. Beard, Ms. Gordon, Meyer, Mr. Gray, Mr. Ellinger, Ms. Crosby, Ms. James, you all promised me that you were going to help two years ago. I ask you to do it now. Thank you. Uh, next on the list is Ted Callan. Is Mr. Callan here? Gave up my comment. All right. Mr. McCarthy. For the record, my name is Bernard McCarthy, and I don't claim to represent anybody else, although I will refer to a few. ... entities. It's been brought to my attention that a consultant hired by this government to draw up plans for replacement housing to be built to replace the neighborhood being wiped out by Newtown Extension has written specifications so fancy that my favorite nonprofit organization is effectively shut out of getting to build any of the replacement housing. Now, while I think it's legitimate to build decent hab- to make sure that anyone displaced by a road gets a house back that's at least as good as the one they lost and that replacement houses do need to meet certain minimum standards, they need to be safe, sanitary and decent, and ni- and structurally sound, but when you go and start writing fancy specifications to where you want people to get mansions in exchange for their shacks, this has gone beyond legitimate mitigation and sounds more like a plot to bankrupt the road fund so that Newtown Extension winds up being the last road built in Fayette County. And I rather object to such plots because we have considerably more traffic problems that need more roads to solve them in the future. And I also, having put much of my vacation time and my Saturdays over the last 18 years into volunteering for one organization, I would kind of like to get a shot at hammering the nails on a few of those replacement houses myself. Thank you. Keith Rogers. Mr. Rogers. And next is Neil Chettick, if you could stand by close to the podium after Mr. Rogers. Keith Rogers. I live at 1421 Audubon Avenue. I've lived there since 1987. I love my home. Uh, unfortunately, I'm now the only owner occupied property on the street. Uh, the rest of it has been demolished for either Delta, a Delta fraternity or bought by absentee landlords. And, uh, I guess over the years the alternatives are to give up my home, to be driven out of my home, or to fight for my home. I'd like to remain on the street. I feel I'm the only constant on the street, and when I go, I guess, uh, the students have it and then it really does become your problem. Thank you. Thank you. Next will be Mr. Chettick and then Mark Barker. Mr. Barker, if you could stand by please. Mr. Chettick? Yes, I'm Neil Chettick from the Seven Parks neighborhood. I'm, I guess, the fourth neighborhood that's being represented here today. And, uh, fortunately I've been there since 2001, and fortunately prior to getting there someone had the foresight to institute a, a historic preservation, so we don't have the same problem on my street, but we abut the Elizabeth Street neighborhood. I walk that neighborhood every day, my kid lives in that neighborhood, I drive down that neighborhood and these are my neighbors and it's... I, I, I, it's hard to... I can't imagine what you must be thinking that we're thinking when we look up here and we ask you to do something and it's been asked for the last 10 years and yet all we hear is, "Talk to the building department." Or, "Talk to the zoning department." And then you walk outside and you look at the homes in your own neighborhood and they're looking like what you just saw on that s- screen. Imagine if in your neighborhood, next door to you on either side, you had a building twice the size of the original house that was there built onto the backyard and the person who built that didn't live there and they put a sign out on the front lawn and it said, "Rooms 450 per." And 6, 8, 10, 15 people ended up in those rooms. Would you come here, sit down wait for hours after hours so that we could get a few minutes to talk to you and then have... be told that we need to act in a moderated, thoughtful, slow, calm, non-pressured atmosphere? And while you act in your non-pressured, slow, calm atmosphere, the next building goes up and the next building after that goes up, and the neighborhood that you moved into is no longer the neighborhood that you live in. I don't know what the answer is. None of us wants to put anybody out of a job, none of us wants to shut down the city, none of us wants to say that there's no building that should happen. No one's in favor of that. There are builders on our street, there are craftsmen on our street, there are people who are building onto our homes in responsible ways. That is not a responsible way, and if we can't have a law and a city and a department that can turn this into a responsible building, then what's the use? We might as well just throw the city open, let anyone build wherever they want. Th- you can build an apartment building next to another building. And, um, for the last 10 seconds of my time, I want to applaud the people who are here. Thank you, Mr. Chaitick. Uh, Mr. Barker, if you'd step to the podium, and John Snyder. Mr. Snyder? Thank you. Hello, my name's Mark Barker. I live at 439 Park Avenue in the Columbia Heights Neighborhood Association. Dear city officials, two years ago, the city voted against a historic overlay for my neighborhood, despite the fact that it was clearly both needed and it neig- qualified for