# Council Work Session - August 31, 2010 > Auto-transcribed civic record · Council · August 31, 2010 - **Permalink**: https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/meeting/1492 - **Source video**: https://lfucg.granicus.com/player/clip/1492?view_id=14&redirect=true - **Date**: 2010-08-31 - **Body**: Council - **Last revised**: June 18, 2026 - **Length**: 9,548 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 This meeting was held by the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government. The council addressed five agenda items during the session, all of which were approved. Business conducted included levying Avalorum taxes, a Citizens Advocate appointment, approval of the Citizens Advocate's Policy and Procedure Manual, and an extension of the Avon Golf Course closure. A total of five motions and votes were taken during the meeting, with no public comments heard. ## Attendance All 15 council members were present at the August 31, 2010 Council meeting. No members were recorded as absent or late. **Members Present:** - Ms. Henson - Ms. James - Mr. Lane - Ms. Lawless - Mr. Martin - Mr. McCord - Mr. Myers - Mr. Stennett - Mr. Beard - Mr. Blues - Ms. Feigl - Ms. Gorton - Mr. Gray - Ms. Crosby - Mr. Ellinger ## Votes and Decisions Five motions were brought to a vote during the August 31, 2010 Council meeting. - **Approval of ordinances related to Avalorum taxes** [timestamp: 0:05]: Moved by Councilmember Ellinger and seconded by Councilmember Martin, this motion passed by roll call vote with 14 ayes and 0 nays. All 14 members present voted in favor: Ms. Henson, Ms. James, Mr. Lane, Ms. Lawless, Mr. Martin, Mr. McCord, Mr. Myers, Mr. Stennett, Mr. Beard, Mr. Blues, Ms. Crosby, Mr. Ellinger, Ms. Feigl, and Mr. Gray. - **Motion to adjourn the special meeting** [timestamp: 0:06]: Moved by Councilmember Lane and seconded by Councilmember Myers, this motion passed by voice vote. - **Motion to add a resolution for the Citizens Advocate appointment to the docket** [timestamp: 0:50]: Moved by Councilmember Myers and seconded by Councilmember Beard, this motion passed by voice vote. - **Motion to add the Citizens Advocate's Policy and Procedure Manual to the docket** [timestamp: 0:51]: Moved by Councilmember Myers and seconded by Councilmember Crosby, this motion passed by voice vote. - **Motion to extend the closure of Avon Golf Course to November 30th** [timestamp: 1:05]: Moved by Councilmember Stennett and seconded by Councilmember Blues, this motion passed by voice vote. ## Budget and Financial Actions The Council addressed one financial item during the August 31, 2010 meeting. - **West Hickman Trail Project Change Order:** The Council considered an amendment related to the West Hickman Trail project in the amount of **$67,000**. This change order represents a modification to the existing project budget or contract terms for the trail project. No vendor or recipient information, resolution numbers, or additional contract identifiers were recorded in the available meeting data for this item. ## Appointments The Council took the following appointment action during the meeting: - **Paula Campbell** was appointed to the role of **Citizens Advocate**. ## Contested Items - **West Hickman Trail Project Change Order:** Council members engaged in heated discussion over a proposed change order for the West Hickman Trail project. The central concern was a 17% increase in project costs attributed to unforeseen conditions encountered during construction. Council members expressed reservations about the cost escalation, though the structured data does not identify the specific individuals involved in the debate or record a final outcome of the discussion. ## Ordinance levying Avalorum taxes [timestamp: 01:04] The Council took up an ordinance levying Avalorum taxes for the support of various departments for the fiscal year running from July 1, 2010, through June 30, 2011. - **Presenter:** Madam Clerk introduced the item before the Council. - **Outcome:** The ordinance was approved. No additional speakers, debate, or concerns are reflected in the available record for this agenda item. ## Motion to approve ordinances [timestamp: 05:22] The Council took up a motion to approve the ordinances that had been read by the clerk. The item was brought forward as Agenda Item 2 during the meeting. Councilmember Ellinger and Councilmember Martin were the key speakers on this item. The motion was straightforward in nature, seeking Council approval of the ordinances as presented and read into the record by the clerk. The motion was approved by the Council. ## Citizens Advocate Appointment [timestamp: 50:25] The Council considered a resolution to temporarily appoint Paula Campbell as acting Citizens Advocate. Councilmember Myers was the key speaker on this item. The resolution was approved by the Council. ## Citizens Advocate's Policy and Procedure Manual [timestamp: 51:28] The Council took up a motion regarding the Citizens Advocate's Policy and Procedure Manual during this portion of the meeting. Councilmember Myers was the key speaker on this item, bringing forward a motion to add the Citizens Advocate's Policy and Procedure Manual and professional standards to the Council's docket. The motion was approved by the Council. *Note: The available record for this agenda item is limited. Further detail on the substance of the discussion, any debate, or specific concerns raised is not reflected in the extracted data.