Let's go ahead and call a meeting to order, if we could please. Could we call the meeting to order please? Well, let me, uh, uh, begin with just a, a real brief special recognition. We, uh, today have some Korean delegates from, um, the metro Seoul area in South Korea. They are, uh, spending some time shadowing people in various departments here at Urban County Government. And they are officials who are studying at the University of Kentucky's Martin School in International Public Policy and Management. And I just wanna say we're delighted you're here. I hope you have a productive afternoon with us today. Thank you for joining us. Thank you so much. Thank you. All right. Is there anyone here who wishes to, uh, comment on issues that're on the agenda today? Seeing none, we'll move to the docket approval. We do have a zone change that is on page two of the docket, and we need the council's guidance as to whether to proceed with or without a hearing. Council Member Hinson. Count- Mayor, I'm moved to place on the docket without a public hearing item number 10. Second. I have a motion by Council Member Hinson and a second by Council Member Ellinger to place Item 10 on the docket without a hearing. Any discussion? All in favor, please say aye. Oppose, no? Motion carries. Floor is now open for motion to approve the docket. Move approval. Second. Have a motion by Council Member Gordon and a second by Council Member Beard to approve the docket. Any discussion? All in favor, please say aye. Oppose, no? Motion carries. We have the September 22nd summary, uh, for approval as well. Is there a motion? Second. I have a motion by Council Member McCord and a second by Council Member Crosby. Mayor. Council Member Gordon. Excuse me. Um, on page nine in the summary, um, under council report, um, uh, reminding the council members of the joint planning committee planning commission, that should be workshop as that was not a meeting. It was a workshop. Uh, it's a technicality but an important one. All right. Is there any objection to that change? Seeing none. We'll incorporate it. Any further discussion? Um, if there isn't any, we will proceed to vote. Those in favor of approving the summary as amended, please indicate by saying aye. Oppose, no? Motion carries. Now, we have some budget amendments for your consideration. Do I hear a motion to approve them? Move to approve. Second. Mayor. Councilme- Just a moment. Council Member Beard has moved the adoption of the budget amendments. Council Member Gordon has seconded. Ms. McGee. Um, I just wanted to point out, I had, uh, emailed to all of you a memo and given you a hard copy in your mailboxes, um, to be sure to include the budget amendment for the synergy bonding funding. So I just wanna make sure that that budget amendment is included in your motion. Uh, Council Member Beard, would you accept that as a- Yeah. ... friendly amendment? Council Member Gordon? All right. Any further discussion on the budget amendments? Council Member Sten- Stenna. Thank you, Mayor. I do have a couple questions on journal 37343 and 37344. This looks like we're recognizing additional revenues from state and adopted tax rates for property for 2010. Does this- is, is this- how does this coincide with our budget? This is just truing up our budget to reflect the rates and the actual certifications that were received. So, these aren't additional revenues? In some categories they may be, but they net, uh, a $3,000 increase to the general fund once you consider the library and then a decrease in the urban fund based on the rollback of the rate. What was that decrease amount? Do we- Uh, 3,805,400. That's a decrease in what we projected? Is that in- That matches what we showed you during- Gotcha. ... the property adoption. Okay. During the tax adoptions, yeah. Okay, very good and then journal 3739, 3734 on the health insurance. Is there anyone here that can answer that? The increased revenues and provided funding for the health insurance? Cost, loss for FY2009, the big one? It's the last one. Uh, Mary Fister i- is not in the room, but I know that this was one of the closing items for, uh, F- FY2009. And, um, so, uh, it- it is in, in compliance with the closing entries which we are now turning over to the auditors to, to review and, and certify. So these were the funds that came from ... refresh my memory. Help me. I would love to. Let me, uh, reach out to Mary and get the answer back to you. Ah, I remember I was putting ... this was closed in FY09. Yes. De- decrease our deficit. Mm-hmm. I just wanna make sure this is where the, where the funds came from. I'll verify and be right back with you. Very good. Thank you. All right. Council member Stinnet, are you comfortable in moving forward? All right. Anything further on the budget amendments? Then those in favor of approving the budget amendments as amended, please indicate by saying "I". I. Oppose, no. Motion carries. Takes us down to the new business items. Is there a motion to approve? Move approval. Second. Council member Beard has moved the approval of the new business items and council member Gordon has seconded that. Any discussion? Council member James? Thank you, Mayor. Uh, my question is on item T. Um, looks like it's presented by the law department regarding the Bluegrass Aspendell area. And I had a question for someone. Thank you, Glenda. Um, this looks like it's for entrance signage, um, do you know if this is the entrance signage at 3rd Street or if this is the entrance signage, um, along 5th, 4th, 6th structure? 3rd. It's on 3rd? Okay. Have you seen that design yet for the signage? No, I have not. Okay. Um, I, I saw, um, the housing authority here. Do you all have this design that you can show us for the signage? What, what does it say on it? You mean what does the sign say? Uh-huh. Equestrian View. Okay. Um, council members this is, this is of a little bit concern to me. Um, the Equestrian View area, as you know, is the redeveloped Bluegrass Aspendell area and, um, one of the things that the, the residents have expressed is a need, um, to have kind of a consistent theme, um, a brand. It came through in the eastern small area plan. Um, the William Lawrence Brown Neighborhood Association, which, um, is the neighborhood association, um, which is over this area, um, has, has made a request to have, um, if we're gonna have these little kind of areas or nooks of the neighborhood. In order to continue that east end theme is to have things such as this where it would say, "Equestrian View at East End," um, or, "In East End." Um, this is also, um, represented in the east end small area plan, um, which EHI, um, brought forward. So where ... I don't ... while I like neighborhood signage, um, I do think that an identity with something that we've supported at council, planning commission and hundreds of citizens have expressed, um, would be something that I would ... I, I think, you know, while we're approving this, would be something that this would be our opportunity to really brand the history, um, of that area with the new, um, and this is gonna be an area very high traffic. I mean we're doing that Ann Street extension improvement along that area. Um, I'd actually like to recommend to the housing authority that if we support this that it do state, that it does state, "Equestrian View at East End." Um, so I'd like to make that motion. Second. Mr. Turner? That would be fine. We could do Equestrian View at, at East End. Thank you. Do we need to carry that motion forward, Mayor, just so that we know that the council has stated that? Uh, I am, um, I'm looking at item T and, and I guess, Ms. George, I'd ask you, is the, this particular design part of the MOU with the housing authority? No. The MOU with the housing authority just allows them to, um, be on the property and to build the sign until the time when we can transfer the- ... it to them. We're gonna transfer it to them regardless. We just haven't done it yet because the road isn't finished. And so the MOU does not address the design of the sign, it just states that they're going to be building an entrance. So- I'd like to have that included in the MOU please. So, I think the motion would be to condition the transfer of the easement, or the property rather, um, on the condition that the sign read "Equestrian View at East End." Is that correct? Yes, sir. That'd be fine. All right. Um, we had a second, but I don't recall from whom it was. Second. Council member Gordon. Any discussion? Council member Lane? Uh, I'd appreciate it if Council Member Andrea James would, uh, just explain the, what the Equestrian View is for the people that are on TV. It's the old Blue Grass Aspidale area that's been redeveloped by a housing authority. Um, it, it holds the site of multiple, um, single family units, um, some multiple family units, um, as well as the... It's the site of the new William Wallace Brown Elementary. Um, it sits between 3rd and 6th Streets, um, between Shropshire, um, and Midland Avenue, Winchester Road area. All right. Uh, anything further on, on that particular motion? Seeing none, we'll proceed to vote. Those in favor of amending item T to, uh, condition the transfer of the property to the modification of the sign to Equestrian View at East End, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Oppose no? Motion carries. Thank you, Mayor. Uh, Council Member Crosby. Uh, thank you, Mayor. Uh, the Public Safety Link would like to request that, um, items H and I be pulled from the agenda till after we hear our presentation. Um, the reason being is these items were not recommended by the Public Safety Link, uh, one, to be bonded but, two, we... It was not a recommendation that we had made out of our link, so we would just like to hold off, uh, voting on these until after we hear the presentation. Second. So the motion is to amend the new business items by deleting items I and J until after the pre- H and I. H and I. I'm sorry. H and I until after the presentation. Council Member McCord, I think, seconded that motion. Any discussion? All in favor say aye. Aye. Oppose no? Motion carries. Anything further with regard to the new business items? Council Member, uh, uh, Lawless. Thank you. Um, this is a walk on concerning the construction on South Limestone, um, and it's to hopefully speed things up a little bit. Um, so, uh, Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government has requested that Kentucky Utilities, for the loca- relocation of overhead facilities to underground in conjunction with the South Limestone streetscape project. Prior to performance of work, Kentucky Utilities requires the execution of a special construction agreement, cost of utility relocation of $1,252,727, and the funds for this activity are budgeted. So are you moving to add that item to the- Yes, please. I'd like to- ... new business list? All right. Any discu- Uh, do I hear a second? Hmm? Do I hear a second? Second. Ooh. Yeah. Thank you. I think that - All right. Yes, Council Member Gordon. I'm sorry, are we walking this onto the docket for Thursday night? Yes. Yes. Okay. Thank you. Questions? Council Member Lane? Yeah, I... Could we have a little more explanation about that? I'm not really, uh, up on the curve there. Commissioner Webb will, uh, fill you in. Sure. Yeah. Yes, sir. I, I'm sorry. If there was a question, I didn't hear it. Yeah, yeah. The, uh, additional funding, could you just explain what that's for? The, uh... This was part of the budget that was established for the project. The reason you see the contracts coming in now, if you take a look at the new business, there was an AT&T contract that was here early enough to blue sheet, and we're trying to move those through as we get 'em as quickly as possible, but it is a part of the project budget that was established. All right. That answers my question. Thank you. Council- Council Member Gordon was first. Council Member Gordon? No, I was just having a sidebar with Council Member Lawless- Oh. ... about explaining a little bit more what this means. Okay. Uh, that's- Uh, that's- Council Member Gray. ... that's really what I was asking for too. All right. I, I guess- The... I think Commissioner Webb probably can explain it better than I can, but I can give it a go. Okay. When, when we signed the contract with ATS, what we did to make this project move along at the pace that we did, we agreed to install the conduit as a conduit system for all the utilities so that we didn't have one utility going in at a time installing conduit, which would take a very long time to do. You'd be working over a couple construction seasons. Uh, and taking a look at how this could be moved along, that was one of the things that was identified, and we incorporated it into our contract to install the conduit for all the overheads to go underground- And we are -- the -- the designs are final, and we are now getting contracts for the utilities to come in and wire up that contract-- that conduit. That is what this contract is for. It is for the placement of the aboveground transformers, uh, that are a part of this project, uh, for all the additional work that has to be done by KU or KU's contractor to wire up the conduit to allow the utilities to go underground. All right. Anything further? Council Member Martin. Thank you, Commissioner Webb. So help me understand. So this amount was among the originally budgeted items? Yes. There was a budget established, and this -- this amount was part of that established budget. And so does this -- I guess the original number we -- I guess we voted on was in the $15 million range. I apologize, I don't have the -- the number, but does this increase that at all or is that just within that original amount? No, it's within that. Okay. Thank you. Oh, I... Council Member Gray. Well, I... I don't want to correct something that I'm not correcting or not accurate on, but I think what we voted on, the vote before was on the ATS contract, and that was 13 million and change. And then there was a original budget of nine million, and whether or not that nine million included the, uh, electrical, I don't know that answer, but it sounds like you do, Mike. We- At the same time that we voted on the budget for ATS and the contract amount, we also included the additional monies that were necessary for the utility contracts and established a budget above ATS's contract amount. Was that... Was that -- what was that number, that estimate, that budget? I believe that... I would like to check on it, but I believe it was 17 million. Total. Total. 