such an overlay. Indeed, the neighborhood is now certified as a national historic neighborhood. Since then, though, I've worked in good faith to come up with an alternative to such an overlay. I've attended multiple public info meetings over the last couple years, and have multiple correspondence with planning staff. I originally suggested that the city consider a hybrid of H-1 and, and Indy 1, an H-1-like, if you will. The city rejected such as too complicated. As an alternative, I suggest that the city simply add as an option to Indy 1 demolition standards. This was discussed in multiple public hearings with no one disagreeing with it as necessary. Without pub- without demolition standards, rebuil- a rebuild- a redeveloper targeting an area can simply buy old buildings, demolish them, and in the process, devalue other surrounding buildings, making it cheaper to acquire them and eventually acquiring enough buildings to upzone and redevelop the area. No Indy 1 overlay has a chance of preventing such a scenario in a targeted area without demolition standards. The planning staff had the law department review the, the standards, and the legality of demolition standards in the Indy 1 overlay, and the law department agreed that it was doable, and the staff initially indicated it could be included in the next update of the zoning ordinance. Moreover, such an inclusion would initially not affect any properties, as the Indy 1 requires a lengthy series of public hearings with pro- property owner notification, and a vote by both the Planning Commission and Council. Yet without warning or justification, it's been left out, nor has anyone suggested any viable alternative to the zoning issues, which I have asked to be addressed. This is failure of monumental proportions. Not only has the city failed to act in good faith. It's acted in a negligent, reckless manner that will leave neighborhoods near the downtown vulnerable of no viable options that they can pursue. The sh- the city should be ashamed. After waiting two years, I'm simply asking for two words to be added to the list of options under Indy 1 standards, demolition standards. Is that really asking too much? Of course not. But time and time, the community's left d- let down. People ask, they ask, "But haven't we had task forces and hearings?" But sadly, when you look at those task forces, rarely is there a substantial number of people that understand the problem and want to solve it on the committees. On the last task force, the student housing task force, only one resident owner was in the task force. Everyone else was either student landlords, who, who greatly profit from adding cheap additions to houses and converting the home t- into a rooming house, or UK, which all too often sees the surrounding areas as a place to dump their student housing alcohol and fraternity problems. Isn't this kind of like putting the fox in charge of the henhouse? And when us mere resident owners dare to attend these hearings, we are all too often quickly dismissed. When I suggested at one of the infill task force meetings that the current policy of not inspecting the underlying structure before adding a second floor on, to a home, even a 75-year-old home, was unsafe, I was told by the building code person on the committee that, quote, "That wasn't required by the state building code, and if it was necessary, the state would have already added it." M- uh, Mr. Barker, your time has expired. If you'd like to- Thank you. ... leave that with the clerk, the rest of your statement with the clerk, you're welcome to do so. Thank you. Uh, Mr. Snyder, if you- I'm still here. All right. Thank you, Mr. Snyder. Um, Mr. Pickett. Uh, excuse me, Kathy Pickett, first. May I? Yes. Um, question. Did you relinquish your time to the gentleman who just spoke? If he chooses to use it. All right. If that's possible. He has one paragraph. Okay. I didn't understand. I'm sorry. I just have one paragraph. Your Honor. Two years ago after the city turned down the H-1 overlay proposal, I asked the council people who voted against it if they had even bothered to walk through the neighborhood before they voted. Well, Councilmen Meyers, Myers, Councilman McCord, Councilman Lane, Councilman Ellinger, Councilman Beard, Councilman Sinnott, they're still building ugly additions, they're still demolishing homes, and I'm still waiting for an answer. Thank you. Thank you. Uh, the next speaker is Kathy Pickett. Ms. Pickett? Thank you, Mayor, and thank you, members of Council. Um, I urge you to consider, um, cons- the moratorium, and, um, doing something about the problems that our neighborhood and the, um, Columbia Heights neighborhood suffers. Um, my husband and I rented on Arcadia Park 16 years ago. We lived there for four years, and then we moved to Park Avenue and rented for a couple of years before we bought our house on Forest Park Road. Um, oddly enough, we moved from Park Avenue to get away from the students. And we had, um, even though when we moved to Arcadia Park and I felt like we had moved to the suburbs and feared that nobody would ever come visit us anymore, I fell in love with that neighborhood. And even though, I guess Elizabeth Street isn't technically a part of that neighborhood, or, um, Forest Park Road, I love that neighborhood. We moved there, we love our house. Um- ... and we're eager to see it, um, be protected and taken care of. Uh, we have three houses on our street, 229, 231, 233, and now 238, that are owned by the same people who own 20 other pieces of property, 16 of those are in my neighborhood. 