* ## Extension of Avon Golf Course Closure [timestamp: 1:05:20] The Council considered a resolution to extend the closure of Avon Golf Course through November 30th. Councilmember Stennett was the key speaker on this item. The resolution sought to formally extend the existing closure of the golf course to the specified date. No additional details regarding the reasons for the closure extension or any debate or concerns raised during discussion are available from the meeting record. The Council approved the resolution extending the Avon Golf Course closure through November 30th. --- ## Decisions - **Motion** — passed (14-0): Approval of ordinances related to Avalorum taxes - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Motion to adjourn the special meeting - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Motion to add resolution for Citizens Advocate appointment to the docket - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Motion to add Citizens Advocate's Policy and Procedure Manual to the docket - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Motion to extend the closure of Avon Golf Course to November 30th --- ## Full transcript That's the roll call. Are you going to have the public hearing first outside the realm of the special council meeting? We can do that. Yes, sir. All right. Thank you. Does anyone wish to address the council on the matter of the Avalorum tax rates? Seeing none, we'll conclude the public hearing. Ms. Henson? Here. Thank you. Ms. James? Here. Mr. Lane? Here. Ms. Lawless? Here. Mr. Martin? Here. Mr. McCord? Here. Mr. Myers? Here. Mr. Stennett? Here. Mr. Beard? Present. Mr. Blues? Here. Ms. Feigl? Here. Ms. Gorton? Here. And Mr. Gray? Here. Thank you. We have a quorum, so we'll proceed. Madam Clerk, would you give a second reading to the ordinances entitled the second reading? Ordinance number one, an ordinance levying Avalorum taxes for purposes of support of the Agricultural Extension Office for the fiscal year July 1, 2010, through June 30, 2011, on the assessed value of all taxable real and personal property within the taxing jurisdiction of the Lexington-Fayette-Urban County Government, all taxes on each $100 of assessed valuation as of the January 1, 2010, assessment date as follows, $0.0032 on all taxable real property, including real property of public service companies, $0.0035 on taxable personal property, including personal property of public service companies, noncommercial aircraft, and noncommercial watercraft, and excluding inventory and transit, insurance capital, tobacco and storage, and agricultural products and storage, and levying an Avalorum tax for purposes of support of the Agricultural Extension Office at the rate of $0.0032 on each $100 of assessed value on all motor vehicles and watercraft within the taxing jurisdiction of the Lexington-Fayette-Urban County Government as of January 1, 2011, assessment date. Number two, an ordinance levying Avalorum taxes for municipal purposes for the fiscal year July 1, 2010, through June 30, 2011, on the assessed value of all taxable property within the taxing jurisdiction of the Lexington-Fayette-Urban County Government, all taxes on each $100 of assessed value as of the January 1, 2010, assessment date as follows, general services district, $0.0800 on real property, including real property of public service companies, $0.0990 on personal property, including personal property of public service companies, noncommercial aircraft and noncommercial watercraft, $0.15500 on insurance capital, $0.0150 on tobacco and storage, and $0.0450 on agricultural products and storage. All urban or partial urban services districts based on urban services available on real property, including real property of public service companies, $0.1431 for refuse collection, $0.0210 for street lights, $0.0094 for street cleaning, $0.0920 for insurance capital, $0.0150 on tobacco and storage, $0.0450 on agricultural products and storage, and levying an Avalorum tax for municipal purposes at the rate of $0.0880 on each $100 of assessed value on all motor vehicles and watercraft within the taxing jurisdiction of the Lexington-Fayette-Urban County Government as of the January 1, 2011, assessment date. Number three, an ordinance pursuant to a request received from the Lexington-Fayette County Health Department levying an Avalorum tax for purposes of support of the Lexington-Fayette County Health Department for the fiscal year July 1, 2010 through June 30, 2011 on the assessed value of all taxable real and personal property within the taxing jurisdiction of the Lexington-Fayette-Urban County Government, including real and personal property of public service companies, noncommercial aircraft, noncommercial watercraft, and inventory in transit, and excluding insurance capital, tobacco and storage, and agricultural products and storage at the rate of $0.028 on each $100 of assessed value as of the January 1, 2010, assessment date, and levying an Avalorum tax for purposes of support of the Lexington-Fayette-Urban County, excuse me, Lexington-Fayette County Health Department at the rate of $0.028 on each $100 of assessed value on all motor vehicles and watercraft within the taxing jurisdiction of the Lexington-Fayette-Urban County Government as of the January 1, 2011 assessment date, and number four, an ordinance levying an Avalorum taxes for purposes of support of the Soil and Water Conservation District for the fiscal year July 1, 2010 through June 30, 2011 on the assessed value of all taxable real property within the taxing jurisdiction of the Lexington-Fayette-Urban County Government, including real property of public service companies at a rate of $0.00416 on each $100 of assessed valuation as of the January 1, 2010 assessment date, with the tax bills computed and collected at a rate of $0.004 on each $100 of assessed valuation. Thank you. Is there a motion to approve those ordinances? So moved. I have a motion by Councilmember Ellinger and a second by Councilmember Martin. Any discussion? All in favor, please indicate by voting aye electronically. Those opposed to vote nay electronically. And Madam Clerk, please call the roll. We'll just do it manually if that's okay today. Ms. Henson? Yes. Ms. James? Yes. Mr. Lane? Yes. Ms. Lawless? Yes. Mr. Martin? Yes. Mr. McCord? Yes. Mr. Myers? Yes. Mr. Stennett? Yes, ma'am. Mr. Beard? Aye. Mr. Blues? Yes. Ms. Crosby? Yes. Mr. Ellinger? Yes. Ms. Feigl? Yes. And Mr. Gray? Yes. Thank you. Thank you. Those ordinances are approved, and that concludes the business of the special meeting. Do I hear a motion to adjourn? So moved. Second. I have a motion by Councilmember Lane and a second by Councilmember Myers to adjourn. All in favor, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. We can now call to order the work session. The first item on the agenda is public comment on issues on today's agenda. Is there anyone who wishes to address the Council? Seeing none, we'll move along. Item 2, the docket approval, is not an issue today, but we do have a summary from August 24th to approve. Is there a motion? I have a motion from Councilmember Martin to approve, second from Councilmember Myers. Any discussion? All in favor, say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. We don't have any budget amendments. We do have some items of new business for your consideration. I have a motion from Councilmember Beard and a second from Councilmember Martin. Any discussion? All in favor, approve. I do have a motion I'd like to add to the docket for September 9th, and Mr. Barber is here with law and has brought from the law and from the administration. I move to place on the docket for September 9th, 2010, Council meeting resolution ratifying the Department of Law's execution on behalf of the Urban County Government of a settlement agreement stipulation and recommendation of any other necessary documents in Public Service Commission Case Number 2010-00204, pertaining to the transfer of control of Kentucky Utilities Company. So moved. Second. I have a motion by Councilmember Ellinger and a second by Councilmember Langen, which will entertain as a motion to add to the new business items, to amend the new business items. Is there any discussion on Councilmember Ellinger's motion? Councilmember Martin. Thank you, Mayor. Would Mr. Barber just give us an overview of this? Sure. This is essentially when an existing utility is transferred or significant assets are transferred, it requires Public Service Commission approval. In this particular case, Pennsylvania Power and Light is acquiring Kentucky Utilities. There was a pre-application filed in which they committed to 50-plus conditions, including keeping their headquarters in Lexington and some other things. And in the last week or so, we've been working with the other parties, including the Attorney General, to come up with other conditions and commitments that they would sign off on as part of the Public Service Commission's approval of the transfer of control. And I've tried to send you all those documents in the last couple days so that you would have all the details of them. Thank you, Mayor. Any further discussion? All in favor of Councilmember Ellinger's amendment, please let it be known by saying aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. We're now prepared to discuss the new business items as amended. Councilmember Blues, did you have a matter? Thank you, Mayor. I had a question about IMP, and perhaps Commissioner Webb could comment on that. There's a, the amendment increases the cost by some $87,000, which is an 18 percent increase over a year and a half, which I'm interested in knowing how the cost of labor and materials could have jumped that much in that relatively short a time. I think Keith Levin is on his way over here to explain this. Could we get back to your question? Sure, that would be fine. Okay, thank you. Any other questions about the, here he comes. Well, let's just let Mr. Levin sort of catch his breath between there and the microphone, and we'll go from there. Afternoon. Good afternoon. The increase for the Columbia Gas was because of increase in material and labor cost. When they did the estimate, they did it in 2007. So they did the work this year. That was the increase. So the increase is really over a three-year period, not an 18-month period. Correct, yes. And there was a few things that were unexpected when they did the relocation work. I don't have a detailed list, but it was a combination of increased cost in materials, increased cost in labor, and then some incidentals that they were not aware of when they prepared the estimate. Thank you, Keith. Thank you. Council Member Stennett. Thank you, Mayor. Keith, you may be on letter R, I'm sorry, on the change order for letter R. This is on the West Hickman Trail project. No, okay, now that one was ‑‑ I was on P, Claysonville Road. Right, but I'm talking about R. Are you also responsible for that trail? I am. So tell us why the 17 percent increase in cost. On the West Hickman Trail, there was an increase in the quantity of rock. There were four different items that we had an increase, the quantity of rock. Because my problem is the next lowest bid was 417. When do we know this increase was needed? During the construction. When we started building the abutments, we recognized that we needed more rock to go behind the abutment. Oh, and there was also an increase in the number of trees that we took out. That was about $10,000. When we had just identified about 17 trees and we added 10 more trees that met the diameter requirement to be paid for when we removed them, all of these changes happened during the construction process. As we got into doing the work, these changes came up during the construction. Right. Well, I mean, my overall concern is we say funds are budgeted, but that's not really the case because if we're adding $67,000 to this trail project, we're taking $67,000 from another trail project, even though it's coming from the same trails. Funds aren't really budgeted because we're going to hurt another trail project in the process. So, I mean, I'm just trying to, you know, Councilman McCord has been working on a way to, you know, standardize how we're building trails before we get into these situations because the 70% change order is a big change order, $67,000 for a trail, nonetheless. So, I'm not sure if I'm going to support it because I think we need to really sit back and take a look at how we're doing the trails going forward. But I appreciate your honest answers. Thank you. Councilmember James. Thank you, Keith. I do have a question for you. Hi. On item R, one of the discussions that we had in tree board a few months ago was the fact that these trees were being removed, and now it looks like even more trees are coming out. Is it still because of the natural inhabitants of the trees that you're ñ that was the explanation given at that point, that there were bats near the trail or something and you needed to remove the trees where the bats were? That was a different project, and, yes, we had an alignment set on that project and we couldn't deviate from the alignment. That was the legacy trail. On this one, we had identified there was a clearing and grubbing area, and we knew it was a clearing and grubbing area, but we didn't go in and actually inventory each of the trees that was in that area. And then once we cleared out all the shrubs and stuff, we saw how many trees were actually there, and that was the increase in trees. When we remove trees to this extent, especially with our ML-4 and our tree canopy that we're trying to meet, is there a goal to replace them anywhere? Yes. Yes, we always replace the trees that we've taken out, generally to a three-to-one ratio. Along the same trail area? Yes, yes. Okay. That's the project. I'd be interested if you could share where the replacement, what types of trees will go back in and with the tree board and where those will be. And I'm guessing the urban forester had to approve these trees coming out. He reviewed, and I got my recommendations from him. Okay. I'll talk with him further. Thank you. Mayor also had questions on items M, N, and O. Commissioner Romkey. Thank you. Thank you. Commissioner, I was reviewing the language for M, N, and O, at least for, I think, N and O. It looks like there was some information that we didn't have that made us have to stay with the current provider. Can you talk a little bit about that? Absolutely. Thank you for asking the question. I think council is aware that we had a subcommittee of employees that do the annual review of the benefits process. As part of that process, they broke down into various subcommittees, and as they were going through, they felt that they did not have enough information to be able to bring forward a new recommendation within the timeframe that we're working in. This year was a unique year in that, and I believe you'll recall when Rama talked to the committee a week ago, that we have some upgrades to our software in order to do annual enrollment. As part of that, we would have had a decision made and in place for any new provider by September 15th, which is you back that up. We would have had to have something before council in early August to be able to change providers. The committees unanimously felt that they were not ready to bring forward any changes, so what they did was they stepped back with each of the providers within the contracts that we currently had and asked could we renew for another year, leaving the committees in place to continue the work that they had already begun, because we think it's going to take another six months to really dig deep and get the best programs that are available under those various plans. And that way we can bring it back to the council ahead of time and be ready for the annual enrollment for next year. So that's what the committee wanted me to bring forward on this. Okay, so the glitch had to do with new software and the ability to input information into the new software? I'm confused a little bit. And again, I'm not the tech person, so forgive me. There is an upgrade to our HCM system that needed to take place that put the deadline for us to be able to load in the approved healthcare, any insurance providers into the system had to be approved by council and loaded in by September 15th. When you backed that up, we were not aware of that when the committee started meeting in June. So once that became apparent, they were in a time crunch. We began the process, we sent the RFPs out, but the