17 million. I'm not sure whether it was any, uh, 17-plus, but it was 17 million something. Well, yeah. All... This is what I remember. I remember the original budget that KKG established was nine million, and then there was some addition to it. And I don't know that number myself, but I don't know that we ever passed or the council ever confirmed a $17 million number. Any other questions? Council Member Beard. Yes, Commissioner Webb. Um, in the deep, dark reaches of my mind, anyway, I can remember is... A discussion similar to this about cohabitating conduit, and I was told it is not done. Now, I don't know to what level it is not done, gas and water and, and, and electricity and cable and on and on. Um, is it... And you should, I would guess, know from your experience, um, is there some that can go in the conduit and then some that have to be outside of conduit? There, there's two conduit systems that are going in. One of those conduit systems is an electrical conduit system, which is exclusively for the purpose of KU. Okay. The other conduit system will include five overhead communications plus, uh, companies plus, uh, the LFUCG fiber optic that has to be put underground on that corridor. Those are all going in concurrently. Okay, that, that, that's fine, and that, that is more consistent with what I had thought I'd heard then, but just a minute ago, I thought I heard it was all going into one. Um- We, we will need to do a contract with each of the overhead utilities. What about the gas? Or is gas involved at all? The, the... We, we... The gas, the, uh, Columbia Gas will have an opportunity built into this construction period to replace whatever needs being replaced on the corridor, but that will not be at an expense of the government. We're simply providing them the opportunity within this construction, the same thing with the water. Water has already started. They started at the Avenue of Champions, uh, about two weeks after the project started, got out of the Avenue of Champions so that could be op- opened back up. Now they've returned because there is now a window of opportunity with no construction in the area they need. They are, I believe I heard today in the construction meeting about, they, from Avenue of Champions, it's about 300 feet from Maxwell. They will be going through Maxwell while we have it closed. They will require a one-lane closure sometime in the future after it opens back up just to make a tie-in. But they, they will be replacing their facility for the entire length of the project. Okay, thank you very much. That's exactly what I needed. Council Member Wallace. Um, I'm going into the far dark reaches of my mind also, but I'm kinda on the same page Vice Mayor Gray's on. Um, I don't remember... I remember the, you know, the budget and the contract with ATS. And I remember hearing that the utilities were gonna be over and above that, as well as the streetscape amenities. Mm-hmm. But I don't remember passing that budget. We can bring that back to you Thursday evening. I mean, I don't wanna slow anything down. Right. Don't get me wrong. I understand. I just don't have it with me right now. Yeah. So if somehow we could find out if we did indeed pass that budget. We will have that available for you- Okay. Thank you so much. ... Thursday night. Anything further? Council Member Martin? Uh, thank you, Mayor. Um, and, and I apologize. I don't have the, the numbers on the budget o- on, on the tip of my tongue, and I'll defer to our, our commissioner and, and vice mayor on those numbers. I, I guess, uh, Commissioner, if we d- don't approve this, will Limestone come to a screeching halt? Uh, it will not get wired up. And the utilities can't come under, go underground without this. Right. That's why it was cluded, included in the overall budget. Right. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you. Anything further? All right, we have Council Member, uh, Lawless' motion to amend the new business items by adding this particular resolution. If there's no further discussion, we'll proceed to vote. Those in favor of amending the new business items to add t- the resolution about South Lime, please indicate by saying aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. All right. We're now ready to vote on the bus- new business items as amended. Council Member Blues. Uh, I do have a walk-on, Mayor, and I save that for, uh, council report, or, or do it now? Um, I think now would be fine. Okay. Unless... Yeah, let's go ahead and get it all cleaned up while we're doing this. Since we're in the mood, uh, I move to place on the docket for the meeting on October 1, a resolution authorizing and directing the mayor to execute an agreement with the Commonwealth of Kentucky for distribution of the assets of Fayette County Legal Aid, Inc. So moved. Second. Have a motion by Council Member Blues and a second by Council Member Beard to amend the new business items to add that resolution, uh, uh, relative to the distribution of assets of Fayette County Legal Aid. Any discussion? All in favor, please say aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Now I think we're ready to vote on the new business items as amended. Council Member Martin. Thank you, Mayor. Um, there are two bond issues on the, the, the agenda here, and I guess I would like a little bit more information on them. Uh, one's a $35.8 million bond issue, uh, series 2009, Build America Bonds, direct pay, and the other is a, uh, um, s- IRB bond series 2009 for Anchor Baptist Church. Could someone maybe get us some information on, a little bit of overview? Can you tell me which items those are? Excuse me, Mayor. Uh, item S and item U. All right. If we can do U first. Yes, sir. Uh, this is the, the first of a series of, uh, sanitary sewer, uh, revenue bonds that we intend to, uh, issue in order to finance the, um, construction under the, uh, consent decree. And, um, this is partially reimbursing for dollars that we've already spent, as well as to finance, uh, those dollars that will be needed in the next 12 months. Um, the projects are pretty much all over the county, um, but they're, I guess, grouped by watershed. And, um, this will be our first Build America Bond, which, um, in very layman's terms means that it's going to be a taxable bond, and the US government will give us a rebate once a quarter to, uh, of 35% of the interest rate. It's part of the, um, federal stimulus program. We have a two-year window for these bonds. So would this be, uh, essentially, uh, r- retired through the use of the new, uh, stormwater fee, or? Not stormwater. This is sanitary sewer. Sanitary sewer. Yes, and we had a rate increase, uh, this July and a year ago June in anticipation of these bonds, uh, so that the revenue would be there in order to support these, th- these, uh, issues. Is that good? And I think Anthony is ready to speak to the IRB. Uh, item S is for an industrial revenue bond. Uh, this particular bond for Anchor Baptist Church is a refinancing or refunding of a bond issue that the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government issued, I think, in 2007. Um, so it's really not, uh, we're a conduit issuer in this. We're not responsible for paying this back. It's the responsibility of Anchor Baptist Church to, to pay it. And there is no financial obligation to, uh, to Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government. As with all of our IRB, uh, issues, we bring them through the IRB committee. The committee meets, reviews the, uh, the actual bond issue itself, discusses the bond issue, and makes a determination on whether or not to recommend for council approval. Does this count toward our bond limit? No. Claria, speak to... Cl- Claria Shadwick is bond counsel, uh, for us, Brown, Todd on this particular deal. These generally do not come against our bond cap. No, sir. All right, thanks. Anything further? Then are we ready to vote on the items of new businesses now amended? All in favor of approving the new business items as amended, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. All right. Takes us down to the Planning Committee Report. Council Member Gordon. Thank you, Mayor. Uh, before I start, I'd like to welcome our Korean visitors, Annyong, Hashim, Nika. Uh, the Planning Committee met September 22nd, and we had one item on the agenda which was Student Housing Task Force. We're beginning our, uh, report out and work on that. And at the meeting, Mike Moiser, Chair of the Student Housing Task Force, gave a brief overview of the mission and scope of the task force and, um, hit some of the highlights of the report and included our eight enforcement options for immediate action and seven expanded policy options. Um, more than 80 citizens came and signed up to speak so the committee decided, after hearing from the chair, Mike Moiser, that it would hear from the citizens. And so, um, we worked our way through part of that list and on October 5th at one o'clock in these council chambers, there will be a special planning committee meeting to hear from the remaining citizens who signed up to speak. So that concludes my report. Council Member Lawless. Um, yes, Council Member Gordon, I've had several people ask if they come on Monday the 5th and have not signed up, if they can sign up. I, what I understood was if we get through everybody that signed up and didn't get to speak, then we would take new speakers. Is that correct? Uh, if everybody who signed up to speak at the last meeting comes, we will not have time to hear all of them. Okay. So I'm presuming that the committee will decide at that time what to do about that. Okay. I'd like first to work through the people who signed up and came and will come again. Okay. Thank you. So. Anything further for Council Member Gordon? Thank you. Uh, we're now ready for the Lyric Monthly Report. And Ms. Raybold, are you giving the Lyric Report today or are others? This probably shoulda just been in the packets under Mayor's Report. It's just for your information. It's not a formal presentation. There was a request to get a written report on a monthly basis as opposed to quarterly, so it's in there for your information. If anybody has any questions, I'll be happy to answer any questions. It's all information that has been approved thus far. Any questions on the written report? All right. Thank you very much. Mr. Martin, if you'll step forward and talk to us about the Water Quality Management Fee implementation. Thank you, Mayor. Um, since council had, uh, passed the Water Quality Management Fee Ordinance back in May, um, there's been a lot going on, and so we felt it was appropriate to come back and brief the council on the progress that we have made to this point as far as implementing the, the terms and conditions of that, that ordinance. Um, like I said, a lot of work going on. And one of the things that we, we did was try to identify, a- as a good friend of mine always says, you know, "Begin with the end in mind." And so what we came up was, what we felt were, were significant and important objectives that we wanted to make sure that we, we met by the time we sent out that first, that first bill in January. Um, you, you see them listed there, on there. I'm gonna talk about how we're accomplishing these objectives as I go through this presentation. Um, essentially, we formed different work groups to focus on these things, is that you, you can see that there's a policy work group that's working on identifying ordinance interpretation and developing written policies. We feel like it's really important is that, as we develop policies related to how the ordinance is written is that we're consistent and it's memorialized in such as that there's consistency that lasts all the way through. Um, there's a billing work group that's doing a lot of the coordination work with Kentucky-American, uh, as you recall, that they are our billing agent for this. Um, the direct relationship between water meters and parcels, parcels being how the Water Quality Management Fee is being applied, presents a lot of unique challenges, and so there's a lot of work that needs to be done in those two work groups to be able to work those things out. AMEC is, uh, is our consultant that has worked on this with us for quite some time, and they have a lot of background in implementing water quality or stormwater management fees, so they've been doing a lot of the work that's necessary to give us the tools to be able to meet the objectives that, that was in the first slide. Um, I'm gonna talk a little bit about customer service. Obviously, that's