229 and 233 have had- ... 1500 square foot additions added onto 800 square foot dwellings. 238 has a permit to add 1620 square feet to a 960 square foot structure. These are not single family dwel- or dwellings anymore. My husband and I, on our end of the street, are one of three owner-occupied homes left. When I came home Friday evening from having dinner with a friend, there were four bicycle policemen on bikes in my neighborhood at midnight. I was sandwiched between , between them and four c- um, patrol cars. And I emailed Keith Gaines, who emailed me back at 2:47 to tell me that they had just left my street, because it took them that long. It took them two and a half hours to get the partying on my street under control. I'm all for building. I work in real estate. I know what this does. I want people to be able to add on responsibly. I just want to see us take responsibility for our community. Pretty soon, my little neighborhood is gonna be turned into a student, excuse me, ghetto, where no owner occupant or single family resident is gonna wanna live, and people like ourselves are not gonna wanna put their precious little college children in to go to school, because it's gonna be so deteriorated. And it'll happen quickly. We've seen it happen to other areas, and I just ask us to, um, take responsibility for our city and, and, and come up with a plan of what we can do. I'm not saying push the students out. I'm saying make a plan. Do something to, to work together to, to come... I'm sorry. My time's up. Thank you very much. Thank you, Ms. Pickett. Mr. Pickett is our next speaker, and then Mr. Olszewski. My name is Hark Pickett. Uh, I spoke with you last Thursday. I, I have to say, my, the wind has sucked out of my sails a little bit by having the moratorium removed from the docket, even more so after hearing some of the comments from the folks from the, uh, University Heights area and the other areas that, uh, have been battling this issue for a lot longer than we have. As a relative novice to advocating for this issue, I have to say, that's incredibly discouraging. Um, that said, I will make my comments as planned. Um, many of us are here to represent the residents of Elizabeth Street neighborhood and the surrounding area. And, um, you know, a lot of this is gonna be in reference to moratorium that's not on the docket. Just please substitute that with speedy, um, a speedy solution to this issue. Um, the giant sucking sound that left this room was not any of the residents that live in this area. It was the builders. Um... As I drove down my street on the way home today, uh, I saw work had begun on a house five houses down from my own, and I feared that that would happen. I feared it, because I noticed earlier in the week that lots of brush had been removed. It was clea- cleared out. I feared it because the people that lived there for 32 years recently succumbed to the pressures associated with the rapid deterioration of our neighborhood. They sold their home, and they moved away. Sale closed in June of this year. If we lived in a neighborhood that wasn't undergoing such rapid evolution that mine is, I would probably have been excited to learn that a neighbor was putting addition on their home. Excuse me. Additions to single family homes can obviously be a great way for folks to expand their living space in a manner that fits with the character of their home and the fabric of the neighborhood around them. Um, the revenues gleaned from this construction associated with additions and remodeling is vital to our community, as are the tax dollars gained from capital improvements and associated spending, but also add to the election's financial base to support any number of exciting projects on our path to Destination 2040 and other projects. Uh, I'm really excited about where our town is, the opportunities that lie before us. Everyone here has a r- a, a vested interest in the result of this moratorium. Excuse me. Speedy solution. Everyone. Several people here have spoken or will speak before you and ask you to vote against the moratorium. They're not here anymore. Some of the people are very powerful due to their financial position in this community. Some of these people are employed by very powerful people to lobby for a vote against this resolution. Many of these people have the very best intentions. Many of them feel that this mortiam- moratorium, as it's written, is too restrictive. I was one of the people that brought that to Council Member Lawless' attention when I first heard of the moratorium. Uh, we're in challenging economic times. Everyone here recognizes that. I think a lot of my colleagues, a lot of my neighbors, uh, have spoken to that. I'm running out of time. Uh, eight bedroom additions. We gonna get the Octomon to move in there? No. That's not what's happening. You guys can solve this. Please, uh, do it. We're here. We're listening, ready to be engaged. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Pickett. Mr. Olszewski, followed by Joanne Filkins. Ms. Filkins, if you'd stand back. Uh, yes, my name's Steve Olszewski, and I, I drew this crude little thing here to give you a notion of what I care about and where I live and so forth. Um, moratorium, quite frankly, I don't care one way or another. You know, I mean, that's, that's in how you determine your own procedures, uh, to, to go forward with this, but I wanna comment, I'm at 220 Westwood Court, and I've drawn kind of an overhead map. And to my left, as soon as... I mean, when I'm standing out my front door, to my left there, uh, 222 is one of these fraternity houses. Now that house, as I, far as I can tell, has not gotten an addition yet. ... but it-- but when I first moved in there, two things. The person who lived there before was a, was a family, a woman, and her two s- a single mother and her two sons, who moved out because they just couldn't take it anymore with the neighbors. Simple. So I moved in there, that's fine, and as soon as I did, I went over, it was about 10 o'clock at night after moving in, and I introduced myself to my neighbors sitting on the front porch and there was four of them. And I thought, "Well, you know, for a two-bedroom house..." But, you know, I don't want to judge anybody's lifestyle. And so they said, uh, they said, "Yeah, nice to meet you, but I just want to say, as neighbors, we have a lot of guests. We have a lot of people over." I said, "Really? Eh. That's nice, you have a social life, that's good." I found out soon thereafter what that meant. Across the street from me at 219 is the, uh, uh, the big vinyl box. Now, I, I don't want you to misunderstand the proportion. That is a two-bedroom house, like all the other houses in that R1 neighborhood, R1 neighborhood, and it has a vinyl box on the back of it that has an additional six bedrooms, as I understand it. I was in it earlier today and I wanna tell you about that. There's a garden, I've mentioned garden, in the center of the, of the, um, cul-de-sac there. That's a garden that, Val, I think I saw, last time I saw you before just today, was, uh, you were out there all bent over putting flowers in there and so on like that. And it's been like that for a few years, whatever. Okay. That place is strewn now with beer bottles, beer cans, plastic cups from last weekend. Today's Thursday. Also, our g- our garbage pickup on Monday, there's, there's garbage all over the lawn and the curb, and there's two, uh, two Herbies out there laying in the street by the curb. There's also another one up by the front door and there's three that are spilling over on the side. I don't know where they get all these ... I guess you can pay extra, but yeah, th- so is the number of Herbies, six, telling me something about the level of activity there? And s- from Monday, they can't get their stuff pulled back. I mean, I think you're supposed to bring it back in on Monday like everyone else does. And so when I was talking to them today, I said, when I was over there saying, I said ... I- it came up. They s- they seemed to be very aware. They said, "Yeah, we know all our neighbors hate us." And they said it just like that. And I said, I said, "Well, here's why th-" I mean, I'm trying to be nice. I go, "Here's why we hate you." "Because, because you're young and strong and you got the potential of your full life ahead of you. You can do anything you want, you got everything going for you, and me, an old geezer like me, I'm stuck with my r- my run-of-the-mill job. Every day I gotta do the same, I'm not going anywhere, this is it, this is it. This is the end of the road for me, literally. This is where I live now, this is my life. I'm stuck with that, I'm not gonna have your ... And so I, so I resent the fact that you guys can do whatever you want, including trashing the neighborhood or anything else." And I pointed out all this stuff. I said, I said, "You know, all this litter here, people hate that, you know." And they said, they said, "Yeah, we try and clean up, but you know, you can only do so much." And I said, I said, "No, you're looking at a few beer cans and thinking like, 'Well, you know, a broken bottle or two is not that bad,' but we're thinking that's the worst trash we've ever seen in our lives." Mr. Oshelsky, your time is up. Am I out of time? Sure. Oh, sorry. 'Cause the thing blocked it. All right. Thank you. I appreciate your cooperation. Ms. Filkins, followed by Val Campbell. Uh, . All right. Um, uh, we'll let Mr.- No, let me, let me- ... Mr. Oshelsky- ... speak quickly before you move on there. Thank you, thank you so much, Val. I wanted to comment, uh, I wanted to comment, it's actually a separate comment. Besides the fact that the, of the trash, and if you could put that back up real quickly, what I've ever done and like to do is drive down Westwood Court and then go around the garden area and park there in front of my house, and it's not very well shown, but in front of my house and in front of the house across from me, it- it- there's a curve, the curve goes, goes wrapping around. So safely, you can park one car in front of my house. Safely. Really. And the s- and the house across the street, the same way. But I can't do that anymore, because the street is always parked up now. It never used to be like that. And they park two cars there, so even just coming down the road at all and to get to my driveway is not particularly safe, and a lot of times my driveway is blocked. Now I'll mention, when my driveway's blocked, I just flip out, and I pull out my