volume of information, the fact that we wanted to dig deeper on the health and wellness aspect of our offering to our employees, we wanted to dig deeper on savings that we might be able to bring forward and better coverage for the same amount from a life insurance standpoint. There were so many different pieces that I know council had asked us to take a look at. They didn't think that they could do the kind of in-depth job they needed to do. Okay, was there a council member on the RFP committee? I know that they were invited. I apologize. I don't know. I did not sit on the committee. Are there any council members that were part of the RFP that are here today? No. Okay. Thank you. You're welcome. And on item J, looks like Commissioner Bennett or David Lucas. Thank you, Commissioner. I know that item J came before the addressing address committee two times, and the first time it was voted down, the second time it voted to move forward. Can you talk a little bit about the difference of the information between the first meeting and the second meeting and how it came to be that this renaming went through? Not in any great detail, because I didn't attend either meetings. But I do know from talking to David that they did have at the second meeting additional information and additional support from the Division of Police that the members were not aware of at the initial meeting. They also had additional information as to the level of support from Officer Dermon's wife that they were not aware of at the first meeting. So that's the extent of my knowledge of the difference between the two. Okay. And has the street already been renamed? Not to my knowledge. I don't think the new signs have been put up yet. They should be in the process of being manufactured, but I don't think they've been. So they've already been worked on? The name change is already happening? That would be my assumption. Okay. Because we do them in-house, so. All right. I'll check with David and make sure. My advice would be that until something passes through council, it's probably not advisable to rename anything yet. Okay. Thank you. Thanks, Mayor. Council Member Beard. Thank you, Mayor. This also, my question relates to item number four. And Keith Loven, I think probably you're the fellow I need to talk to. That's the West Hickman Trail also. Could you tell me where this trail will start and where it will terminate? Sure. This is what we're calling phase 1A, and it begins at Veterans Park and it crosses the West Hickman and it ends up at Veterans Elementary School on Clearwater Way. Ultimately, where is it going to? Right now, that's all we have on the books. We had proposed going underneath Clearwater Way up to Man o' War at Clearwater. That's the section that's in the floodplain behind Fiddler's Creek. We have moved that project out into the future with no estimated date. Okay. I guess the second question, which at one time anyway, we were going to do an extension of the Legacy Trail through the Arboretum and then further Residential Streets, Belafonte, I think. And it would end up at Veterans Park is my understanding. So is there a connection here? Yes. Okay. We've got a master plan that has identified a north-south route of which the Legacy Trail is a part of it, as well as the West Hickman. That route has not been defined. We're using on-street roads. We're using the Belafonte bike route. We want to go through the Arboretum. We will build it where we can when we have the funds. The West Hickman was part of it. We can shift the West Hickman to on-street. If things change, we can maybe go back and work with the people in that subdivision. The goal is to build the section that we've got built, let people see what it's like, and see if attitudes change. It was my understanding that the original West Hickman Trail didn't quite suit the Pinnacle Neighborhood Association, their main concern being or one of their major concerns being safety and having people wandering through their area and that type of thing. And we were going to move the trail? We've talked about it. You know, we're taking their concerns into consideration. No decision has been made. We have moved the funding out into the future, and when that date comes, then we'll look at it again. But no plans to build that at this point. If we're going to respect the Pinnacle, I think we should respect the people that live on McDonald abutting the Arboretum, because that trail at one point was 50 feet from their backyards. Sure. And so just tuck that one away, too. In all probability, I won't be sitting in this chair. I may be six feet under by the time we get around to all this. But I just, as I say, get a Post-it note and stick it to something. Sure. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. Council Member Henson. Thank you, Mayor. Keith, I don't know if you can answer this for me or not, but I have a problem with item R and the fact that, you know, an RFP to me is not fair to a contractor if you can get the low bid in and then get a change order that's 17% increase. So, you know, and that is much greater than the next lowest bid. I don't know. I just think that's something that we need to take a look at. Sure. Because anybody can put in a low bid, and then later on we're going to approve a change order automatically. I just don't see that as being fair to the, you know, the RFP process is put in place so it can be fair to the contractors, and this just does not seem to be that way. Sure. The next lowest bidder, the same thing would have happened with the next lowest bidder. The quantities changed, therefore his bid would go up as well, probably by the same percentage. And I reviewed my minutes again, and it was also a change in the design of the abutment. We increased the quantity of the concrete that went into the abutment, and that happened during the construction process. Those four major things that the quantities increased while we were under construction. Anybody else that had bid on the project would have had the opportunity to increase their price as well. Okay. Thank you. Council Member McCord. All right. Anything? Council Member James. Yeah, thank you, Mayor. Keith, on the item R, you mentioned, well, it said funds are budgeted, and then Council Member Stennett talked about that it's in the trail fund but not necessarily, it wasn't necessarily budgeted for this project. Are all of the trail funds allocated for? Are there extra trail funds just floating around out there? Actually, probably the better terminology would be saying funds are available, and the West Hickman project was funded with SLX dollars, and it wasn't a trail fund per se. This was actually highway transportation dollars. And so when we had set this project up, we were using the SLX dollars. Which can be used for? Highways, trails. Any trail project in Lexington? Anything that's transportation related. Legacy or anything. Yes. Okay. All right. Thank you. Thanks, Mayor. Council Member Lane. Thank you, Mayor. Just a follow-up question on the trail. When we were doing our feasibility analysis to put the trails in, do we actually have a survey made, and do they look for larger trees, and do we do soil testing? Or have we elected not to do that, and the experience has been that, you know, we're not having that much of a problem, this was an exceptional situation? During, for the trees themselves, we identified, we knew where we were going to do the clearing and grubbing. It was basically a thicket, and we couldn't identify all of the trees. We did a best guess estimate. Then when we got in there and started clearing it out, that's when we discovered the extra trees. So we did not actually do a field survey to count the trees when we were doing the design. What about the soil conditions? You don't test for rock when you do? When we do a bridge, yes, we do a geotechnical investigation because that is critical. On the design of the abutment, we made an assumption for the design. Once it goes to bid, the bridge manufacturer reviews the design. He felt like we needed to make the abutment bigger to support the bridge that he had recommended. So that was the reason for the increase in the concrete for the abutment. Is there anything that you feel like we could do differently that would give us a tighter bid and less change orders? There's always things that come up during the construction of a project. A lot of times rock comes over, sometimes it runs under. We've actually saved money on number two stone. That change order hasn't come in, so the total dollar amount of the project may come in. It's going to come in at a different price than what we had originally projected. Well, I'm not trying to pick on us too much, but I'm just thinking as we're working these trails, we might get some new approaches to tighten the bids up if it might be possible. We had the same issues with roads. You go in and there's undisclosed things that you don't see. You run into rock that you hadn't anticipated. You run into sinkholes. Any number of things. Change orders are part of the project. We tried to limit the change orders. We do the best we can up front. But once you get into the project, there's things that you didn't, that were unforeseen. All right. Thank you very much for your input. Council Member Martin. Thank you, Mayor. Keith, thanks for coming down and talking to us about this. I, too, am concerned about the overage. It is a substantial amount of overage, but I do understand about when you get out on site and you find unforeseen things. One of my questions to you is that would, you know, you and I have talked about the need for a project manager in trails and bikeways. Would that have helped this to have more boots on the ground? Not in this situation. I mean, we did a design. We thought we had looked at everything. Those few items, a project manager probably would not have helped in that situation. Okay. Well, I appreciate everything that you and Cindy Dietz and Kenzie Gleason does. I know you're running a lot of things out of just three people, and I just appreciate your help on that. Thank you, Mayor. Anything further? Council Member McCord. I think one of the, a couple things, Keith, while you're there that may help clarify, is a lot of times there's not a lot of uniformity in how we do trails because of where the source of money comes from. If it's federal monies, there's all kinds of other hoops you have to jump through, and if it's local money, then we have a whole lot of flexibility that we don't have in other situations. The other piece is that there's no real uniformity in how wide we build certain trails and so forth. Again, it goes back to if Parks and Rec lands the grant, it may be eight foot wide and not dug very deep, and if engineering gets it, we could probably land a plane on it and it meets AASHTO standards and will stand the test of time. And so to a couple of folks' points here, you know, as we start to create connectivity and so forth, it is incumbent to start looking at how Lexington