really significant when we start sending out new bills in January that people may or may not be familiar with. And related to that is that public outreach, uh, effort that we need to incorporate. Some of the highlights relative to, uh, those particular work groups, um, we're in the process of developing a, a, an appeals process. Uh, the ordinance is fairly specific on how appeals would be conducted through a water... ... quality m-- board fee appeals board essentially. Um, Darrel Bennett's kind of heading that up right now. That, that there's enough other, other, um, cities that have these type of things that essentially we're, we're, we're kind of, I guess, using some of their stuff, but we obviously have to have the forms because those things have to be done in writing. Uh, likewise, the developing the account maintenance procedures, as I mentioned before, is that the match between water meters and parcels is very difficult, and I'll give you a specific example out at Wa- Town Branch Waste Water Treatment Plant. That treatment plant has one water meter, but it sits on four specific parcels that are all identified under different names for LFUCG. Two of them, the city of Lexington, another one is some type of Lexington improvement pro- um, um, company, and then the last one is, is Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government. But because they all have impervious area to them, is that, that we've got to somehow get all that impervious area that's owned by one person assigned to one water meter because the other ones don't have a water meter. A lot of work that needs to be done in that area. Uh, developing policies that establish the decision trees and resulting work flow, again, that's, that's really about establishing a line of consistency as we go about some of these unique features associated with some of those parcels. And then a significant amount of work we're doing right now, and as I look at Ms., Ms. Gordon is that we have formed an incentives program, uh, work group. Uh, as you recall, the incentives program is where we have a million dollars a year that is earmarked to commercial institution or, or industrial properties to where they can put in, uh, water quality improvements that help reduce their bill, but also reduce the amount of storm water and improve water quality in there. Um, we have Fayette County Schools, University of Kentucky, Lexmark, uh, we have a s- we're in, still pro- recruiting a small business. Uh, Ms. Gordon is the representative for the council. Um, we've had about three meetings right now and that we're working through essentially a draft that we've prepared right now. One of the big, big things that I think the group has arrived at at this point in time is that we need to have a scoring system on how we evaluate, uh, requests for a grant under the incentives program and that we're looking at different models including the PDR program of how we would be able to consistently rate specific, uh, grant requests to be able to get, get what we want to get out of an incentives program. Uh, the billing work group highlights I, I've mentioned before about working with Kentucky American. Kentucky American's been very cooperative and, and, and done a lot of, lot of yeoman's work in helping us get this set up. Uh, I'll bring your attention to that second one because the, the, this aggregation of continu- contiguous parcels single owner is, is, is proving to be challenging. I, I mentioned, uh, the treatment plant example. Uh, some churches and other institutions have that same thing is that the church building may sit on one parcel and the other three parcels make up the parking lot, but all four parcels are billable under a, uh, water quality management fee. But you can't bill the other three parcels 'cause they don't have a water meter and so we're, there's a lot of inside the program that has to do that makes sure that bill all gets to the single owner. And so, um, it, it, it has been challenging, but it, uh, I think it's been good work that'll make it, that reduce the, the, uh- Yeah. ... the difficulties for our rate payers as much as possible. That last bullet also is, is a big part of what AMEC and our computer services folks have been doing. Uh, we feel pretty good about the customer service tools and software that we have available. Essentially it's a three-screen application to where somebody calls in and they're, they're contesting their water quality, um, fee, that we'll be able to look at that map and be able to produce a map for them to where they can see what we're suing as far as how we arrived at what their fee was going to be. Also having the Kentucky American database and Lex call that where everything is in front of us, uh, it, it's really important for us that they, that, that our folks are well-trained and well-prepared to be able to answer the questions that are inevitably to come. Which leads me into the customer service work group highlights. Essentially we've taken our conference room and turned it into a, um, I guess a, a, what we call FIST, the Fee Implementation Support Team. It's all, all cubicles and we've got six temporary employees in there right now that are going through some fairly intensive training as far as what the ordinance requirements are, how to use the software application, and, and, and all of these things. There's a, a, a couple of significant mailings that are getting ready to go out that I'm gonna mention in a minute which will give them some very much on the ground training before, uh, we go live in, in January of 2010. I will emphasize this though is that the work flow still remains the same for us as it has always been is that Lex call continues to be our front end. Uh, it's really important for us is that, that as many calls as possible flow through Lex call. Uh, A, it's for, um, for us to be able to track as far as the number of calls that we've got. I mean, I rely very heavily on them as far as the number of sewer calls, the number of flooding calls, and all that, and they're, they're our source to be able to target where our, our gaps are in our service, and so for this water quality management fee, that, w- would like to have the same thing happen. Uh, likewise is that, that for the residential folks, uh, there are certain to be questions from residential folks, but we feel like that we've done a pretty good job of training the Lex call staff and will continue to do that to handle the Lex, the, the residential calls. The residential call, e- e- everybody is $4.32 per household if it's a single family, so there's not a lot of reason to pass them along to a, to what I call the implementation support group. They're more focused on the more complex... ... commercial and institutional type of things that involve maps. There's really not anything to look at on a residential. This is what the fee is for, this is why we're doing it, everybody pays $4.32, and that should be basically the end of the call unless there's some other related issue that -- that they need, ah, Urban County Government to deal with. So again, is that we would ask that -- that the council and their staff and -- and everybody in Urban County Government, as we launch this thing, is they send those calls to LexCall, that will, I think, make things flow much easier for everyone. These are significant things that you need to pay attention to right now, because they're the things that are getting ready to happen. Ah, we're working on a letter right now that would go to all faith-based institutions that we've identified to this point, and we are inviting them to two different public meetings that we're gonna be hosting. As you can see on there, October 12th and October 15th, at those two different locations. Those faith-based institutions that they will be provided with an informational letter and also a map. And essentially, we'll be there prepared to be able to answer their questions about what's getting ready to happen as far as the water quality management fee in January. So those are our two dates. Notice on the 15th, we set that up for 5:30 because I think you have a council meeting that night, so if you're so inclined to try to attend, that -- that we would try to make it available so you could attend if you -- if you so desire. But those ma- those letters are essentially ready to go. Got today's date on it. I was told before I came down here it might be tomorrow. There's roughly about 250 letters, and producing 250 maps in color and all that is it's -- it's -- it's challenging our printer, which leads us into the next one is that October 1st, we intend to send a direct mailing to all identified single parcel multi-premise accounts. This is another one of those big challenging things when you bill based on parcel but you're billing via the water meter. Um, I'll give you an example. Most commercial, um, um, shopping centers, they have multiple tenants, multiple water meters, but they actually l- reside on one parcel. So who do you send the water bill to? That's a good question. The owner is ultimately responsible for it, but somehow that's got to be apportioned out among the different tenants. What we're doing October 1st is sending a letter to the identified owner of that parcel and asking them to complete the form and figure out how they want to apportion the percentages of that wa- of that water quality management fee. For example, is that if they're 10 equivalent residential units, 10 ERUs, and they've got three tenants in there with three water bills, we expect them to tell us how they're going to apportion those 10, not us do it ourselves. This will be a g- a -- a real good opportunity for us to do some of the communication part of it we need to do, and that's one of the reasons why those customer service or those -- the -- the fee implementation support team is in place, 'cause we anticipate this is gonna generate a lot of calls. But we wanted to make sure you knew about it, because that way tha- it's not a surprise if the calls land on your desk. Again, please route them through LexCall. Ah, we anticipate there's gonna be calls just because of the survey work that we've done to this point in time show that we're -- that folks aren't necessarily aware that -- that this is coming, and especially in the business community. So beginning in November, we're gonna begin to use med- media outlets to inform the community about this upcoming fee. Ah, we're gonna do our best with trying to get the word out that this is coming and try to deal with it in as an upfront manner as possible, but at the same time, ah, it was really important when I talked about those objectives before is that we have a predictable lo- and consistent location for people to get answers regarding this new fee. Um, mind you, that doesn't ensure that they're gonna like the answer that they get, but it will be a predictable and consistent answer, and we're putting every effort we can to make sure that that's in place come January. Thank you. Council Member James. Thank you, Mayor. Thanks, Charlie. Um, my question has to do with what you just mentioned about a single parcel and multiple premise. Um, and I wondered if mobile home parks fall into that as far as you're concerned? Or is that mainly... Are you talking about commercial or is it... Yes, I would believe that that would be- Okay. ... is that, um, m- most mobile home parks that I'm familiar with usually have what's called a master meter. They have one meter and the water bill is apportioned between the different folks. The owner usually pays it. He's just collecting it and it's built into the rent. And so if that's the case on a mobile home park, then yes, that's gonna have that same application, and they're gonna take that -- that monthly water quality management fee and just divvy it up equally among all the different tenants there with the assumption that everybody shares the common areas that aren't necessarily part of their -- their pad or their footprint. But that's the way they do the water bill. In most cases when it has one meter that serves 50, um, manufactured homes. Um, if it's individually metered, then they're gonna be considered the same as residential. It's residential. Okay. So, um, if it is one meter and they're gonna divvy it out, um, divvy it up, um, is that something they need to record with us? Urban County Government, you said something about submitting a list, so we'll have that on file of how that's expected to- Well, the, like I said, if they're... if it's one meter, one parcel, and we don't recognize those individual pads for those -- those manufactured homes as individual parcels, we don't even know it's there. It's irrelevant to us is that this is however many ERUs, owner, you have to pay that. And if it's one meter, he's probably getting the water bill from Kentucky-American already. Mm-hmm. So he's gonna get the bill and he's just gonna have to figure out how to adjust the rents to be able to recoup that. Does that make sense? It does. But that ... So that's not ... What, what was the list you were talking about that we'd need? Only if there were separate meters on one- Yes, yes. ... parcel? Is it, um ... Like I said, think about any particular shopping center that has a Kroger anchor- Mm-hmm. ... and maybe a little neighborhood pub and a Hallmark store and a dry cleaner. You know, is that, there's a fairly large footprint there as far as amount of impervious area. Mm-hmm. Each one of them has their own meter, but how do we apportion what share of that overall parking lot is theirs? Mm-hmm. The assumption would be, is that Kroger is probably the larger part of that because it's the larger anchor, but we don't want to make that decision. We want the owner of the parcel to make the decision on how the ERUs are split among their various tenants. Okay. So that's what you're going to be keeping an account of. Right. That's what we are sending out this mailing in, in October 1 and that we will be sending them a form that lists the different premises or water meter accounts and allowing them to fill back in what, how many ERUs of the total that they want to assign to those individual premise numbers. They have the option of this. If they have a fire line there and they're the ones that are paying the, the, the water bill for the fire line, they can put it all on themselves if they want to. It's entirely up to them. As the owner of the parcel, they're ultimately responsible for paying the bill, so we're telling them, "You tell us how you want us to divvy it up." Okay. But if they don't, we'll choose, we'll choose theirs, where they may become a direct bill. We're trying to avoid a direct bill or what we call a non-mutual, which means that we have to create the bill internally ourselves. We have to be able to send it directly to somebody. And, and in many of those, uh, direct bills, they have no water account, so our collection, um, presents some challenges. Okay. For example, a parking lot that's just out someplace. If there's no water meter there, we're gonna have to send a direct bill to that parcel owner, but if they don't pay it, then we don't have a water account that we can shut off, so we're trying to avoid those as much as possible. Okay. I think maybe I should, um ... My question is surrounded by, um, if you have a large ... We have, um, at least one mobile home park where the water lines are leaking. Mm-hmm. So there's one main meter. The water lines are leaking. So the bill that's received is a larger amount because the capital improvements are not ... It might not be Irwin County government. I don't know who it is. Okay? I don't know if it's ... I don't know who owns the water pipes. Um, but in that case, if the residents are being apportioned their part of that bill based on leaky pipes, then how do we ... What control do we have as an Irwin County government to say, "We're assessing a fee based on water usage, but there mi- ... Or based on ..." We are not billing this based on water usage. Those are two different issues. Oh, it's a one-user fee. Okay. This is about- Okay. ... how much impervious area they have. You're right. We're just attaching it to the water bill like we do with the Herby fee or we do with the, um, um, the sewer bill or any ... A lot of the other things that we collect. Okay. So if you don't ... If you ... If, if the water bill ... As long as the water bill's paid, it doesn't really matter? It's a, it's a billing ... It's a, it's a collection mechanism for us- Okay. ... or a billing agent for them, just as we do with the sanitary sewer fee. So, you know, if they've got a water bill and th- they don't pay all of the things that show up on their bill, from what I understand, and, uh, ho- and Bill might, uh, correct me on this, Bill Amer, is that it gives them the right to terminate the service if they haven't- That's what I wondered. ... paid the entire amount. Okay. All right. Well, thank you. Okay. Thanks, Mayor. Council Member Feigl. Thank you, Mayor. Charlie, I ... This is going to be a very difficult process as we, as we get a little further into it, and I just wanted to say that I have, uh, a great deal of conf- confidence in, in you and in your ability to explain it to folks. Uh, but I, I think we talked about a process for, um, dealing with those folks who come in with questions about it or want to appeal their decision, um, or, or appeal their bill, or at least debate it. Mm-hmm. And we talked about that process, and I just wanted to make sure that there is, um ... That process is in place and it's, you know, the people are trained and ready to go to, to begin dealing with those folks. Right. The, um ... We're hoping to be able to resolve these issues without going to the formal appeals process that we put into the ordinance, is that, um, at no cost to the caller, we will send them a map. And we will also send them a form that we've prepared tha- that allows them to state what their appeal is. And then th- the idea is, is that then we pick this back up again by ... We l- ... They're looking at the same thing that we're looking at, and so if there's a dispute of property lines or as ... Well, you, your aerial photograph shows a building there. I tore that building down six months ago. That we simply verify that and make those adjustments. Some of the process that I talked about as far as documenting policy and workflow involves that sorta thing, is, is that somebody's gotta make that call, and that would require going out in the field and then making the appropriate changes in not only our database but also Kentucky-American's database that we share with them. But yes, I, I agree with you. Having, um ... I started out in the water and sewer billing, uh, thing part of it, so I, I'm kind of expecting the worst, and I think the, the work group, uh, of, of Julie Mantrum and, and Cassie Felty and, um, Candace Deininger, I think we're all very sensitive to that and it's that we want this to work as well as it possibly can, so, uh, we'll do our best. Thank you. Council Member Gorton. Thank you, Mayor. Um, Council Member Feigl, I'm glad that you brought that up, because, um, I have been out there to the Town Branch treatment center building. I guess that's Water Quality. . These folks, Charlie, Julie, I can't mention everyone, they are working inordinately hard to make this come out right. And they've even- ... called Cookie back from retirement . If any of you know Cookie, who sta- who piloted our Lex call, uh, over 10 years ago, to, to be on this, uh, call center team, this is a humongous effort. And I just wanna publicly thank you for all your work and all of your staff, because it, it's not like anything we've ever done. To, to bill, to have this database, um, on properties that don't get any kind of a tax or fee bill, and to make it all integrate with this fee, with the end result improved water quality. So thank you very much for all that you all are doing. Any further questions for Mr. Martin? Thank you for the update. Uh, Mr. Lucas, if you will come forward. Thank you, Mayor. Um, I'm here to present, or to follow up to our previous presentations about our radio interoperability project, and they do relate directly to items H and I on the, today's agenda. Um, previously, we talked about the need to upgrade our current radio systems. And since our last presentation, we've been working 911, fire and police, and we've been working with our current vendors to find solutions, um, to reach the goals that we're trying to obtain. Those goals, there's actually four main goals. First i- to allow interoperability between our police and fire, um, which will allow sworn personnel in the field to talk to each other regardless of division, and regardless of geographic location, and regardless of interaction by a third party. Um, and this also would include our other partners who are on our radio system outside of police and fire. The second is to improve our coverage in the county. We do not have full radio coverage, um, border to border. We do not have coverage within several facilities. When you get into, uh, some buildings, um, some large facilities, we do not have radio coverage there either. We also want to, um, provide connectivity between all of our, um, sites. This would be our towers, the brains, our routers, our servers. Uh, we have several single points of failures in our system now. Those have been identified and we, um, want to, um, have redundancy, so if one of those do have a problem, it does not affect the system or the end users, which are our sworn officers. Our partners in this project, which we've already had discussions with and are ready to move forward are UK, um, the airport, Fayette County Schools, um, our, um, counties to the south and to the north, Scott and Madison County, who are on similar systems, so we would like to partner with them to share our resources and towers. Um, in your packet, we have, um, some pricing and, uh, information on narrow bounding, and I would like to point out some things, some timelines in there. One of them being, um, we have a phase one, which is our goal by July of 2010. Obviously, we want to get some, um, completions before the games. And by July 2010, we want to improve our ca- coverage at the Horse Park. Geographically, being on the northern edge of our county, we have some weak areas there. We want to provide basic interoperability between our fire and p- police, and we'll be able to do that with the integration of new, um, smart routers into our system. The next goal is by the June of 2011, which is to upgrade all of our infrastructure for both our VHF and 800 systems, so they will all be IP-based systems, be compliant with, um, federal mandates, and also, um, be P25 compliant, which is also a federal mandate. The third, um, item on there is highlighted, it's called narrow banding, um, and I gave you some information in your brochure about that. Narrow banding is a requirement by the FCC to narrow the bands that public safety uses in radios by January of 2013. What this actually is used for, so the FCC could shrink the narrow, or narrow the frequency we use, so they can sell the rest and make money. It's very similar to what we all had to do when we went to digital TV. They got us off the analog TV so they could use those frequencies and sell them. They're doing the same thing with public safety by requiring us to all move to a smaller, smaller bandwidth. Um, the deadline for that is January 2013, which has already been extended once. So our ultimate goal is, besides improving the coverage and interoperability, is to meet our FCC requirements and get to narrow banding before January 2013th. 'Cause if we don't, do not do that, we will not have radio oper- interoperability at all. Um, items H and I, um, item I actually is a contract with Harris. They are currently our vendor and system provider for our 800 megahertz, and we want to upgrade that system, add three additional towers, which will double the number of towers we have today, and also duplicate our brains or the, the core for that system. Also, item H includes additional money, um, in our reimbursement bond, so we can also improve our VHF, which is what the police department is working on. We will put their, their antennas on these new towers as well, so we will be sharing those facilities. Um, and we also have to provide connectivity between all these, and we will be doing that using, um, fiber optics, um, implemented and maintained by the Irvin County government. Questions? Council Member Stinnet. Thank you, Mayor. Mr. Lucas, thank you, uh, for being here. And I know we've had this conversation many times, especially during- Yes. ... our recent budget links. Uh, at that time though, we were only talking about $10 million for a system. Today, I see a $16 million item and a $14 million, so a $30 million system. I know the latter $14 million is for the maintenance and ongoing support and changing out the radios, et cetera. But the big capital item I thought was around $10 million that we've already approved that in past budgets, the bond, the $10 million portion. So how did we get from $10 to $16? Well, uh, let me outline that. You're right. The $16 in item H does include the $14 in item I. It does include it. It does include that, okay? So the $16.6 is actually, if you look at your sheet, I'll outline what all is included in that. That is, um, under FY 2010, it includes those expenses, which is, um, part of the Harris contract, the $6.6, the VHF upgrade, $1.4. We cannot complete either of those in one fiscal year, so those actually spread into FY 2010 and 2011. The fiber upgrade is included as well. Um, with our new sites, we need to run, um, fiber to those locations, um, and some of those fiber will actually be used or be available to other Irvin County govern- projects. So the original $10 or the $9.92, which was budgeted in the original CIP, we do need that, and the additional funds is because we're also replacing the, um, handsets, um, to multiband handsets. That was not in the original $9.9. We were just going for infrastructure upgrade, but we found during negotiations and working with our vendors that if we go ahead and got these subscriber units now, we actually get a deeper discount and actually be saving money overall. Um, so the $16.6 is actually all the costs in the first two phases through June of 2011 and the maintenance, as you pointed out, which is under, um, the second item, 800, Upgrade and Maintenance, that line item, um, vertically or horo- horizontally across includes that. Okay. And I assume these prices are coming from the vendor, the, the, the people we're gonna buy it from? Yes. We, um, the contract, which is in, um, item I, outlines the, um, is where all those costs come from. The main- ongoing maintenance in years, um, 2014 onward are actually year to year, so, um, that is the price if we commit to it at that year. And I guess I'm just curious of why we didn't put this out to bid. Uh- This is a big dollar amount, and normally, we don't just award it to someone. Just 'cause we've done business with them in the past doesn't mean we need to do business with them again in the future. Um, so I'm just curious of why we didn't put this out to bid. Um, well, if we put it out to bid, we would have to replace both... We could replace both systems. Um, we have 800 megahertz with the fire and the VHF, so we are upgrading both of our existing and connecting them together, um, rather than starting from scratch, so to speak. Now, what we did not do was obligate ourself to replace every single radio that we have. Because of th- the requirement in 2013, we are changing all the infrastructure, so we will be able to go out to bid for all of our handsets and get a larger price when we buy 1500 of them at once, and also, the capability in the handsets in 18 months, we believe, will be a lot higher than the capability today, and we'll have better competition at that time. So are we gonna keep fire and police still separate? No, we, we- This'll, this'll b- combine them? We're keeping their frequencies that they have today, and we are combining them, so they'll be able to talk on one unit to each other. The reason we're keeping both is 800 has advantages, and the VHF has advantages. So instead of all going to one, put all our, um, carts, all our items in one cart, we're gonna take the advantages of both, so they could use them both at either wherever they are at. VHF has much better infra- in structures, so we want to be able to have that capability. The 800 has a better, um, capacity throughout the coverage, the, um, county, and we can get more users on it. W- what kind of research have we, have you all done in terms of looking at other systems across the country? What other units? Are, what, are other cities keeping them separate? Uh, what, uh, wha- what's everyone else using? Uh, well, um, for instance, Louisville actually bid, rebid their whole system, and they started from scratch. That is one way to do it. There's others who have migrated. The advantage of keeping them both is we can migrate over time, over till 2013. Um, if you go for all at once, you actually have to keep your old system, build the new one, and then switch them over, um, and, and then you're with that one system. You don't have competition between the two systems. You kind of buy into one as proprietary. Where we're going is an infrastructure that's not proprietary, so we can buy anybody's hand units in the future, so we're not tied into one. Um, in other places, they've gone either way. Uh, we didn't have the money to do it all at once. Um, we didn't get the grants that Louisville did to come in and just get a whole new system. Um, the handsets that we are purchasing have been evaluated. Actually, they were evaluated at the, um, uh, last derby, um, and this is the same units that Louisville purchased after that evaluation. Um, so we just got a small quantity of them, so that we can test them and make sure they work before we move further. Okay. Uh, l- last but not least, I know earlier during Budget and Finance, we asked Mayor for a, a proposal at the most... ... uh, hopefully next work session or the weekend-- uh, work session afterwards about our current projects we've already approved the bond through the budget process two years ago and last year. I know this is gonna play into that, um, as to whether or not we can actually proceed with this versus other projects. 'Cause we have approved 10-- almost $10 million of this, but not the whole amount. So, um, uh, I would not be in support of bringing this back today until we see that presentation 'cause I think it's fair to compare that to what el- other critical needs we have out there. So I'll just throw that out there. I assume that's how we're gonna pay for it is ultimately bond it, and we'd have to do it here pretty soon. So that's gonna compete with the other projects we have that we've already approved. So thank you, Mayor. That's a fair request. There's no, no doubt about that and, um, Commissioner O'Mara has been working on pulling together a capital projects budget for your all's consideration. I wish we had the resources to do all of the capital projects that are-- that we have, uh, considered. I really do because there are a number of worthwhile things there. But because of budget constraints, we haven't. And, um, I don't like spending $16 million, but I don't like the risk of finding ourselves in a situation where we need to have the interoperability that Mr. Lucas has just described and, um, we don't have it. And it, it could be a, a very consequential problem for our Public Safety Department. So that's why we're coming forward with it. But I have no problem whatsoever in, in coming up with, uh, CIP for the, uh, council to consider. Well, a- and again, Mayor, it was the CIP- Per- ... we've already approved. Pardon me? It was CIP projects we've already approved that we haven't bonded. Right. Uh, not the entire list. Okay. Okay. Yeah. We just wanna see what we've already approved. That's, that's real fair. Yeah, that's f- that's appropriate. Thank you. Council Member Feigl. Thank you, Mayor. Uh, I had a couple of questions. I think I heard you say that you're going to, to be installing three new towers? That's correct. And will they be on, uh, city property? Or have you decided where they'll be? Um, we have three sites, um, that we're looking at. One is on city property, one is a joint project with the schools, and another one, um, we haven't locked in. It could be on private property or it could be on another government agency site. Okay. Um, is there any way that we can s- can lease space on those towers? Lease it to others? Mm-hmm. Um, yes, we could, as long as they don't interfere with our frequencies. And I think you mentioned that, um, you're, you're, you're trying to, to move to a new handheld product. Is there any opportunity to sell the products that we have now- Um, actually, the products- ... to reduce some of the cost? ... we have now will be obsolete by 2013 because of the narrow banding requirements. Okay. So we are going to use them up until that point, um, during the migration. Okay. Thank you. Mm-hmm. Good questions. Um, Council Member Wayne. Thank you, Mayor. Uh, uh, j- just for the general public out there, could you describe, you know, what our problems are right now about communication between police, fire, and EMS? Yes. Yes, I can. I can touch on those. We, um, currently only have three towers that operate in the, in, um, Fayette County. Um, and because of that, and they're all heavily located on one side of the county, that we actually have gaps or holes and the, um, officers are well aware where they, those are as they're driving down. So we want to eliminate those. Also, the police and fire do not communicate on the same channels or the same radio. So they either have to carry a radio from either or they have to get a manual patch b- by the 911 system to get 'em on one. The goal is that they will have one unit on their hip or in their car that will communicate with all public safety and with other public works, be it, um, Fayette County Schools, security, UKPD, or our own public works department during, um, hazards. If someone calls into 911 in an emergency and you want to dispatch, uh, police, fire, or EMS, uh, will this system improve the ability to dispatch? Yes, it will. Currently, if someone calls 911, we ask, all the calls come into the police headquarters and if it is for police, we actually transfer it across the aisle to someone to dispatch for police and they're in the same room. Uh, if they need fire or EMS, we actually send the call up to fire headquarters where the fire 911 head- dispatching center is, and they will take the same information and send it. And we're sending two different units via two different radio systems and two different operations. This will bring it in to one facility so one, one caller will get all the information for fire, police, EMS, and send them at the same time without ... Right now, obviously, police or fire may get there first because they are being sent in parallel yet unequal paths. Yeah. I had the opportunity recently to visit the emergency operation center that Louisville just opened and the, uh, it was in the ... Uh, I'm trying to remember. The Federal Reserve building, which was a hardened building and had redundancy in it, the way it was originally designed. But, uh, one of the things they told me is that the prices on a lot of this equipment, you know, is very competitive and with technology improvements and all that, and that sometimes not buying it all at one time under one contract and then maybe the prices would be, uh, reduced in the future. The system you have planned, would it accommodate that approach? Yes. We've done it in phases for that very reason. We, we want to get a certain level of service by the games, um, and we're, we're moving towards that. And then a- We want to get a compliance by the end, that's why we're withholding getting all the hand units or the radios, so we can get those in a different contract 18 months from now. If we got them all today, I couldn't install them all that quick, nor will we have the infrastructure available. So we're gonna do one phase at a time and as you say, get the parts as we need them. Okay. That's all I've got. Thanks a lot, David. You're welcome. Appreciate it. Council Member Blues. Thank you, Mayor. I, David, I, um, I understand that going forward, uh, in, in m- moving, uh, through this transition, that's gonna bring us more sophisticated equipment and it's gonna put police and fire, uh, on the same channel and, and, and really make some, some public safety improvements. But something you said earlier interested me. You said that, that, that the FCC is mandating that we transition to, uh, to narrow band frequencies so that they c- can make more channels- Mm-hmm. ... available for sale. So we, we pay for the transition and the federal government gains the, uh, you, you know, uh- New things. ... gains, gains funding as, through this process. Do we get anything back? Your interpretation is correct. Uh, we do not get any money upfront. Um, it is a requirement. We are hoping, in the public safety arena, that once they sell those bands that they will actually provide money back to public safety in form of grants. Um, that's what they have said. It is their goal. They've done that with other frequencies. Actually, um, the state of Kentucky just recently got about one and a half million dollars from the last sale that went directly to 911. They are not promising that upfront, but that is their goal is once they sell it, um, whatever price they get, they take a slice and give that back to all the people that moved. But will it cover the cost? I don't believe so. So, well, I, I shouldn't think it, it would, but, but I h- I hope we'll be poised to reach out. Uh. Understood. If, when, if, if that becomes, uh, a possibility. Council Member Martin. Thank you, Mayor. Uh, will the, uh, the new towers that are contemplated for this be located in, in any of the city parks? Um, th- um, currently no. Um, one site that we actually are looking at is, um, a shared facility at Takes Creek, um, High School campus. Um, which is right next to one of our parks, but not actually in it. Um, one of the other parks we are looking at is Cardinal Run. Actually putting it on one of the lights that are s- already there. Um, and the other facility is not a Irvin County government, so it's not a park. Well, I, I, I guess I have a problem with s- putting it in the parks. I know you need some place to put them. Um, the, uh, I know at Cardinal Run, uh, they were, they've been negotiating with cell tower groups for some number of years and there was a, a, uh, what can only be said a, a violent opposition to putting, uh, towers up on the lights there. Uh, they, the perception is, is that, uh, with kids playing there, baseball on the lights, that they don't need to be near high radi- high frequency radios. And, uh, and I know the city needs some place to put these. Uh, but I also have an objection to that because, you know, our parks are sort of one of the last vistas we have of, of outdoor green space in the city, and as we get, become more and more dense and as we are pushing for more and more density, uh, that green space is gonna become more and more challenged. And, uh, uh, and I would like to see every effort made f- for the city to find some other place to put these than in what's left of our green space. Um, you know, Cardinal Run Park, uh, is in my district and, uh, and I will, uh, uh, lead the charge against putting it in Cardinal Run Park. I know the city needs a place to put these, but it's, uh, uh, uh, you know, I, I know the, the neighborhood association in Beaumont has been looking carefully at, at various types of, of camouflage, uh, for a, a possible radio tower and, uh, cell phone tower in Cardinal Run Park and that one, this one is disguised as, as a clock tower. Um, the, the s- the, uh, steeple of Centenary Methodist Church is a cell tower. And I think there are many, uh, uh, uh, uh, developments that have been made in this technology that can b- be used as sort of disguises. That said, putting it on a light pole at a Cardinal Run's gonna be very unpopular. I'll just let you know. So. Well, I will say the west side of the county presents many challenges for a tower because there's not much height in current structures out there. Um, and trying to get one in that location, I mentioned the park, it is not our preference. Actually, it's third on our list in that area. Um, but, to be honest, it is on, it is C for