cellphone and go, "Somebody better get over here and tow this car, because I'm trying to get into my own driveway and can't even get into it." Nothing ever happens. I mean, it takes an hour or two. There was a car that was parked in front of my house, but I want, I really do wanna park there, seriously I do. And, and it was there for like a week and I called up and said, "We might have an abandoned car here in front of my house." And they said, "Oh, well, we'll go ahead and put that in the system," and in five days someone will come out and put a, put a notice on it that they have 24 hours to move it. "Well, listen," I said, "it's, I mean, I can tell by the license plates it's from far away. If I were coming to school here, this is me, if I were coming to school here, I'd drive up into Lexington, find a nice place to park that was free, I'd go to school and come Thanksgiving or so I'd get back in my car and go home for the holiday." And why not? Especially if my fraternity brothers live on all the houses around there to tell me, "Ooh, there's a yellow thing on your car, you better come over and move it within 24 hours." Yeah, why? It's free parking, that's just all there is to that. So what I want to tell you is, besides the moratorium, I kind of don't care one way or another, I want you to give me back my parking place in front of my house. I do. I wanna have the right to park in front of my own house again. I also want to have my garden back. I wanna be able to look out and see the flowers not with beer bottles and beer cans and pla- and the big red plastic cups and, and whatever else. And, and third, I'd like to be able to run around and play without worrying about broken glass. Now, you know what I mean, sometimes I go out there barefoot, that's a bad habit, I guess I should be shot for that. But, but, you know, I mean, it's, it actually turns into a safety hazard and danger when you talk about broken glass. And, I mean, and these guys aren't to be blamed. I mean, you, you drink so much, you can only do so much and you can only, you know, you can only expect it to stay so clean. Sorry to run over the time again. Thank you, Mr. Oshinski. Ms. Filkins, thank you for your cooperation, and, uh, Ms. Domatiadis. I'm not gonna speak. All right. Uh, Mr. Burk, Tom Burk. Uh, Linda Worley. All right. Ms. Filkins. I'm Joanne Filkins. I live also on Westwood Court. I've lived there for 16 years and I own my own home. For those of you who are unfamiliar with our street, it's a one-block dead end, with typical lot sizes of 50 by a 150 feet. It's a mix of owner-occupied houses and rental property. We've had problems for many years with trash, noise, parking, and traffic, related to student rental property. We're part of the Elizabeth Street neighborhood, which was in the news last fall as a location of the couch burnings following UK football games. Now we have at least two satellite fraternity houses on our block. If you don't know what a satellite fraternity house is, it's an off-campus house that houses the overflow from efficient... an official on-campus fraternity house. We don't know the affiliations of all the student renters on our block, so that it's possible there are more fraternity houses than what we know of, but we do know that at least these two houses are connected with fraternities. One of these houses, and it's the one that Mr. Oshinski was just talking about, across the street from him, was roughly tripled in size this summer by the construction of a six-bedroom, two-bath addition on a house that was originally two to three bedrooms. The backyard was turned into a parking lot. One of my neighbors was told that the developer wants to do five more houses like that in our neighborhood. So we're just hoping that th- something can be done before that happens. We've heard that this fraternity is conducting all of its, its, uh, rush activities on our block. Presumably, that's in order to circumvent the UK rules regarding drinking, et cetera, at parties on campus. The first week of this semester, actually it was partly before the semester even started, they had at least three big parties. Two of which were on nights when most people needed to get up and go to work in the morning. One was a Thursday night and one was a Sunday night. We're not against students. I work at UK myself. Many of us have either worked with students or have been students. We're not against builders or landlords, but we want to see them all act responsibly. Nobody in a residential neighborhood wants to be woken up at 2:00 AM by fraternity parties several times a week. We also don't want to find beer cans, bottles, and cups in our yards, where they provide evidence that the partiers have been trespassing on the property of neighboring homes. We don't want to put up with street parking that leaves, uh, uh, us no room for our own guests and sometimes even blocks us from our own driveways. We don't want people relieving themselves on our bushes or in plain view on the street. We appeal to you, our elected officials, to protect our neighborhood and to prohibit construction that is inappropriate to a residential area. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Ms. Worley, you'll be our last speaker, unless anyone else wishes to address the council. I think everybody was very happy to hear that comment, the last speaker. I am Linda Worley, and I, I live in the, um, Seven Parks area, which is a his- H1 overlay. I recognize that this is a very complex issue, where a lot of individual rights clash. You've got the rights of entrepreneurs and homeowners, the rights of landlords, the rights of owner-occupied property. I acknowledge and respect, very much so, the differing aspirations and needs for all of the involved parties. And because of the situation, it seems to me one of the best things we need to do, and most reasonable, is to step back and ask some basic tough questions: What is best for Lexington, for the city as a whole? Are blighted areas surrounding UK, and I mean south, east, west, and north, and blighted areas that ooze, that ooze, it's half a mile, then a mile, and I think in some point, it might hit all of the districts. Are these in the city's best interests? How can we encourage, not just discourage, how can we encourage quality investment by homeowners, by landlords? And here's a question only a professor would probably ask, what kind of housing might actually help students learn? Now, that might not be within the council's purview. Um, all right. These are, and unfortunately, they were good questions that have been asked for the 20 years I have now lived and been a faculty member at the University of Kentucky. During 20 years is a long time, in that time, and I just want to give one example, the fate of the North Elizabeth area was talked about, was brought to the council, with pictures of the vinyl boxes that were going up on State Street and Transcript. I believe Dave Cooper was here at that. The answers by the council, some of the same people were, unfortunately, please forgive me, Mr. Lane, "Go to code and we will work on it." I was at UK meetings where, unfortunately, I heard callous comments like, "Oh, that area's a goner anyway." And it is now UK's new parking garage. There have been promises and questions and committees for this whole time. And I have to ask, what's being bulldozed tonight, tomorrow? We need a timeout. We need action. And my final comment is, I am really sad and a little embarrassed to go to national conferences, and when they hear Lexington, they go, "Oh, you're that city that destroys the historic areas." I don't want that anymore. Thank you. Mr. Sams, do you wish to speak to the council? Sorry, I missed the list. Uh, I would like to, uh, comment on, uh, 25 on the docket. I know there's some questions to, uh, Shaler & Taylor, to your commissioner. And I'll, uh, she's only been here a short time, and someone who has been there, done that kind of work could probably shine some light on some of the questions you have, if you'd ask. And some of those questions are about the neglect. And it shows we don't just neglect on just certain things. There's other neglect in this city too. But it is a shame that we neglect on the needs and the needs of people's pro- health, protect their health on the jobs that you do. But what I wanted to tell you, in 1996, this government embarked upon temporary services through corporations as labor fill-in on your, on your, your, your fill in everyday services employees that should ha- Citizens should have that right to compete for them jobs, but it was filled in through temporary services. That corporation doesn't have the rights as a person. Now, if you want to know where the surplace- surpluses come from, you got to, you got to, uh, wonder about why have you neglected? You neglected to give citizens a job and benefits that was not paid out to these positions for 1996 until this date helps you get there to that, that number, that magic number of 25 million, 24 million, whatever you want, whatever you wanna call it. But these things has went on so long, and it's not that it went on blindly. We've came down here and told you about temporary people cutting their thumbs off, cuts to their heads, legs broke. It's neglect. It's n- It, it is total neglect. Now, if we had a firefighter or police officer that had faulty equipment and we knew about it, we'd pull every bit of that equipment and find out what it is. Today's society has changed. We no longer pick up banana peels and apple peelings. That's over with. We have every kind of chemicals out there that is, i- is depo- uh, disposed of, and it's prompt put up on these people who gives these vital services. Why are we not concerned about their protection as we are the firefighters and the police officers? I cannot, for the love of life of me, I cannot understand why we neglect a certain group of people. Why haven't we asked and made a motion for the Kentucky University who wants to be a top research study to study the health of these men? You know, neglect is a long time for 10 years, but I've been down here 20 years crying the same tune. It always falls upon deaf ears 'cause y'all's position changes. Mr. D- Mr. Sams, your time has expired. Yeah. Thank you. It did 20 years ago, too. Thank you. Uh, does anyone else wish to address the council? Then, uh, that takes us to the end of the agenda. Motion to adjourn. Second. I have a motion. Mr. Sanders' not supposed to speak when he's speaking. Have a- We have an announcement. Okay. That's okay. I just want to tell people, if you want to stay here, I'll talk to you about the plan. All in favor of joining, please say aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries.