# Council Planning Committee - November 24, 2009 > Auto-transcribed civic record · Council · November 24, 2009 - **Permalink**: https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/meeting/1133 - **Source video**: https://lfucg.granicus.com/player/clip/1133?view_id=14&redirect=true - **Date**: 2009-11-24 - **Body**: Council - **Last revised**: June 18, 2026 - **Length**: 12,642 words > ⚠️ **Auto-generated content.** Audio from the official Granicus video was auto-transcribed by OpenAI Whisper-1. Structured facts were extracted with GPT-4o; the narrative summary was written by Anthropic Claude Sonnet. Speaker labels and verbatim wording may contain errors. See [methodology](https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/about/methodology) or [report a correction](mailto:editor@lexingtonky.news). --- ## Meeting Overview The Planning Committee convened on November 24, 2009, at 1:00 P.M., with Madam Chair presiding over the session. The meeting addressed two agenda items, both of which were informational in nature: a presentation on an IT system linking Building Inspection and Code Enforcement, and a review of Student Housing Task Force Recommendations. Over the course of the meeting, five motions were brought forward and voted upon. No public comments were heard during the session. ## Attendance All ten council members were present at the November 24, 2009 Council meeting. No members were recorded as absent or late. **Members Present:** - Gorton - Blues - Gray - Ellinger - James - Lawless - Beard - Feigel - Stinnett - McChord ## Votes and Decisions The Council considered five motions during the November 24, 2009 meeting, covering building inspection, rental licensing, and student housing topics. - **Building Inspection Task Force Assignment** [timestamp: 30:10]: Moved by Dr. Blues, the Council voted by voice to assign to the building inspection task force the issue of a safety inspection process, including matters related to code enforcement, building inspection, and fire. The motion **passed**. - **Motion to Not Adopt Rental Licensing Ordinance** [timestamp: 42:48]: Council Member Ellinger moved to not adopt the rental licensing ordinance. This motion was subsequently **withdrawn** before a vote was taken. - **Motion to Adopt Rental Licensing Ordinance** [timestamp: 49:30]: Council Member Ellinger moved, and Council Member Feigel seconded, a motion to adopt the rental licensing ordinance. The motion was decided by voice vote and **failed**. - **Endorsement of Student Housing and Partnership Program** [timestamp: 1:10:17]: Moved by Council Member Feigel, the Council voted by voice to endorse the concept of the Student Housing and Partnership Program. The motion **passed**. - **Residential Zoning Review — Definition of Family and Parking** [timestamp: 1:14:07]: Moved by Council Member Stinnett, the Council voted by voice to address the definition of family and the parking issue when reviewing residential zoning laws. The motion **passed**. All decided votes were conducted by voice, and no individual roll call tallies were recorded. The rental licensing ordinance was the only item that failed, following the withdrawal of an initial counter-motion on the same subject. ## Contested Items - **Rental Licensing Ordinance** — The council considered a motion to adopt a rental licensing ordinance, which ultimately failed due to a split vote among council members. The divided outcome indicates that members were not in agreement on whether to move forward with the ordinance, though the specific arguments made by individual members for or against adoption are not detailed in the available record. The failed vote means the ordinance was not adopted at this meeting. ## IT System Linking Building Inspection & Code Enforcement [timestamp: 07:24] Phillip Stifel presented an overview of a proposed IT system designed to link the building inspection and code enforcement functions. The presentation was informational in nature, covering the system's anticipated benefits, associated costs, and related projects connected to the initiative. No vote or formal action was taken on this item; it was brought before the Council as an informational presentation only. *Note: Additional details regarding the specific benefits cited, cost figures, related projects discussed, and any questions or concerns raised by Council members are not available in the provided source data.* ## Student Housing Task Force Recommendations [timestamp: 26:20] The Council took up Agenda Item 2, a discussion of recommendations from the Student Housing Task Force, covering topics including rental licensing, safety inspections, and the SHIP program. Key speakers in the discussion included Mike Moizer, Dr. Blues, and Council Member Ellinger. The item was informational in nature, meaning no formal vote or binding decision was taken at this meeting. The structured data available for this item does not include a detailed breakdown of the specific positions each speaker took, the particular concerns raised about rental licensing or safety inspections, or the specifics of what the SHIP program entails as discussed at this meeting. Readers seeking the full substance of the debate are encouraged to consult the meeting video beginning at approximately the 26:20 mark. The outcome of the agenda item was informational, indicating the Council received the Task Force's recommendations for consideration rather than acting on them at this session. --- ## Decisions - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Assign to the building inspection task force the issue of a safety inspection process, including issues related to code enforcement, building inspection and fire. - **Motion** — withdrawn (0-0): Motion to not adopt the rental licensing ordinance. - **Motion** — failed (0-0): Motion to adopt the rental licensing ordinance. - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Endorse the concept of the Student Housing and Partnership Program. - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Address the definition of family and parking issue when reviewing residential zoning laws. --- ## Full transcript Thank you very much for your patience. Today is November 24th, and this is the planning committee meeting, and we now have a quorum. And so, um, we will go ahead and follow our agenda. The first item on the agenda, council members, as you recall, last meeting we asked IT to come before us and give a brief presentation about the, uh, IT system that will link building inspection and code enforcement. And so, our, uh, our own Phillip Stifel- Yes. ... will give us a 10-minute, right? You gonna put me on the clock? T- I am. 10-minute presentation, just kind of a, an introduction to the issue and where we are on it. So, thanks for being here. Okay. Uh, you don't have handouts. Uh, we were, we were set to come and then taken off and back on, so there are some hard copies if you'd like them. I'll just jump right in. For, for terms of definition, in government, we, we kick around a lot of words, but mostly we've been calling this solution, this application, a CRM. In the private sector, CRM stands for, uh, Customer Relations Management, but, uh, could also, in terms of local government, we can refer to it as Citizen Relationship Management. But, uh, the enterprise solution, enterprise for the government, for what I would like to consider the operating portions of government, not the back office, but this is more the front office. But we're talking about data management, reporting on data, case management, whether it's Lex call, um, code enforcement cases, workflow, how things flow through, sign-offs, approvals. Uh, it's a solution that would help us with our field inspections, whether you're code, uh, perhaps, um, water quality inspectors, of course permittees as far as building permits. Also provides transparency to the public, access via the web, some IVR technology where people can call in and gain access or status of their request. Generally, these programs obviously have a 311 component. Uh, we currently have a Lex call application here, but most of them come with an integrated 311 so we can manage, just like the case management work order service requests. And then also, it's not just, um, a database, but it's address-centric and it, it integrates with the GIS system. So, I was asked to come here today to give you an update on where we are with the building inspection, code enforcement, and planning. Uh, those, those divisions generally wh- in talking about CRMs, no matter what package you're talking about, the- they, they're generally, all those are under land management. Different local governments have those divisions organized differently. Sometimes they're all in the same department. Some, like ours, were in different departments, but mostly they're all involved with land management. So, what I'm just gonna discuss briefly today, this is just, uh, an outline of what we're gonna cover. Um, what our findings were, uh, what we've been planning. Uh, definitely need to have a discussion about water quality. They have a pl- uh, a role to play in this. The benefits of the system, some estimated costs, and some related projects that we've, that we've been involved with. All right, obviously, management partners who produced their, uh, their audit, and all those numbers up there were recommendations that apply to why I'm here today. Um, some of them fell under the building inspection. Some of them fell under planning, some of them under computer services, and some under PI- uh, public information with Lex call. But the, but the recommendations for a common system all tied... they kept referring to the term property-based. So, we're talking about building inspection, code enforcement, planning, and Lex call, and how we manage data. They, the management report, um, suggested, you know, reporting, uh, efficient case management, and tracking of all those items. Um, at one point, we, uh, had a subscription to a company called Gartner. They're an IT research and advisory partner. We no longer have that subscription. We've, uh, we've dropped that. But while we had them, I took, we took advantage of their services and, and contacted them to gauge, uh- ... with what research they had available, what were the best practices, methodology, and strategy for implementing one of these enterprise systems. They'd done it several times. They assisted. When I, when I contacted them, the, what I put forward to them was not just the divisions we're here talking about today, but mostly all of government. There were overall, there were 12 divisions, but they included beyond what we're talking, we included streets and roads, engineering, water quality, waste management, Lex call GIS. And they provided us with a plan to assist us, and they estimated that it would cost approximately 250 to $500,000 to define the requirements, complete the scope, develop the RFP, and they even went a step further where they could help us in the vendor selection process and contract negotiations. While all that was going on, we were also involved in an IT strategy, aligning ourself and our mission with the government's mission. This was also a recommendation of the management audit. Uh, that IT strategy, I believe, is available as well. You can see it, but just in general, our plan for 2009, we wanted to gather requirements, define the scope, and generate an RFP for the water quality asset management. And I'll have a slide on that in a minute, but that's what we've been doing, you know, the last year and this year. Plan for 2010 was to develop the scope for building inspection, code enforcement and planning, and we refer to that as phase one. Um, 2011 would be to implement phase one, and also scope the remaining divisions. That would be HP, maybe waste management, engineering, traffic engineering. And then 2012 would be that final implementation. As I mentioned, water quality plays a, a large role in this, because at the same time, as we were doing our IT plan and trying to understand what's involved in implementing it, an enterprise CRM, the division of water quality was actively searching for an asset management solution. So, there were a lot of timing issues, there were budget limitations. I mean, ideally, we would have wanted to move forward together as one at the risk of, um, identifying and perhaps acquiring different solutions and systems and have integration problems later. But we did need to move forward with water quality, so we did complete the requirements, we did generate the scope, RFP was created, and we, uh, we went through a vendor selection process with the vision, understanding, you know, the, the enterprise need and the recommendations of the audit of the management report. So, just recently, we have ex- we have, ah, selected Axcela to Government Solutions, they are an enterprise solution. Again, this is just for water qualities, asset management. The cost is approximately 1.6 million. We anticipate kicking this project off late winter, early spring of 2010. Um, it'll be a 12-month implementation, and we are actively attempting to include the 311 module with that. We would have to scope that, but, um, we see this as an opportunity to bring Lex call on board with this system. Water quality selection certainly has an impact on the selection of future modules as we move forward with other divisions. Um, for those of you that are interested in that product I mentioned, I do have some, some materials back in the back if you'd like me to, if you'd like to see those. But we did choose a s- a solution at water quality that is expandable. It does have land management modules, it does provide citizen access, it does have a 311 component, and it does have wireless features for field inspectors. And of course, there is GIS integration. With the benefits, which is why we were asked to come here, the biggest benefit is it can pl- it can, it, it provides a complete picture of all the things that we do related to a specific address. Um, I mean, the address is probably the single most important entity. I mean, those are, those are our customers. Most things that we do on the operational side of government go to an address, whether it's citations, inspections, permits, emergency services. So the benefit is that we can effectively communicate amongst ourselves. Um, I know one of the big thing is, you know, being able to do that, you know, violators or consistent violators, we can restrict them from getting approvals through other places that are monitored and managed in other, other solutions. Where a benefit would be that we can meet the agency's needs through a standardized product. Obviously, management report pointed out that we've got these silos of applications and it's very difficult to integrate those. Um, from an IT standpoint, the maintenance of a standardized system, obviously, there's a lot of- there's a benefit to that, as well as training. And lastly, well, not lastly, there are many benefits, but the main one is our customer service. It provides transparency to the citizen or the customer, whether you're an applicant trying to identify the status of your permit. Estimated costs. Um, first let me state that the phases and timelines that I've presented and going to present, you know, it makes the assumption that funding is available. Obviously, in uncertain times, it, you know, we just, we will address things as we come to them. But again, these costs that I'll be discussing apply now just to code enforcement, building inspection, and planning, that land management module. These numbers do not include other divisions, the phase two part. But estimating $2 million, and I won't read to you, but you can see what, what those estimates would, would cover. Um, this would be a massive project. It would entail multiple business processes that span various divisions and departments. It would require a huge commitment of resources and would require a significant amount of change management. Um, other considerations when identifying that cost would be the timing of the 3-1-1 component. I mentioned we'd like to visit that now with our implementation at water quality. If we are unable to do that, we would certainly have to do it with this phase. And also, you know, just existing LFUCG resources, whether they are subject matter experts in other divisions that have to be available to us and existing IT staff. Now, last few budget cycles we've gone through exercises of budget cuts and things. And sometimes those change our plans, but there are business needs that we need to meet. So there's been some related IT projects, or I like to call them these stopgap measures. These are some things that IT has done while we work through our plan and work through our budgetary issues. Um, the first one, computer services is currently rewriting the building inspection application. It's a slow process, but it is a web-based application. Currently, the electrical and mechanical modules are completed. We are rewriting the program because the existing program, again, as the management audit reported, is built on a platform that we can no longer maintain and make changes to. So as regulatory changes come, it's difficult for us to, to apply those changes to the software. PlanTracker, this is a result of another recommendation from the audit. After the initial audit, uh, management partners returned to Lexington in the summer of 2008 to look at specific issues related to plans, submittals, approvals, tracking. Um, this is an application done internally. It also is a web application. And what this does is it, it tracks a plan as an applicant has it submitted. It tracks when it requ- gets to various sign-offs required in government. If you did sign off, when did you sign off? If you didn't, why? And it allows the applicant to check the status of those plans via the web. Code enforcement field application, we're wrapping this, this e- we're wrapping this project up. We're in our testing phases right now. This allows code enforcement's inspectors to access property and enter data in the field. It helps them complete their inspection reports and bring them back into the office, and it also provides them or will provide them with access to historical data as it relates to inspect a piece of property. And lastly, we have just issued a, a new application. It's, I would say that it's in beta. We're having some issues. We're working through those. But it's lien collections, and that's simply to move fee collections from law into revenue. If there are any questions. Thank you very much. I know that was a brief overview and I really appreciate it. I think that's what the committee wanted. And I would ask right now if any council members have questions at this point of Phillip. I don't see any. So oh- Um, Madam Chair? Wait, we have one from the vice mayor. Yeah. I may have missed the original context. Um, Brahma, was this part of the strategic, of your strategic plan? Where, where did the... Yeah, this was part of our strategic plan. We, uh, wanted to do both projects, the waste manage- uh, the water quality and this together. But due to some of the limitations we've had, we started with the water quality. Okay. So where do we take it? Where, where do we, where does this go from here? Well, our recommendation is, uh, it's in our strategic plan to gather the requirements this year. And I hope, uh, we stay focused on the timeline and start implementation in July. That's pretty much what we hope to incorporate into this upcoming budget for '011. Right now, it's not, this, these funds aren't budgeted now, right? No. To what extent does the, um, now being familiar with CRM solutions and applications, somewhat familiar with them, um, you know, a whole lot to me, a whole lot of the success depends on the culture. That's right. The operating culture. And, um, you know, the old aphorism, the old saw about automated systems, or if we automate awkward systems, we're gonna get awkward outcomes rega- regardless of the technology, of the automated technology. Absolutely. So I'm curious about that dynamic. Uh, completely agree with you. Uh, the -- that's why we need -- in the requirements gathering phase, we're gonna look at the business processes and that has to be refined. And there are delivered business processes in the system and we're gonna change ours to kind of meet what's in there because unless you do that, you don't gain the efficiencies that you're looking for. So. So part of -- so, significant activity within the scope would be -- Would be changed. ... examining the current processes. That's correct. And adjusting, right? And a focus on change management. Yeah. On how to move into that. Okay, great. Thank you, sir. Thank you. Thank you very much. And I think that the, um, im- just to put a fine point on this, the importance of this, uh, came up through the discussion of the building inspection and code enforcement, not necessarily knowing what was out there on a single property. And in the, um, context of these, uh, neighborhoods where we're having increased density, it would be helpful to have those connected. So, if there are no other questions on this item, I thank you both Rama and Phillip for, uh, bringing this back to us. Thank you very much. Um, we will move along and in our packet we'll be starting on page 12 as we continue to work our way through these, um, recommendations of the student housing task force. And I'm wondering, we're ready for number two, which is, uh, recommendation to adopt rental licensing ordinance. Um, reminding committee members what this number, uh, in parenthesis means, the student housing task force, um, went through and rated the recommendations. And so that is how many points were given to each recommendation. Which is listed right- right at the beginning of the recommendation. Uh, Mike Moizer is here, and he chaired the task force. Would you wanna give us a 60 second or 120 second recap of what this recommendation means? I appreciate your being here, Mike. Afternoon, members of the committee. I'm Mike Moizer. Um, this proposal was one that's been adopted in a number of cities around the United States. Uh, a couple of models that were brought forth that we talked about briefly, one was in Bloomington, and I can't remember the other. But the basic concept is that you create a licensing program which results, number one, in regular inspections of properties for life safety issues regardless of their classification for zoning purposes if they're used for rental purposes. Uh, the second thing that's attractive in terms of trying to lessen the government's burden of enforcement is that since you have a license, which can be suspended or revoked, you have a- a very simple way of ensuring compliance with, uh, regulations. Thank you very much. Um, council members, if you have comments, questions, et cetera, please punch in on your electronics screen. Um, Dr. Blues. Thank you Madam Chair. I... I think that this, uh, that this particular recommendation emerges from the fact that, uh, that- that as a government, there are various entities, whether the fire department, code enforcement or building inspection, we have very limited access to the rental housing units. Uh, and we do know that we have some very serious, uh, serious safety issues. For me, th- the- the issue of access and of the ability to inspect and to make sure that- that the rental units are safe and are up to code is, uh, is of paramount- paramount importance. So I wanna make a motion, uh, in, uh, in relation to that. We already have a building inspection task force, uh, chaired by, uh, Council Member Stennet and my motion will add a little work to that, uh, to that body. I move to add the following assignment to the agenda of the building inspection task force: a safety inspection process, including issues related to code enforcement, building inspection and fire. So moved. Do I hear a second? Second. So the motion on the floor is to, um, assign to the building inspection task force the issue of a safety inspection process, including issues related to code enforcement, building inspection and fire? Yes. Is that basically what- Yes. Okay. Essentially, what we're talking about here is- is- is- is we'd be asking the task force to take on the question of- of how we can- we can guarantee that a unit offered for- for, uh, for rental residence is up to code, up to standard, is safe. Thank you, Dr. Blues. Um, I'm not sure our electronic is working because I only show Dr. Blues. Oh, well, there. Thank you. Now can you, let me ask- Ms. Sutten- ... just as a technical point, can you remove ... It used to be the chair had the ability to remove a name, but it's gone. Thank you very much. Okay, Mr. Ellinger. Thank you, Chair. Yeah. I think we had a problem because I tried to have mine on earlier, and it kicked out. I wanted just to ask about the motion. I'm, I'm kinda confused. Would, would the rental licensing then be put into that committee then? The issue? Dr. Blues. The, the, uh ... If the, if the, if the task force, uh, discovered, I guess, or, or deliberated and found that, that a licensing mechanism was necessary, then they would go from there. My, what the intent of my motion is to put the, put inspection for safety issues first. How do we do that? In other words, it's, it, the, the, the safety issue is, is predominant. It's not a licensing issue for me. It's access to make sure that these units are safe. Uh, and I, and I agree. I think they need to be safe. I guess my issue then is, u- um, when we're dealing with number two that ... and it says adopt the rental licensing ordinance and ... So, uh, well, that's something we still have to look at after we're done with this motion? Or is that ... Do you think that takes care of this issue or is that separate? And will that ... Will they then bring that back to the full council? Or will they bring it back to the planning committee with Mr. Stennett's ... Are, are you chairing that, Mr. Stennett, with the building inspection? And if ... I'm presuming it's coming back to us, uh, to, as it, as a planning committee. Okay. Uh, but I guess my next question then is the issue of the rental licensing in and of itself. So, will we still have to address this as number two? Because I'm prepared- The- ... to make a motion, but if this- Again, the intent of this, of, of this motion is, is, is to, uh, uh, enable us to move past number two without i- ... you know, without making some determination about, about rental licensing. The ques- And, and I think safety is the, is the big issue, but I, I think- That's exactly right. But I think this still, and I think a lot of these people in the audience are concerned about the rental licensing, either for or against. And if that's something we need to address, and, and are we going to put it off? Or do we ... And I'll make a motion later about it if ... and I think I probably still will. But I don't think that we're addressing that in your motion. I think we're just looking at safety issues. And I think rental licensing is a, an issue that was brought forth from the, the task force. Here's the way I see it. That, that rental licensing is not a, an issue of itself. Rental licensing is a tool. It may be a, a useful tool. It may not be. And it may not be a useful tool, it may not be practical, but it's a tool that could be considered by the task force as it discusses how do we, as a government, as a community make sure that, that, that, that rental housing is safe? That it's up to code? So I would rather not take it out of the, out of the picture. In other words, the, the, the task force could, could, could, could keep it in its toolbox if that's the, if that's, if, if, if that's the, the right metaphor here. But that, but their, their, their primary task is to, is, is, is, is to, uh, come up with a solution to this problem. The problem we have now is that we do not have adequate access. We do not know whether ... Unless we're invited in, whether a unit is, is, is operating up to code ordinances. Uh, and I agree, the safety issues are. I think we're kinda skirting around the issue, though, because I think number two, um, deals with rental licensing. And I don't think we're really addressing that by ... And I thought we were gonna go systematically down through each one of these. And I don't think we're really hitting that. And that's fine, we can vote on this motion, then maybe I'll have to come back with another motion just to direc- ... at this one specifically. And I think Ms. Feigel might be doing something here too, so thank you. I think just to ... If I can put it all together, I think what I'm hearing is based on what Mike Moiser said, um, and what you said, Dr. Blues, number two could or could not be a tool that the council adopts. But what your concern is, and what your motion addresses is, in lieu of this right now, you would like for the building inspection task force to look at options for getting in to inspect properties for safety ish- issues. If I understood all this correctly. That's correct. Okay. So, um, so whether anything's done with number two today or not, you would like to go forward with safety issues? That's also correct. Okay. All right. So the motion on the floor, is there ... Council Member Feigel, uh, I believe has a question or comment. Well, I just, uh, couple of comments. Um- I would like to just point out that there has been, I think, some really good progress in terms of addressing safety issues in recent weeks. There's been an ongoing discussion now between, um, the city and building inspection and- and the fire department and, uh, and Keith Gaines and- and a lot of folks have been working on trying to address these safety issues in a- in a very expeditious manner. Uh, and I would just like to say that we've made a tremendous amount of progress, we're getting a lot of, um, cooperation from the landlord community to allow the fire department to come in and inspect, uh, homes on a voluntary basis, and I think we have the makings of a really good working relationship with, um, that community, and I believe that we can take that a lot further. Uh, I'm afraid that this licensing issue is going to stop that cooperation, uh, and, uh, again, you know, it's just gonna make it that much harder for us to- to try and address problems in- in an expeditious manner. So, um, I would just- just- just to share with you that there is some, um, some progress being made and if it needs to go to another committee to be discussed, I think that's fine because we certainly all want to address safety issues. Um, that's all. Thank you. Tha- thank you. Dr. Blues. Uh, thank you, Madam Chair. I, uh, I appreciate the fact that there is progress here and- and I think it's- it's- it's- it's very helpful to know that- that- that the university will move forward with, uh, you know, with the- with the- with the, uh, uh, uh, non- non-campus residential housing task force or- or- or, uh, or office, uh, off-ca- campus housing unit, if- if that's what it's to be called. I think that's a positive step. But there is a huge gap between voluntary adherence to- to- to the law and in the absence of law enforcement mechanisms. What we know is that we have we have ordinances on the- on the- on the- on the- on the books, which we can only be invited to enforce. And that and- and that for me, is the key safety issue in this- in this discussion. Vice Mayor Gray. Hmm, uh, thank you, Madam Chair. Um, I- I think it's- it's worthwhile- it's worthwhile for us to, um, to mention that, um, the changes or the progress that's being made has come as a result of work, and work comes when we- when we endorse behaviors that don't avoid conflict, but are willing to engage the conflict that comes with tough issues. And I think what we're doing by continuing to move this issue forward and to recognize the public policy implications of it, what we're doing is we're continuing to work. That's what we do when we move issues into smaller, more deliberative, more intentional work groups. Uh, we know that we know as, well, Council Member Blues has already expressed the motivations, and I think we all share the recognition that as these issues- as these issues mature and as the problems continue to illustrate themselves, we have to keep working on 'em, and this is one way to do that. Thank you. Thank you. Is there any other comment on the motion on the floor, which is to, uh, move the safety inspection process into the Building Inspection Task Force, and I didn't ask Council Member Stennett, who chairs that, if that is something he would take on. Yes? Okay. Uh, Council Member Ellinger. Thank you, Chair. I'm gonna support this 'cause I think safety is a big issue in here. Although after I'm done with this, I will be making a motion to not adopt the rental licensing. So I'm not sure how that will affect this, but I- I will go ahead and put this in there and vote for the safety issues. Thank you. Um, thank you. We did learn on Tuesday that negative motions go nowhere, so if the rental licensing has no motion, it goes nowhere. So it's the same kinda thing. Just, you remember that on Tuesday, that discussion. Is there any other discussion? I don't see anyone else signed up. So, um, with that, uh, will all those in favor of the motion, please say, "Aye." Aye. Is anyone opposed? All right, that motion passes, and I know that the Building Inspection Task Force has already scheduled its first meeting. So this safety inspection process issue will move forward to the full council and then presumably, if it passes, to the Building Inspection Task Force. So Council Member Ellinger. Thank you, Mayor, or thank you, Chair . Uh, I'd like to make a motion. I know, big promotion there. Uh, I'd like to make a motion that we do not adopt the rental licensing, um, so moved. Second. I have a motion and a second, uh, to not adopt the rental licensing ordinance as proposed. Is there any discussion? Um, let's see, Dr. Blues. Well, thank you. I, I, uh, I agree that, that, that, um, by excluding that, it would make things clearer with reference to task force recommendation number two w- w- but, on the other hand, as I say, although it's subordinate to anything that, that, that I think is most important, it, it is nevertheless a tool that's in the box, and I would like to, to keep it there rather than take it out of it. So, that's why I, I would not support this particular motion. Is there any other comment? Vice Mayor Gray. Um, I just endorse what Council Member Blues said. Um, I'm not sure how I feel on this completely yet. That's why we continue to get data and information, and if these were easy answers, they wouldn't be before us. Thank you, Chair. Thank you. Council Member Sinnott. Thank you, Chair. Eh, eh, as you alluded to a few minutes ago, motions need to be made in the, in the form of a affirmative or positive motion. Um, you can't make a motion in form of a negative motion because otherwise, um, it kinda defeats the purpose. So, I mean, I would call into question the motion itself. I mean, basically we don't have to act on it at all, and that's the same thing. Uh, any motion would be made to accept the recommendation 'cause right now there, there is noth- no issue on the table. It's just a recommendation. That was, uh, actually, I was gonna clarify that too. If this motion passes, um, the issue of rental licensing can always come up again because there's no affirmative motion. Right. Is that... Okay. So, and, and, uh- Now how would you... As a parliamentarian, how would you, uh, direct the motion then? Well, it- The, the only motion we can really make is to adopt or accept something. Yes. Um, otherwise, th- no action is, is the same as then what your motion is. Yes, and the negative motion- Well, I think it, it does send a message to the task force that's dealing with this, that this is not an issue that we want addressed. Well, a- as Council Member Blues and Vice Mayor Gray said, I think it's an issue we still need to look at and still need to address in some form. Um, obviously I would probably support y- your motion, but, um, a motion in the negative, um, is a s- is out- Yes. ... is out of order. A- and a negative motion will not go forward to the full council. Right. As we learned last week. Correct. So... And how would you say... So unless... I mean, well, if someone makes a motion in favor of adopting rental licensing, that's how a motion could go forward. So- Well. Do you... That, that... I mean. So you want me to make a motion to adopt something so I can vote against it? No. Is that what you want me to do? No. No, I think that- I, I just- ... if there is no motion to adopt it, then it's not adopted. Well, this issue's been lingering out there for many years, and I think it, it needs to be addressed. However we make the motion, I don't care, but I think it needs to be addressed that the council's taking a stand on this one way or another. It's been brought up many times. Before I was on the council, it was brought up. Not, and I'm, I'm the second most senior on the council now so... At seven years, so it's been an issue that's been out there. I think we need to address it, vote it up, vote it down, move forward, because it, it has been looked at many different times, and however the parliamentarian requested, I don't see why we can't vote a- vote it down if, um, not adopted. And I don't see why you can't... Because they made a recommendation, and we'll... And make a recommendation we don't accept number two. Can you not make that? Uh, a- again, if no action is the same as what you're saying, i- if we don't adopt anything, then, then the issue is not being taken up by this body. And we've had that many, many c- occasions in the past where people have presented something to us and we took no action on it. And it's, it's been that way forever. I mean- ... the, the chair can, can allow the motion, but again, it won't be reported out to council as a negative motion. Council Member Feigl. I'm just trying to recollect, um, how the recommendations from the previous meeting went forward to council, and I do think that there was one negative motion that went forward to council. But it was disallowed by the mayor. But we did- You can go back on the record. ... but we did allow it to happen in this committee. Well, because we didn't... We were not up to speed on the, I think, on the, the rules. Uh, one of the previous recommendations went forward to not approve it, and when it got to the work session, the mayor reminded us of what the parliamentarian has reminded us, that negative motions go nowhere. So, I think that was the clarification. O- one example of this recently is the immigration task force had several motions, uh, of which most of them we did not accept. One would be the ID cards, and no action was taken on that recommendation. It's just a simply a recommendation. Well, in that case, I will- Dr. Blues. Oh, I'm sorry. I thought you were asking me. He's taken himself off. Are you on? Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Mr. Ellinger. Well, then I will remove that motion and make another motion that we adopt the rental licensing ordinance. Does, uh, Council Member Feigel, did you remove your second? Yes. Okay. That one was removed. So the negative motion is removed, and the motion now on the floor is to adopt a rental licensing ordinance. Discussion. Dr. Blues. I think that, that, uh, in, in light of our, uh, unanimous agreement to, to put the question of safety inspection in the, uh, in the building inspection task force that that motion would be premature. And, and I'm, I'm not ready to, uh, uh, to, to come to a conclusion on, on that, so, uh, I, I don't expect to support that. Thank you. Is there any other comment from council members on the motion to adopt rental licensing ordinance? Chair. Yes, Mr. Stinnett. You know, uh, given the light of our current, um, economic situation that was made to light last Friday and, and we've known about for a while, uh, I guess m- m- I would like to know if we did pass this, can someone from the administration suggest or, or give us direction as to who would implement it, uh, within government? Would it be code enforcement? Building inspection? Um, because the way it's written now, there, it really doesn't specify, so I don't know how we could pass this without knowing who's actually w- would take it up and the cost associated with that. Obviously, there is gonna be a cost, and, uh, without that information, I'm not sure we're ready to move forward on, on the, on the motion today, but, uh, that would be a, um, obviously a significant question that has to be answered. Is there anyone here from the administration who knows where this would go? It's a very good question. Is there any other comment or question? Come on. Uh, if not- On the previous question. If ... Um, the motion on the floor is to adopt a rental licensing ordinance. If there's no other discussion, all those in favor, please say aye. Opposed? No. Okay. Uh, we will move on to number ... See how that works, Council Member Ellinger? Gotta make both motions. Um, so we've had two motions. Um, so now we're ready to address number three, and actually, Tom Harris is here from the University of Kentucky, and I have asked him ... This, number three, is to adopt portions of the Ohio State plan by creating an office of off-campus housing at UK, and then we'll also n- not make you come and go from the podium. I asked Tom to give us an update. Number four is to consider an off-campus housing fee to be paid by UK and BCTC students, uh, to fund initiatives related to the off-campus housing, and those are related. And so Tom, uh, is coming with some comment from the university on any progress, et cetera. Welcome. Thank you, Madam Chair. Good afternoon, members of the committee. Uh, just as a, a quick s- summary of what we talked about ... Excuse me, I'm fighting a little bit of the crud, uh, this afternoon. Uh, as we talked about, uh, couple months ago, um, the university is very much in favor of, of creating an, uh, off-campus student services, uh, position. Um, uh, we are in the process of defining what that would look like. Uh, the position would report to the vice president of student affairs. Um, many of the, the things, uh, that we've talked about, um, obviously m- maintaining a, a off-campus student services website where, uh, if certified properties were, uh, provided to us, uh, from the city, we would certainly post those, um, a- serve as a liaison between, uh, students and, and, uh, the rental property owners, uh, s- serve, uh, as a, as a way to educate. One of their roles would be to educate students', uh, rights and responsibilities, how to be a good citizen, how to be a good neighbor. Those, all those types of activities. Uh, the student affairs has been actively working with, uh, our benchmark universities to look at w- at, uh, off- similar offices that they have, and they're in the process of writing a job description. I think he's actually, uh, a- applied with the provost to, to fund a position, so hopefully within the next few months, we'll, we'll get that underway. That's good news. Thank you very much. Sure. Um, are you up for questions? Sure. Are there any questions for Mr. Harris? Vice Mayor Gray. Or- Uh, just, uh, oh, sorry. No, I haven't looked it over, but I was gonna make a motion. But, but go ahead and ask your question. I'm sorry. I- It's actually not a question, it's just thanks and praise. Thanks to you guy- thanks y'all for stepping up on this, and, and, a- and Craig Harden and of the, uh, delegation that, uh, how long ago was it that went to Ohio State and did some some due diligence on that, and, um, I think it, it illustrates- ... that, you know, sometimes we have these problems and sometimes we come to some good solutions, so thanks a lot, Tom. Sure. Council Member Feigl. Thank you, Chair. Actually, in light of, uh, all of the, the recent progress and certainly want to, to express our tremendous appreciation to the university for, for helping, uh, to, to work out these issues and supporting us in this way, uh, and, and because of all the ongoing discussions with UK officials and landlords and the city and Keith Gains, um, I think that I would like to move that we actually consider Keith Gains's program, it's called SHIP, which I think incorporates many of the things that are still left on our list. I know it's the last thing, but we, we did take a motion, you know, not following our schedule here earlier, so I would like to move that, uh, that we consider the SHIP program, um, and actually just save some time going through each of these, uh, recommendations below because I think they're, most of them are incorporated in the SHIP program. Second. Okay, there's a motion on the floor. Actually, what we had planned for today was for Officer Gains to give us an update and then to vote on that at the end. Um, if you would like ... I, I'd like for ... I realize there's a motion on the floor, and Tom, I'd like for you to speak to number four also as soon as this motion- That's, that's the student fee? Yes. As soon as the motion is dispensed with, because it's ... Then we'll work our way through the rest of the recommendations. So if you can hang tight. Sure. Uh, the motion on the floor is to adopt the SHIP program, and I think we need to have an update from Officer Gains as he agreed to do, if that suits the committee. If this is a little out of order, I know you're giving me the eye - Well, I have a question for, for Mr. Harris. About the previous issue. Right. Okay. Number three. Can- But that's okay. I mean, we can wait. I just didn't want to keep him at the microphone all, all afternoon. Right. We're, um ... So, uh, committee, we have a motion on the floor and then we'll get back to our questions for Mr. Harris. Um, any comment about the motion on the floor? Do you want to hear from Mister, Officer Gains, an update? Yes. Can you give us a brief update of where you are? Sure. Welcome. Thank you. Officer Gains with the Lexington Police Department. As far as the program, um, since the last time I've been up here, uh, having the support of the university, which was the key in kind of making this follow through and work, it's kinda come to fruition and, um, it, it ties it together. So as far as having this continue on as the way it's intended to go, um, their participation, um, in stepping up and, and providing this service, um, I think that they're also ready at any time to place properties on their, uh, website. Uh, they could actually start right now. I think it's up to, um, the city to come up with, a- at the moment, with a criteria. Uh, there's some in the program that would go, but they, you could actually start with some of the ones that would meet, um, criteria that the city could've agree on at the moment to get things moving forward immediately almost. Um ... D- and Officer Gains, have you been in discussion ... Can you give us a little update if you've been in discussion with our law department on some of the problems with the city running this? Are you ... Yes, um- Can you give us an update on that? They, they've made a recommendation through the law department and I believe kind of a summary of it and, um, they could probably clarify if I, um, uh, misspeak, but I think their position was they have no problem with the program itself. It is having someone within the city administer the program, which to me, was never the intent for me to actually administer it, but I could facilitate and get it started, uh, and then pass it along, which would go along with, um, the university's ability to, um, take over, uh, hopefully with the majority of the stuff that would be going on, um, through the program. Now some of it may, um, you know, it's, it's kind of still a plan that could flux either way with some of the, the possibilities with it, but, um, that was kind of the, the main part of the law department was is they, I don't think they had an issue with the, the program itself, it was administering it through someone through the city. Thank you very much. Are there questions? Dr. Blues? Uh, with regard to the motion to adopt the, uh, uh, Preferred Student Housing Pilot Program, what, what would adoption mean exactly? Especially with reference to the obligations of LFUCG. Did ... Council Member Feigl, did you have a comment about what your motion's intent is? Um, I, actually I had asked the commissioner, um, ask you to be here and I saw him earlier, but I think he left. Um, I think basically what we're doing as a planning committee is just suggesting that what Commissioner Gain- uh, I mean, uh, Officer Gains has - Thank you. ... and you got a promotion too. Everybody getting promotions. Yeah, me too. If you come to the podium, you get a promotion. Um, I'd -- I think we're just, uh, as, uh, as this planning body, we're just, uh, accepting his, um, proposal which has been outlined in the appendix of the student housing report. And we're just suggesting that this is th- the direction that we want to go in and recommending that the full council, um, take a look at that program. And I think if we need more specifics about what's being done then I- I think Officer Gaines can answer questions. And I know that, um, Commissioner Askew was going to be here to speak on it as well. I- I just text him, I hope maybe he'll come in. But, uh, I- I'm not sure that, um, you know, we are accepting it, you know, line by line. Basically, what we're accepting is a concept, which he is already implementing. Dr. Blues. And which I think the university has, um, also suggested that they are participating in this. I... An- and I certainly agree that- that, uh, much of- of Officer Gaines' proposal, uh, fits- fits very nicely with the off-campus student office. Uh, but I, but I'm- I'm little concerned about the difference between, uh, adopting a- a- a- a program and, let's say, endorsing it as a concept. The... That's where I would have some problems with the, uh, with the motion. So your emotion remains to adopt the Student Housing and Partnership Program. I would certainly be willing to revise that motion to say that we recommend, that we recommend this program to go to the full council. As- as a concept and- As a concept. Okay. Who was the seconder? Who- who- I did. Do you accept that little slight change? Okay. Um, uh, Council Member Henson. Thank you Chair. Even though I'm not on this committee, I wanted to ask couple question. Officer Gaines, if once they are placed, if we go with this program, the- the house is placed on this desirable list, can they also be removed? Yes. That- that's covered under the program. Um, by not meeting the requirements of either the inspections or the lease agreements or the other conditions of the program, they can be taken off. And- and I know we talked few months ago about enhancing the nuisance ordinance. Yes. And I know you've been working really, really hard on this, and I don't wanna overload you, but, um, I feel like that that would be a very good component to this as well, so if you have a property that's has numerous violations, then the property owner at that time could be fined or receive other penalties. Yeah. Like if it were code, building inspection, and police. A lot of that, under- under the, um, ordinance that you're talking about, the chronic nuisance ordinance, um, this could be tied into it. You could make it a condition because that's gonna hopefully go into a- a similar area, kinda like the code enforcement does, that it would be a recommendation from the civil side of it to- Correct. ... move into the program which would... Okay. Thank you, Chair. You're welcome. Any other comments about the motion on the floor, which is to accept the concept of the Student Housing and Partnership Program? Uh, Council Member Feigel. Commissioner Askew is here now so I would ask him to come forward and just comment on- on his, uh, review of this. Welcome Commissioner. Thank you. Good afternoon. Uh, I think, uh, Mr. Barbary had prepared some information for the committee but subject to what he had set forth, we think this is a program certainly that building inspection can participate in and assist Officer Gaines and I only heard part of the debate, I'm sorry I'm here late, but... So we can certainly do that. So participation would work but actually running the program. Right. There are some issues with, uh, trying to... Our- our primary concern is- is you all adopting an ordinance that says this is the program. We- I think we can- we can endorse a program, we can participate meaningfully in a program like this or something similar. Our concern is if you create a governmental program like this, you're going to have extra considerations that you all need to, uh, weigh before you all do that, and I think it's going to be vastly more complicated to have you all create it and run it than it would be to ha- just have you all participate in- in the- in the running of the program, so... Okay. Did that answer- So I think what... I- I think what we would like you all to do if you did it, it would be to endorse the creation of the program and I think through our participation we would have some involvement in what some aspects of the program look like, but you wouldn't be adopting an ordinance that says, "Here is the- the SHIP program in Fayette County." I appreciate that. The motion actually is to endorse the concept of the program, so does that fit in with your concerns? Yes. Okay. Okay. Does that answer your question? I think -- I think, uh, my, my verbage was to recommend, but I can certainly change that to endorse. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Um, are there other questions? Vice Mayor Gray. I think it, um, you know, th- there's a lot of appreciation for what Keith has developed and the, and the ideas and so forth. And within the context of number of solutions have been presented, I thought it might be useful for the chairman of the task force, Mr. Moizer... Mr. Moizer, you might wanna... Could you comment on, you know, from your point of view, you might give us some insights on how you feel like this, where this takes us from your point of view as chair for a year and a half? I think when you look at the rankings, we were trying to deal with two issues that were foremost. One was the conditions in the neighborhood related to density, and the other was life safety issues. So if you keep those two things in mind and look at where things fell on this list, the concern that the task force had was that we did not have an adequate way to ensure life safety. The thing that Council Member Blues has been alluding to. And so we were looking for ways to get that kind of net thrown around this problem on the life safety issue, and also try to deal with the density. And I guess for those of us that didn't vote for this kind of a program, the concern is that this takes the very good landlords who are in this room endorsing this program and allows them to label their properties as being good properties, which we already know they are, and they voluntarily submit to a compliance program. But it doesn't deal with the landlords who don't wanna participate. So that was, I think, the overriding concern that those of us who are neighbors had with this program. We certainly hope it'll work if it is gonna go forward. But the concern is it's relatively voluntary with the, with the participants. So to summarize that, so it doesn't take the place of the enforcement that is- I don't, I don't think it can. And I think that points up the hard work that Councilman Stennett's committee has to do in looking at where you do these inspections, how you can do them, what buildings you can get into, what buildings you can't. I heard as recently today differing opinions from the local fire marshal versus the state fire marshal about the ability to get into certain buildings and how far you could get into certain buildings. So tho- those are gonna be difficult issues to explore, and we have a lot of information that we'll be happy to share with his committee as they go forward looking at that. Thank you, Chair. Thank you. Because this is a voluntary program? Yes, it is voluntary and, uh, economic, um, stimulus is kinda where it drives it. Are there other questions or comments to the motion? Okay. Um, then let's vote. The motion on the floor is to endorse the concept of the student housing and partnership program. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? Okay. That motion passes. Thank you very much. Now I'll ask Tom Harris to come back to the podium. Um, and we were discussing... Well, you had given us the update on number three, and so number four is the, uh, consideration of an off-campus housing fee to be paid by UK and BCTC students to fund initiatives related to off-campus housing. So could you give us your perspective? Sure. As I, as I stated a couple months ago when I was here, the university doesn't feel like a- an additional fee on the backs of students is the way to address this issue. And we would not be in favor of that. Are there any questions about that? Is your... I guess the obvious question then is funding the off-campus housing office would come straight from somebody's- We will, we will fi- find some money to- ... budgets and- ... to make that happen. That's, that's great. A- if there are no, um, questions or comments, is there a motion toward this item? It's kind of an odd one, because any motion by the council doesn't really hold water with UK, does it? I don't, I don't mean that in a negative way, but it's, you know. You understand what I mean, I think. Um, if there's no motion, let's move on to number five. Oh, Council Member Stennett. Thank you. No, a- actually I wanna speak to the five and six. Oh, okay. Number five recommendation is to revise the definition of family in the zoning ordinance. And I know that just for background, um, if the council wants to look at this further, the law department has done some preliminary work on this. So Council Member Stennett. Yeah. For five and six, um, we put the issue into this committee of our residential zoning laws, and pr- that would probably be th- the most appropriate time to address five and six, recognizing that they are important and that we do need to create, um, as Council Member Ellinger said earlier, uh, uh, clean up some of our language in, in those ordinances to address these issues once and for all. And I think when we do, uh, if we can, Chair, in January, take up the residential zoning laws, um, we can define family in there as well as address the parking issue in, in number six. Uh, for those not privy to the paper, number six is to amend the ordinances to prohibit parking in rear yards, except on approved surfaces that are permeable, in compliance with all other ordinances. Um, is there any other comment or any motions? Council Member Feigl. Just clarification on my part. What committee is that being, taken up by? It's this one. The planning committee. Oh. It, it's under a separate issue review of residential zoning laws. Okay. Thank you. Other comments or questions? So the- the- these, uh, technically are in the committee now, and they've come specifically through the task force, so, um. Chair, do we need to make a motion then? And i- is that a motion. I think we do. I'll se- I'll second that if that is a motion. Yeah, that way it's formalized and when we take 'em up, we address these two issues during that. What is your motion? Uh, to address five and six, which is the definition of family as well as parking issue, uh, when we review the residential zoning laws, hopefully in January or February. Second. Any discussion? So in other words, keep them in committee? . Just for clarification. Um, if there's no other discussion, all those in favor say aye. Anyone opposed? So five and six remain in committee for discussion. Uh, number seven, uh, which received the lowest number of points in the recommendations from the task force is to create a university district overlay zone with modified zoning restrictions, increased enforcement, which would be funded by a special taxing district. Um, is there any discussion on this or any motion to come forward? If not, um, that will remain without a motion. Um, is there any other comment or, um, question about the motions? We have several that will be coming forward. Council member, if I could just recap, and we've just lost our quorum, so, um, Council Member Henson, would you be kind enough to stay long enough to give us a quorum to the end? . Um, so if you could recognize in the summary that Council Member Henson is now a part of the voting quorum. Thank you. So, uh, Council Member Blue's motion regarding the safety inspection process will move forward. The, uh, motion on number two, which failed, will be the licensing, rental licensing will move forward. Uh, there was no motion on number three or number four. Those were the, um, housing fee paid by students and the Ohio State plan. But there is a motion to endorse the student housing and partnership program, which will re- will move forward, and the motion to keep five and six in committee to be discussed at a future time. Any questions about that? Oh, uh, Paul has reminded me that we did not take any action at the last meeting on number eight of the expanded enforcement. And that has to do with adopting a definition of fraternity house and sorority house. And the idea was that Tony Blanton from UK and our law department would work together to bring forth a suggested wording. So did law leave again or are... Commissioner, are you still here? Um, so that will need to come forward at our next meeting. We'll see if we can't, uh, get that taken care of. If there's nothing else on this issue, we will move on to our final issue on our agenda. And I thank everyone for being here. And I especially would like to thank Mike Moizer for chairing the task force and for those members who served on it. And we still have a few things left to do on that. So, um, that will probably come in January as we don't have a meeting in December. This committee doesn't have a December meeting. So, uh, thank you very much. The final item on our agenda, uh, council members, if you'll turn to the last page in the packet, we would like to take a serious look at our issues in committee. And I know that some can be moved out of committee because they're either completed or, um, require no further work. Um, so let's work down from the top since we have time to do this. Our three road projects, Liberty Road, Newtown Pike, and Loudoun Avenue. Is there any recommendation on any of these or requests to keep them in committee or take them out? One of them is yours, Council Member Stennett, and one is Council Member Blues. Being that we let Liberty Road on November 20th, and we'll start construction on January 1st, the Man O' War intersection, I want to keep it in there- Okay. ... to make sure we're, we're done by next, uh, the World of Question Games. Okay. And Council Member Blues, it seems to me we should keep Newtown Pike in there. Yes, I think, I think we should. I think that those, uh, bi-month, monthly updates are very- Okay. ... very helpful to us. Student housing issues will continue, like we said. Fencing regulations, as I understand, that might be ready in the near future. Council Member Blues? Uh. Maybe first we begin. The Division of Planning is working on a, on a, um, on drafting a Zoda, and, uh, our law department, uh, uh, is, is working on an ordinance, uh, re- relating to, uh, sight lines. So, uh, I think the, the horizon is drawing closer on this. Okay. Very good. And Council Member James isn't here for the mobile home issue. Council Member Vice Mayor Gray, Infill and Redevelopment Committee recommendations, is that something that you have, uh, something- That's on- ... for the committee to hear? Uh, not specifically right now, but, um, work's ongoing. Do you want to keep it in committee for some future work, or- We probably need to do a report out on acti- activities and progress pretty soon. It'd be useful if we go ahead and schedule that when you've got a chance to. Are, are you thinking that report out will go to this committee or to the full council? Hmm. Wonder if the full council needs to hear it. That'd be good too. I'm, I'm just thinking about- Maybe a pres- Yeah, maybe a council work session presentation. I, I'm wondering if this needs to stay in our committee for future action, or if it should come out and the updates go to the full council, is the question. Why don't we- We can leave it. ... consider that. Yeah. Okay. We'll leave it. Um, Council Member James, Tree Protection Ordinance. Um, let's move down to the three issues that Council Member Henson's working group attended to, and those were reviewing civil penalties, which actually was moved and passed at work session on November 17th. That related to home offices. So that's... Do you consider that complete? I think I do. I think that it can be removed. Okay. So, uh, do you wanna go ahead and move to remove it? I make a motion to re- move item from committee to review civil penalties, post fines on property owners who operate a home office occupation in violation of zoning ordinance, move out of committee. So moved. Second. Have a second from Council Member Ellinger. Yes. Did you have discussion or comment? Okay. It, uh, has already been attended to, so if there's no discussion, all those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? Um, Council Member, I've distributed, um, two summaries to you from Council Member Henson's, um, br- building permit issues ad hoc. And so if you want to attend to the next two bullets. I will. If you could give us an update on those. The second, um, item was imposed restrictions on issuing permits to individuals, property owners when they are pending written complaints regarding violations of zoning ordinance. And it was, um, through the, uh, working group, the, um, law department issued a opinion stating that until someone, they felt until someone was actually proven guilty, no restrictions could be imposed. So we tabled that item in the working group. Okay. So I can motion- Take it out of committee? ... to remove it from this committee. Okay. And do I hear a second? Second. To remove it from committee? Okay. Any discussion? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Is there any opposed? Okay. The third bullet there. The th- the third item was to place reasonable time limits for completion of construction, construction projects approved for existing family residential building permits and fence retaining wall permits. And I recommended through our working group that that be placed into the Building Inspection Task Force. Uh, so is that your motion? So I'll make a motion to remove that from the planning committee. And to move it to Building Inspection Task Force. Is that, is that correct? Pardon? To move it to the- Oh, yes. ... Building Inspection Task Force? Yes. Sorry. Okay. Thank you. We have a motion and a second. Um, all those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? So the first two issues there, your first two bullets are removed from committee and the third bullet is moved to Building Inspection Task Force. Correct. Thank you very much. Um, and then the, the rest of the items are either in progress or will be taken up at a future date because they're new items. Is there anything else- Yes, Vice Mayor. Yeah, it's- it's not nice to have sidebar conversations, is it Madam Chair? I'm so sorry. We've got a lot of folks in the audience today who I think think that the sign ordinance was gonna be on the agenda today and- and it's not, and Paul says it's not. It was never- So- It was never meant to be on the agenda. I'm not sure... I'm so sorry. I'm not sure why you thought it was on the agenda. We like having y'all here. We appreciate it a lot. I- I am so sorry. I didn't realize. I thought you were here for all the licensing and student housing and all of that, so... And learning. You... We love having you . Thank you. Um, it's my intent that that will be heard in January, and that will be January the... Well, we haven't officially adopted our calendar yet, so I will need to ask you to check our website once the council's adopted its calendar. And I'm so sorry that that's why you're here, but you got some good information, right? Thank you, Vice Mayor. Okay. Is there any other issue to come before the committee today? If not, do I hear a motion to adjourn? So moved. Second. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. And I think there are none opposed. Thank you very much. Shooting at the walls of heartache. Shooting at the walls of heartache. The warrior. The warrior. Follow hysteria. Jungle child. Love is the kill. Your heart's still wild. Shooting at the walls of heartache. Bang, bang. I am the warrior. Well, I am the warrior. And heart to heart you'll win. If you survive. The warrior. The warrior. You talk dope. Talk to me. Your eyes touch me physically. Stay with me. Take the night. As passion takes another bite. Oh. Oh. Who's the hunter? Who's the game? I feel the beat. Call your name. I'll hold you close. Victory. 'Cause I don't wanna tame your animal style. You won't be caged. In the call of the wild. Shooting at the walls of heartache. Bang, bang. I am the warrior. Well, I am the warrior. And heart to heart you'll win. If you survive. The warrior. The warrior. I am the warrior. Shooting at the walls of heartache. Shooting at the walls of heartache. The warrior. I am the warrior. And heart to heart to win. Heart to heart to win. If you survive. The warrior. The warrior. Shooting at the walls of heartache. Bang, bang. I am the warrior. I'm Gary Means, and did you know that you can't park on any Fayette County street for more than 24 hours? That's a rule that's been in place, it's in our ordinance. It's section 18-122 in the city ordinance. Also, did you know that many of the streets in downtown, you can't park overnight? And that's due to street sweeping. And as you'll see the sign behind me, from 2:00 AM to 6:00 AM, there are many streets, uh, in the downtown area where you cannot park overnight due to street sweeping. For more information about parking rules and regulations, you can see the LexPark website, that's www.lexpark.org, or go to the lexingtonkentucky.gov website. Most people know that you can't park in front of any fire hydrant in Fayette County, but did you know that you can't park at any yellow curb in Fayette County? You'll find yellow curbs a lot of times near intersections or where there are turning lanes, but anytime you see yellow markings on a curb, that's a no parking area. For more information about rules and regulations with parking, go to www.lexpark.org or see the Urban County Government website, lexingtonky.gov. Well, I'm calling, but you don't want no talking. Well, you only call me just to keep me hanging on. Well, you pick me up, then you knock me down. You say you love me, but you dog me around until I'm all mixed up. Enough's enough, baby. You're driving me out of my mind. So I'll be calling and calling. But you never answer. No, you just don't seem to care. Because the way you treat me, well, it makes me sore. It breaks me down. I can't take no more. So I'm calling you to say where you went. To get you off of my mind. ... in the middle of the air. And we were rolling in the middle of the air. Rolling by faith and running by faith. We were running by the grace of God. And we were whirling away in the middle of the air. Talking about my Saro Jane. Nothing to do but sit down and sing. Rocking about my Saro Jane. Indian cracker whistle. He was blowing the engine steam. Gonna move them all over Saro Lane. Nothing to do but sit down and sing. Rocking about my Saro Jane. Yeah, yeah. Rocking about my Saro Jane. Yeah. Rocking about my Saro Jane. Nothing to do but sit down and sing. Rocking about my Saro Jane. Nothing to do but sit down and sing. And rocking about my Saro Jane. The 2009 Winter Festival, Christmas Parade, and Tree Lighting Events take place on Friday, November 27th. Starting at 2:00 PM, take in wonderful live entertainment while enjoying warm apple cider and seasonal foods as you peruse arts and crafts booths at the Winter Festival in Triangle Park. The Annual Christmas Parade starts at 5:30 PM and runs down Main Street from Midland to Broadway. Then watch as Mayor Jim Newberry and Santa himself turn the magic key, causing Lexington's official Christmas tree in Triangle Park to become aglow in festive colors. Hey. Down here. Yeah, the storm sewer's talking to you. I'm old, sick, and tired. And I gotta swallow trash, butts, and voice. Whatever you leave on the ground washes directly through me, untreated, pollutant our beautiful bluegrass streams. How about a new diet? What do you say? With your help, Lexington's Department of Environmental Quality will improve our storm sewers, clean up our water, and teach us how to keep this precious resource safe. Bank job in the city. Yeah. Riding in a little town out in the hole. That's the life. They don't need me here. Sitting till the sun goes down. And dreams the world keeps going round and round. And I can't get it out of my head. No, I can't get it out of my head. Oh, my whole world is gone. Gone, yeah. Because I can't get it out of my head. Oh, no. Oh, I can't get it out of my head. No, I can't get it out of my head. Now my whole world is gone. All day. Because I can't get it out of my head. No, no, no, no. Oh. Welcome to the Grand Illusion. Come on in and see what's happening. Pay the price, the ticket for the show. The stage is set, the band starts playing. And suddenly your heart is pounding. Wishing secretly you were a star. Don't be fooled by the radio, the TV or the magazines. They show you photographs of how your life should be. But that's just someone else's fantasies. So if you think your life is complete confusion. Because you never win the game. Just remember that it's a grand illusion. Because deep inside we're all the same. All the same. So if you think your life is complete confusion. Because your neighbor's got it made. Just remember that it's a grand illusion. Deep inside we're all the same. American sales competition. Join us in our blind ambition. Get yourself a brand new motorcycle. Someday soon we'll stop to ponder. What on earth's the spell we're under. We've made the grade and still we wonder. Who the hell we are. Riding along in my automobile. My baby beside me at the wheel. I stole a kiss at the turn of a mile. My curiosity running wild. Cruising and playing the radio. With no particular place to go. Riding along in my automobile. I was anxious to tell her the way I feel. So I told her softly and sincere. And she leaned and whispered in my ear. Cuddling more and driving slow. With no particular place to go. No particular place to go. So we parked way out on the kokomo. The night was young and the moon was gold. So we both decided to take a stroll. Can you imagine the way I felt? I couldn't unfasten our safety belt. Riding along in my calaboose. Still trying to get her belt loose. All the way home I held a grudge. For the safety belt that wouldn't budge.