that, you know, that area. Um, as you know, there's not many tall buildings out there. Um, it's a high need area. Uh, but we need a, a tower out there to get full coverage. Um, but I understand your concerns and we, we want to hide it as well. Well, perhaps they could stick it on top of the r- of the, uh, air traffic control tower and, uh, u- up top where no one can see it. But, but, uh, I, I'm assuming you would have to come back to us in order to do that. Is that correct or is it you, just something you guys would go do? In which aspect? In putting a s- a s- a tower up in s- in Cardinal Run Park. On any, um, Irwin County government site, that would be correct. We would have t- Then you would not need to come back to the council. Yes, we would. Yes. You wouldn't- We would have to come back to put it on a Irwin County government site. You would not. I would. You would. Would. Okay. Keep talking through the echo so I can't... It sort of keeps disappearing. So. We will come and talk to you if we put it on any Irwin County government site. That'd be marvelous, rather. Okay. Thank you, Mayor. Council Member Crosby. Thank you, Mayor. Uh, back during our link process, uh, you had stated that, uh, this project would require approximately $10 million in the first year, with an additional two to $3 million for, um, the next three additional years. Is it safe for us to assume that we would not need an additional two to $3 million each additional two to three years now if we make the initial investment of the 16... I've lost the number, but 16 point whatever? Um, no, it would not be safe to say that. The 16.6 actually covers the first, um, three years, or the first two years in our chart, um, and ongoing maintenance, which is a year to year through 2016. So- It does not cover, um, additional radio handsets, but we would not go to purchase those until the beginning of FY 2012. It goes back to we didn't want to purchase everything at once. We want to spread it out. Now, the cost includes... Of the 16 does include some handsets, and you're correct, it's more than the 10 plus I think it was two million for four year... Or 18 mil- Two to three million. It says- For- ... two to three million for three additional years. For about 19 million total, that's correct. So, so we're looking at 16... Oops, whatever. 16 point whatever million, then an additional, additional charges every year for there on out once we get for- We'll- ... maintenance and- We'll need to go purchase additional handsets, and we would be... We don't know what the cost is now. I have estimates in the spreadsheet, but until we put it out to bid, I do not know the true cost. Okay. And then what about... Does, does the cost include the construction of the towers? Yes, it does. It includes the construction of the tower and the, what we call the building that goes next to the tower, uh, which runs that tower. So it includes three of those. Okay. I, I will probably hold off voting on this, like Council Member Stennett, 'til I can see the information from budget and finance regarding our bonding, uh, information. Thank you. Council Member Myers. Thank you, Mayor. Um, thank you for coming in to talk about this issue today. In, in my district, in the eighth District, we have, um... One of the cell phone companies was interested in putting a cell phone tower at one of our parks. I ran that up the flagpole in the neighborhood association, and they climbed. They weren't really interested in that. As a result of that, we ended up with an ultimate Frisbee, um, field going up in that same park that we wouldn't be able to have had we allowed that cell tower to go in. I'm concerned now that you're talking about putting a cell tower at, at Tates Creek High School or somewhere on that property. I understood you to say that if you put the cell tower on city property, you have to come back and talk to us about it first. Um, am I assuming that if you put it on school property, you do not have to do that? Um, I don't know the answer to that. Are there... How far are you in the negotiations with the school system? Um, we need a tower in that area. They want a tower in that area. And we both agreed verbally that we need to put a tower on that campus. There are some serious deficiencies in that area and radio coverage for both our public safety and theirs. But the same issue that, that, uh, previous councilman talked about with respect to having kids around that high frequency is exactly what you're gonna do if you put it on a high school, elementary, and middle school campus. I, I agree. And as you know, the Fayette County Schools has not allowed a single cell tower on any of their property in Fayette County. And, and that's one of the reasons. Obviously, they feel an overriding concern on this one. I don't want to speak for them, but it was enough that, um, they're changing their policy for this location. So health and safety of the kids is important until we get to this location, or- The daily health and safety of everyone at that facility is very important to them. S- Okay. Well, I'm asking the wrong person about changing that policy. Thank you. Um, but, um, first I guess I would ask, are you planning to have any public meetings to discuss this with the public in that area? Yes. And, and the parents? Yes, we are. Um, I guess offline, I'd like to set a meeting up with you and whoever it is in the school system that you're negotiating with- Yep. ... and go from there. Very well. Thank you. Let me, let me ask a couple of questions about the timing of all of this. What sorts of issues are we looking at now in terms of timing? Well, the tight timeline is obviously for the July of next year. Um, and we have set up, uh, a phase one and actually the whole project, but the phase one is, is our initial goal, so we can get coverage at the horse park and get our interoperability. Um, to do that, we actually need to move forward rather quickly, actually beginning of October, um, which means we just need to get the contract with Harris approved so they can move forward with their obligations. The funding, which is two other a- aspects, um, uh, needs to move forward as well, but we don't have any funding obligations to them until a month after the contract is initiated. So they... Actually, if we can get the contract immediately moving forward, they can start working, and if we figure out the funding... Obviously, with any contract with Irwin County government, if the funding co- doesn't come through, the contract is null and void. Uh, we are on a very tight timeline. Uh, we, we started on this over, several months ago, but as in all negotiations, you know, it goes back and forth. So we were hoping to be here about two work sessions ago, uh, but we're, we were not able to meet that timeline. Well, I guess what I'm ultimately trying to get around to is, does the request that Council Member Stennett create timing problems that, uh, uh- ... we need to factor in, in some fashion or no? I believe it d- it does. I mean, if we can go ahead and, and to address his concerns, maybe get that ... When is this coming up for next, this Thursday? And I don't wanna speak for Bill and, and how fast the financing is working out or get the information you need, but we, we are on a very tight timeline to get by July. Um, and the contract's one issue and the, the funding is anothe- another. Well, I guess what I'm, I'm trying to find out is, is it helpful in terms of your construction and implementation schedule, generally speaking, if we advance this to first reading on Thursday night, while we get the information together for review, is it next week or ... Like ... Okay. Um, I'm trying to think who, Mr. Mayor, if you could step forward maybe if we get, uh, everybody involved here, we can work through this. I guess the question is, what kind of time do you need to prepare the information Council Member Stennit requested? Uh, Mayor, it sounds like I need to have everything ready Tuesday. A week from today, right? Huh? A week from today? Yes. Yeah, a week from today. I, I don't think I can make the Thursday deadline for the Tuesday packet. Ah, okay. He can recommend the 2nd. Well, if ... I'm thinking through the schedule here, our next council meeting is on the 1st. This one after that's on the 15th. Between now and the 15th, when we get to second reading, we'd have ample opportunity, I think, to address the issues that you're interested in addressing and then make a decision on the 15th one way or the other. Is that fair? Well, I mean, that's only one issue that I have. I mean, we gotta figure out how we're gonna pay for it before we move it forward. Sure. I mean, the, the second issue is I'm not sure why we're not competitively bidding the whole new system. I mean, I know that's gonna take time, but I think that's a real opportunity. We don't know how much that will cost. It could cost less than 16 million, a whole new system. That, that's, that's an entirely different- Right. ... issue. That's the second issue I have, though. Okay. Um, well, I guess what I'm, I'm wondering is, if we can get it on the docket for first reading and then have a presentation next, uh, Tuesday at work session on the financing issues, um, would that be acceptable for purposes of moving it along? And why not, if it isn't? W- I, I guess, you know, as a member of the public safety link, I mean, we're just hearing about this today. We got it as part of our packet a few days ago and evidently they've been negotiating this for months and this is the first that we've heard about these negotiations. It wasn't mentioned to us. We didn't go through the budget process too terribly long ago, so, um, I think it's not too unreasonable for us to delay this and get all the information that we need instead of moving it forward personally. Thank you. All right. Council Member Lane. Uh, yes, and David, I just want a couple of follow-up questions that sort of came up after the other questions. Um, normally, how long, uh, does one of the phones, uh, work, assuming there's no governmental obsolescence involved? How long, how many years can, uh, one of those phones be operational? Oh, one of the radio handsets? Yes, sir. Um, we have handsets that we had 10 years ago, when we originally went to the 800. Now we're running out of parts, but that's how long they lasted. The, the new ones, uh, actually have a five-year warranty and we expect them to last longer than that. Okay. Um, do you normally have, uh, money in your budget each year for the replacement of phones? So the money that we're spending here, is that gonna be offset any by what you would normally budget in the ... Um, uh, actually I w- I'll defer to police and fire because they have, uh, replaced their units within their own budget. Good afternoon. Hello. The, the funds that we use in, in, at the Division of Police, uh, come from repair and maintenance funds that we use to repair those handhelds and subscriber units, uh, when they break. Uh, we contract through, uh, various service agreements to repair those radios. New purchases, uh, uh, are either purchased through optional funding or they're bonded. Would ... I think that af- that would be good information to have, maybe what you're spending annually and, you know, maybe over the last four or five years for, uh, repairs and replacements, because that will, if we're getting a- a lot of new stuff, it, maybe that would defer some of that expense. And I guess that would also apply to fire. Do, does fire wanna address it too? Good evening. Uh, no, we do not have a line item budget for purchasing new radios. Um, anything we do is mainly a replacement. If one breaks, we will buy a replacement or when we purchase a new vehicle, we will generally try, attempt to buy one with it. A lot of times when we purchase a new vehicle, we will take the old radio from the ve- vehicle we're retiring and we place it in the brand new vehicle. Uh, as far as a replacement schedule, we don't have one of those. Um, and like I said, there's no line item budget, so ... ... um, one of the big problems we are facing is the parts availability. Uh, most of our units, as of January 1st of 2010, the factory no longer supports, well, the factory-supported parts for the majority of the units we have in service today. Okay. And was the fire department in- uh, involved in the decision to look at the system that's being recommended and are y'all happy with that approach? Yes, we have been involved in that and yes, we are happy with the approach. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Um, I think that's all I have, David. Uh, thank you, Mayor. I wanna address, um, Councilman Stennis's question about, um, the sole source or why we're going with, uh, these vendors. The, um, the Harris company is actually who has the fire system now. The upgrade that we're doing to that system's actually already was bid out, um, by Madison County, so we're actually buying off of their contract. So similar to buying off a state contract, we are buying... just like we buy off UK's contract. Or and we have, uh, in previous terms upgraded part of our fire system off of that same contract. So we did not bid it out specifically for this one, but we are buying off the contract that was bid out that Harris actually got awarded in Madison County. I don't know if that directly answered your question, but that's how we got where we are today. Council member Stent. Thank you. Well, what, what about the police side? What are they- The- Who, who's- Um- ... our vendor on that side? Um, that's Motorola and, and we're doing upgrade to theirs, their system. So is this part of the same bid with the same company, they are using Motorola? Um, no. Harris... Item I was the, um, Harris contract and on the spreadsheet, the VH, uh, eh, VHF upgrade for roughly 1.6 is with the Motorola group to upgrade, um, that network. So again, I guess my... I'm still questioning how much does it cost to buy a new system, start scratch, and how much does it cost to upgrade? First, is that cost of the upgrade. Have we looked at that at all? I mean... We did not bid it out for competitive bid to upgrade our system, just like we don't up... whenever we do an upgrade, we don't bid it out, we just do the upgrade and that's what we did. I mean, we did get a competitive price we feel through the Madison County contract. The other concern obviously, was the timeframe to get it completed before July of next year. Oh, and, and I understand that. I know we have to do this. The... we should've done it six months ago to a year. I know your urgency and I appreciate everything you've done. I just, I, I know under big projects like this, always competition and bidding will give us the best result in technology and price. Um, I agree with you, which is why we're holding back the large, even large purchase of the handhelds for that very reason. Um, but, uh, as I said, because of the timetable and we're able to buy off a competitive bid contract through Madison County, which is why we moved forward. I just feel like we're, we're being rushed again into a last minute decision that we have no other choice is what you're telling me, that if we do bid it out and put it competitive, then we'll miss our Ju- our July deadline. You're correct. If, if w- if we move the deadline... if we move even further back, we will not be a- be able to be compatible by July. Thank you, Mayor. Council member Beard. Thank you, Mayor. Uh, David, you mentioned buying off of the Madison County contract. Yes, sir. Then that does not come to council, that activity in and of itself? Of buying off of their contract? Mm-hmm. I believe that has come before, is that correct? Yeah, we, we have already come to council in the past and got permission to buy off of their contract for a previous upgrade on our system. But what about this one? Uh, this is... we're using the same contract for this upgrade. That's what we're asking you to do, uh, today, Council member Beard, is approve the contract with Harris, so we are coming to you today and asking for your approval. Okay. It just doesn't mention here, at least, what we have- It said... It's item... I think it's item I on new business. Yeah. The purchase contract with Harris Corporation. On page four and then, uh, the memo's on page 32 of the packet. Yes, but un- unless I've missed it, I see nothing about Madison County in these two, H and I. Th- the I contract, which you're approving was originally off the Madison County contract, which actually is about this thick. I got in the back of the room, but what we're approving is the number of items we are purchasing. Um, Madison County got 12 towers, we're only getting three. So the changes are the quantities, not the base price on those. Madison- Okay. Thank you. Council member Beard. Council member Myers. Thank you, thank you, Mayor. Um, could you stay up for a second and then, could, Logan, could you come up? I asked a question to, um, Mr. Askew, Mr. Askew, um, what form of motion I would have to make. My, my intent is to make a motion that would prohibit the placement of any of these towers until and unless the, the actual location comes back before this council for approval. And the purpose of that is I don't want that tower going up at Fayette County or, or at Tates Creek without this council having some say in that before it's done. So, uh, Mr. Askew, is that a resolution that we would do? I think you could do it that way or you... Mr. Lucas may say, I think he's already indicated, he would come back to you and, uh, seek your authorization on that. I- Well, I mean -- This is -- ... once there's a placement, but if you want a resolution, that would be appropriate. I think -- That would be the appropriate way to do, handle it. Okay. I want to do the resolution 'cause there's a little bit of difference between LTCG property and the school system property. That's right. And so I don't want to get lost in that. So I guess I move to have you draft a resolution that require, that would require that before any of these towers can be placed at a specific location, that location has to come back to the council for approval. All right, we should do that. So moved. Second. Yeah. Well, is the motion to place that resolution on the docket for Thursday night's meeting, or -- Yes. ... something else? Okay. Yes. All right. The motion is to add a resolution to the docket for Thursday evening's meeting that would require council approval of, um, antenna locations. Right? Yeah. Any discussion on that motion? The motion was seconded by Councilmember Gordon. Um, any discussion? All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, no? Motion carries. We'll get it out to you. Thank you. Thank you, David. Councilmember Crosby. Yeah, I'd -- I'm also hung up on this Madison County, uh ... I've got the blue sheet, and it, would it say, would, or would it have to say, in what we're able to see here, I don't see anything in what we're able to look at with any agreements about, um, buying off the contract with Madison County. I mean, I'm looking at what we're provided with our blue sheet. Yeah. One second. You want to handle ............................ I'm sorry, Councilmember Crosby. I'm looking at our system purchase contract -- Mm-hmm. ... between Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government Fire and the Harris Corporation, what was blue sheeted. Mm-hmm. And I don't see anything about Madison County in here. So I guess I'm just a little confused where ... I, I guess it's confusing to us how that plays in, where this is what we have to see -- Right. And- Well, this is the actual contract, which I did not put in the packet. Okay. Which, which would outline ... So I, I can make that available to you. Obviously, I didn't want to present- Or at least that section? Yes. Thank you. Does anyone have anything further for Mr. Lucas? Councilmember Lane. I'd like the commissioner come up and just, uh, speak to the issue for a second. I mean, you've reviewed this too. Do you have a comment on it? Yeah, and, and that's why I was supportive of getting it on the, um, the agenda for today and asking you to put it on the docket for Thursday night. I'd like you to keep in mind two very important deadlines. At, at least one of 'em is important to us. The other one's gonna be important because the, the federal government's imposing it on us. But one is to get phase one done before the World Equestrian Games next year. We think it's critical that we upgrade our system, that we have better capabilities, and that we have capabilities for agencies to talk to each other. Uh, there's gonna be a lot of coordination necessary during that period of time, and, and it's very important, uh, from our perspective that we at least get phase one of this project done by then. The second deadline that David mentioned is January of 2013. We're gonna have to do this anyway. We're gonna have to revamp our entire system, uh, to, to be able to comply with the FCC requirements at that time. As David mentioned, it's very similar to what happened with the digital TV conversion. They set a deadline, extended it once, and then people had to comply by that date at their own, uh, expense. The broadcasters had to convert at their own expense. Uh, the same as the, the, uh, requirement they're imposing on governments to convert the radio systems, uh, to the new narrowbanding requirements. So while on the narrowbanding side we might be able to delay a year, if that was our only deadline, we're still gonna have to get it done. And it's still gonna cost what it costs to be able to get it done. So delaying is not gonna avoid those costs. Uh, and in the bigger scheme of things, if we're looking at how that fits into our debt package, it's still gonna be there. We're still gonna have to pay the debt service, so we can't load up the front end with doing other projects and then wait a year or two to, to fund this one. Uh, we think strategically overall it fits in. Uh, I, I realize there's gonna be some pain in deciding what other projects may not be funded, or how to fund other projects in an alternative way. Uh, but I think with, with our scheduled objectives, as well as the, the, uh, requirement that the federal government's gonna impose on us, we think it's prudent for us to go ahead and move forward at this time. Thank you. You're welcome. Anything further? All right. As it stands now, um, in the absence of a motion, neither item I nor ... There's J or H. H. Nine? H or I will, um, be on the docket on, on, uh, Thursday evening. So we'll roll ahead. Uh, we're ready for council reports. Um, Councilmember Gordon. Thank you, Mayor. Um, a couple of items. Um, we all heard the presentation from Charlie Martin, and I wanted to, uh, be sure folks know that the next Water Quality Incentives Group will meet October 9th at 9:30 at the town branch wastewater treatment plant. Um, and to remind councilmembers that we have two confirmation hearings coming up. On October 1st at 6:00 will be our confirmation hearing for Linda Rumpke, uh, nominated as Commissioner of Finance. And then October 15th at 6:30 PM, our confirmation hearing for LaToya Mayo, who's been nominated to the Ethics Commission. And then I wanted to thank Tom, Council Member Tom Blues, for co-chairing the, uh, joint planning workshop this morning in my absence. Thank you. Thanks. Council Member Feigl. Thank you, Mayor. I just move to approve the Neighborhood Development Fund list. Second. I have a motion by Council Member Feigl and a second by Council Member Myers to approve the NDF. Any discussion? All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Council Member Blues. Thank you, Mayor. Uh, the, uh, the annual Lexington-Fayette, uh, Environmental Commission, uh, awards have been announced, and I want to congratulate, uh, two neighborhoods in the 2nd District. The, uh, Historic Western Suburb, uh, has received, uh, one of 10 awards, and that's for, uh, planting of trees, uh, the, uh, uh, the purchase and decoration and, and distribution of rain barrels and for refuse collection program. And then in the Certificate of Appreciation category, the McConnell's Trace Neighborhood and Greenway Committee has, has received that recognition for, uh, for their program of greenway improvements in the, in the neighborhood. And, and these awards and, and, and recognitions will be, uh, uh, will be made at the, uh, October 23rd Green Breakfast, and I, again, congratulations to both neighborhoods for, for these distinctions. Some announcements. Uh, tomorrow evening at 6:30 PM, uh, I will be hosting, uh, the, uh, uh, the first, uh, Second District Neighborhood Association Presidents meeting of the, of the season. That will, uh, that will take place at the Community Center in Oakwood Park. Uh, socializing begins at 6:30, and, uh, and the meeting itself will commence at 7:00 PM. I'm looking forward to seeing Second District, uh, leaders, uh, tomorrow evening. Next Monday, October 5th, the Georgetown Neighborhood Association will hold its monthly meeting at 6:00 PM at the O'Rear Center in Douglas Park, and then at 7:00 PM, Green Acres/Hollow Creek/Breckenridge Neighborhood Association will meet in the Community Center in Green Acres Park. And just an additional note to, uh, today, since 8:00 AM, the Federal Bureau of Prisons', uh, 2009 Career Fair has been in, in progress. Uh, there are a variety of career opportunities available in the Federal Bureau of Prisons System, uh, both in Lexington and throughout the, uh, throughout the nation. That Career Fair will continue, uh, tonight until, until 8:00 PM, so, uh, if, if you are, uh, interested and curious, uh, and, and, and, and looking for an employment upgrade or new employment, uh, I certainly, uh, certainly recommend you, you, you take in this, uh, uh, this job and career fair. That's at the Federal Medical Center at 3301 Leestown Road, just past Masterson Station Park. Thank you, Mayor, that's my report. Council Member Wallace. Thank you, Mayor. Um, I was wondering if, I, I know I've asked this before, but if we could have some kinda update on the library audit, how long it might take. It seems like it's been going on for- And I provided you with an update, and the feedback from the auditors were that they were going to proceed deliberately and as expeditiously as possible, but they had no timeframe within which to say the report would be complete. Okay. Um, the other thing I wanted to do is there is a problem on the corner of Main and Vine. There's no pedestrian crosswalk there, and I would like to refer that to Services Committee to explore. Where at Main and Vine? Uh, where- Which, which place? It comes together two places. Okay, where? On the west or east end? Now, let's see. Over there by the Civic Center. I don't know my directions. That's the west end. Okay, and the cross- Remember, we were the best city west of the Mississippi, so. So, so the cross, are you talking about the crosswalk from the Victorian Square shops to the- No. ... Civic Center? You know how you turn, take a turn left on Vine, I mean, on Main, and it goes into Vine? Mm-hmm. That's where I'm talking about. Okay. All right. Um, Commissioner Webb, could you ask the folks in traffic engineering to take a look at that crosswalk and perhaps give us an update- Uh- ... as, as soon as they reasonably can? They, I have spoken with them, and they don't seem to think it's an issue. However, I've had several complaints about it, and I drove it myself and could understand why it would be dangerous there. That's why I was gonna send it to Services Committee. I'm sorry. Did, did you make a motion to send it to Services Committee? I'd like to move to send it to Services Committee. That's fine. Do I hear a second? Council Member Hinson has seconded that motion. All, any discussion? All in favor of referring that item to the Services Committee, please let it be known by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. That's all. Thank you so much. Council Member Martin. Thank you, Mayor. Uh, I had a wonderful meeting last night with neighbors around the, uh, the Springs Inn in Southland Drive, and, uh, to look at the, uh, uh, the procedures for demolition of the Springs Inn and issues relating to that. Uh, the owners of the Springs Inn were there and their representatives, the representative from the demolition crew, uh, and also representatives from the city, and I just appreciate all the folks for showing up, and I appreciate the owners of the Springs for, for making their time available. Also met last night with the Palomar Neighborhood Association and, uh, Commissioner Webb, uh, joined me there to discuss, uh, the city's schedule for rating and for prioritizing the repaving of roads, and particularly appreciating, uh, Commissioner Webb for, for coming out last night and, uh, uh, helping us talk to the Palomar Neighborhood Association. Uh, Mayor, I would like to move that an ordinance amending section 4-2, uh, sub A of the Code of Ordinances Relating to the Care and Treatment of Animals be referred to the Services Committee. I have a motion. I have a motion and second to refer that item to the Services Committee. Discussion? Mayor, if I just might explain. Uh, the, uh, the, the, the council adopted a, a, an amendment to the animal, uh, cruelty ordinance, um, uh, just before I think the session ended in, in, in June or July. Uh, I had some comments about the, uh, uh, some what I thought were technical defects with the, uh, the, the writing of that, uh, that ordinance. I'd like to put that into services so we can get that cleaned up, so that, uh, perhaps we would have a, a, a, a sort of a, a clean, viable, uh, animal cruelty ordinance in time for the World Equestrian Games. Any further discussion on the motion to refer? All in favor... Council Member Myers? Thank you, Mayor. Um, Councilman, for some clarification, are you talking about changing or amending the ordinance with respect to what we passed already or are you talking about the second issue that you had that didn't have an ordinance in place for horses, I believe? Um, uh, thank you, um, um, Council Member Myers. The, uh, um, this is simply an attempt to clean up what we passed in, in I guess early July or late June. Uh, this does not, at least my... this particular effort doesn't attempt to revamp the entire ordinance or to pass or, or to, to, uh, uh, address the, uh, the, the real lack of a suitable ordinance for, for equine. Um, but, uh, the... and I made some, lots of comments and noises at the time we passed this, uh, and at present, the way I read it anyway, in, in order to, uh, to keep a horse in Fayette County, you had to keep it in a doghouse. And so I would like, uh, I think in order for us to be prepared for the, for the world as it comes by, I'd like to at least get this cleaned up. And I certainly would entertain, you know, trying to have a more comprehensive ordinance 'cause I think we need one, but I would certainly like to get this one cleaned up. I think some very minor changes, but I think service is the place to do that. Okay, thank you. Is Mr. Horn... I think Mr. Horne drafted... Are you... I didn't come down here to- You look like you were just jumping at the chance to come up to the microphone and say something this afternoon. Um, a- and you're off guard, and I realize that, and you haven't studied this ordinance, um, before you came down here today. Could you maybe speak a little bit to... I understand that councilman had some concerns with the way the, the ordinance was written. I disagreed at the time. Um, there was some language that you put in there that it may seem to be contradictory, but it was based on the fact that we had state statute at KRS that we had to deal with as well as local law. Well, let me interject here for a moment. Before we go any further, the motion on the floor is to refer it to a committee. Well- So our conversation needs to be tied to whether or not it is wise or unwise to refer this item to committee right now, as opposed to the substance of the, of the ordinance. I, I understand, and I agree with you 100%. The reason that I asked the question though was because if it's just to get at the language that Councilman Martin thought wasn't the best that it could be, then I'm, then I'm not gonna support putting it in committee, because I think we had set out before and I don't think there's anything wrong with the ordinance. If there is a real issue with if you're gonna keep a horse, you have to keep it in the doghouse, which I'm not sure about that, if that's really the case, then that does need to go into committee, in my view. There may be disagreements about that particular language, but I think what we have now provided to Mr. Martin, there's not going to be any major controversy over, if that helps any. It's a minor adjustment to the definitions for adequate shade and adequate shelter. And that's all it is at this point, is adjusting those definitions basically to make a distinction between dogs and other animals. Okay. Thank you. Mr. Martin, is that sort of in fact in line with what you want to put in the committee for? Basically, I'm asking will you narrow your scope in the committee to that? I, I have not had the opportunity to read Mr., Mr. Horne's draft, uh, and, uh, but, but I believe that is the, uh, the essence of what we're trying to do is, is the definitions, um, and I apologize, Mayor, but the, the question was asked, but the, the definitions, it basically says you, you, you have to provide animals sh- food, water, and shelter, that kind of thing. You look back at the definition of shelter, it says basically things for a doghouse. Uh, and, um, and, and I... There, there are room for various interpretations, but in, in, in, in legal writing that you want something very sort of clear, and, and, and I don't think this does any abuse to the, to the ordinance to, to, to try to fix it. Okay. Thank you. I will support your motion. Thank you. All right. Any further discussion on the motion to refer to Services Committee as I recall? All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Councilma-- Anything further? Council Member Myers. All right. Um, I see no further council reports. I do have, uh, a group of nominations for, uh, approval for the docket on Thursday evening. A motion to approve those recommendations would be in order. Do I hear a motion? So moved. Second. Thank you. Have a motion by Council Member Stennet and a second by Council Member Lane to approve the mayor's report. Uh, discussion? Council Member Gordon. Uh, Mayor, um, LaToya Mayo's confirmation hearing isn't until the 15th, so do -- I think we should pull her- Could we, could we approve it subject to, uh, the confirmation? Well, it'll get approved Thursday- Yeah. ... if we do that. But approve it subject to the confirmation. Approve it ahead of time before the confirmation? I- Subject, subject to your confirmation. I would not support that. All right. Are you moving to withdraw- Yes. All right. Motion is to withdraw, uh, Ms. Mayo's name from the list, uh, because of the confirmation hearing. Is there a second? Second. Have a second. Any discussion? All in favor of that amendment, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Oppose no. Motion. Council Member... Uh, the motion carries. Council Member James. Thanks, Mayor. Um, there was, I don't, I didn't bring the report down with me. There was, uh, one recommendation that was someone that did not reside in Fayette County. Right. Did you want to talk about that a little bit and... Well, Robert Crofton was nominated for the Ethics Commission. Okay. And we didn't catch his out of county residence- Okay. ... until after the report had been, uh, circulated. So that's the reason why his name was withdrawn and Ms. Mayo's was substituted. Okay. Thank you. Actually, I think she might be referring to the Social Services Advisory Board. Oh, yeah, this- Uh, Grace Akers, who resides in Louisville. Is that the one you're talking about? Because- One I'm talking about, yes. I had the same- All right. ... um, actual comment 'cause I know we've discussed this on various occasions on... We have discussed this on several occasions. I have spoken with, um, Commissioner Helm and asked her if she would be here to discuss this one with you. She felt strongly that this was an, a person who was very important to this particular board. And, um, unfortunately, she is not in the building to discuss it with you. So it's really, um, someone who works apparently in, in Lexington, drives back and forth, but does reside in Louisville. I make a motion that we- Second. ... withdraw that name at this time. Second. All right. Uh, motion and second to withdraw the name of, help me, Grace- Akers. Akers. Um, any discussion? All in favor say aye. Aye. Oppose no. Motion carries. Now that takes us down to the Housing Authority Board recommendation. Um, those in favor... Uh, any further discussion on that recommendation? Then those in favor of approving the mayor's report for the Housing Authority Board, please indicate by saying aye. Oppose no. Motion carries. Um, we're down now to, oh, one other thing. A couple of Fridays ago, I had the good pleasure of, uh, riding with one of our police officers, uh, Officer Steve McCowan. We, uh, uh, worked, eh, or traveled through his beat in, um, the central sector. He was a credit to our community. He was a delight to, uh, ride with and, um, when all of a sudden, we stopped a couple of people who had just stolen a purse with a sizable amount of cash in it, he took control of the situation as you would hope he would, and, uh, he did an outstanding job. Um, I just wanted to, uh, encourage members of the council and others who may be watching to give some consideration to the prospects of doing a ride along with our police officers. You never know exactly what you're going to encounter, but that's the nature of their job. And if you have the opportunity to do that, I would highly recommend it. It is, uh, an enlightening experience in many ways, and, and, uh, Commissioner, if you would relay my compliments to Officer McCowan for job well done, both in terms of, uh, making the arrest that needed to be made and, and serving as a good host too. With that said, we're ready for public comments. The only person I have, um, indicating a desire to speak is Mr. Cobb. If you'd come to the podium, Mr. Cobb. You'll have three minutes. Peace and love to the council. First give love to the most High. I really didn't want to speak today, but I was hoping that I could get proven wrong. As I look at the advertisements for the, uh, Only Downtown, I don't see no Blacks. And I know this might be an oversight, but we gonna have to do something about that. I was hoping that I'd get proven wrong. Prove me wrong. I'm here today to show love. I want to, uh, express the urgency of what we fillin'. As we get prepared for the 2010 Equestrian Games, we got to be at our best. And we are not at our best if we're not utilizing all of our citizens. We got people who can work. I got ideas that we can implement. I've been talking to you, Mayor, for almost two, three years. I don't know what's going on, but I need your help. I got a mandate from Pierce Lyons to shine, put the spotlight on Lexington, and I'm gonna do that. I don't want to operate in hate. I want to flow in love, but I'm gonna need all y'all's help. Show me some love. I need to see some results. I'm on the street every day. I hear complaining, I hear bickerness, but I refuse to be a part of that. Imma be the difference maker. We have to have a dialogue. Y'all don't even know what we need. We preparing for 2010, we need something for our young people today. We need something for 'em tomorrow. I beg you, show me some love. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Cobb. Does anyone else wish to address the Council? Council Member Lawless. Excuse me, um, Mr. Cobb, I didn't catch the name of the magazine, or... Did you say Only Lexington? The... Or... An advertisement? Oh, okay. I'm sorry. I, I'm... Okey-dokey. Thank you. Do I hear a motion that we go into closed session? So moved. Counc- Council Member Hinson. Mayor, I move that we go into closed session pursuant KRS 618101C for the purpose of discussing proposed litigation. I have a motion by Council Member Hinson, second by Council Member Crosby. Any discussion? All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. The motion carries. ... publishing and to seek other appropriate relief. So moved. Second. Any discussion? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? Do I hear a motion to adjourn? So moved. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Thank you.