will design trails so it takes some of the pressure off of you and some of the unknowns that you get into once you get into a project like this. But also the issue of safety, one of the things that we've found all over the country, all over the world is that that becomes the very first thing that neighbors say is, well, this is going to really degenerate safety in the neighborhood. And not only do home values go up 16 percent on a national average, but safety actually can go up because you have more attentive eyes on it. And with regard to the issue in Pinnacle, what's very interesting is that that's land that we own. It's down in the floodplain, so it's not an issue of, you know, we were very considerate to the neighborhood and so forth, and if we were just saying we're going to connect, we could just kind of go through. So I appreciate how you have handled all these things with sensitivity, and I think Councilmember Martin's point is, I want to reiterate, is that you all are doing a phenomenal job of just the three people and so forth. But I think we can do a better job in, one, getting local funding so that we have the greatest amount of flexibility to deciding what our standard type trails are going to be so that there's not a lot of room for a change order like this and so forth. But I think, again, I just want to publicly thank you for all that you do. Councilmember Feigl. Thank you, Mayor. I don't really want to beat this to death. Again, I think 17 percent is something certainly to be questioned. And I'm looking at where the additional funds are going to go, and you have 14 trees to be removed. And I may have missed the conversation that Councilmember James had with you when I walked out of the room, but what's the reason for removing those trees? They were where we were actually putting the bridge, so we had no other option. We couldn't shift it. And we had identified the area, and we just did a ballpark estimate on the number of trees. It was a thicket, and we couldn't count the actual trees, so that was the reason for the increase. So are you pretty sure that all 14 trees have to be removed? Yes, yes. We can't cut that number down? No, it's exactly where the bridge is going, and the bridge was designed for that location. We couldn't shift it. What about any of these other items on the list? Any of the things that are possibly optional at this point in time? No. Believe me, I tried to limit the change orders, and we look at all the options we've got available, and this was just an increase in the quantities. So it's all or nothing? Yes. Thank you. Vice Mayor Gray. I hesitate to speak on this, but in support of Keith on a project like this, my own experience is that sometimes to get the best price we will, and I suspect that you may have done this, Keith, to get the most competitive price, when you know there are going to be issues on a construction project that are not able to be identified up front, then you don't include that in the original scope, especially like rock. And I assume that a big piece of this was rock. Is that right? And then you said it was stone that was required. So it's not at all unusual to do this. I think perhaps in our planning that we might be able to do better is to identify an amount for those unexpected conditions beforehand in the budget, because some projects will have more than others. We identified each of these items. We actually had a price going into the project for each of these items. On a unit price basis. Unclassified excavation, right? Right. Which is not an unusual procedure. But what can be surprising to those on the funding side is when the number that was originally estimated or budgeted then comes in through change orders to be a higher number. So my suggestion might be that you all consider from a project management point of view in the original budgeting process that an amount for the expected or anticipated change is included then. But I would say that I suspect that you were getting a very healthy amount of competition up front. Oh, yes. Right. Any further discussion on the new business items as amended? All those in favor of approving the new business items as amended, please indicate by saying aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Thank you. I understand Council Member Blues has both the Council Water Resources Oversight Committee report and the Planning Committee report. So, Council Member Blues, I'll give you the floor for those purposes. Thank you, Mayor. I'll start with the Planning Committee report. As Vice Chair, I'm substituting for Council Member Gordon, who chaired this meeting on August 24th. There was one main item of discussion, and that was fencing regulations, with particular reference to fencing in the front of residential buildings. Current ordinance allows fencing of any density up to six feet, and there are some concerns with that when a property owner can put up a fence that tall, that dense, all around the front yard, cutting off sight lines on driveways and even on the street. So I had originally put this issue into committee. Chris King had drafted in consultation with Building Inspection a text amendment, which we discussed as a possibility going forward. This was a preliminary discussion. So Chris presented the possibilities for limiting fence height in the fronts and to a certain distance on the sides of houses on corner lots to four feet. Council Member Feigl brought up the subject as this conversation went forward about the way fences face, particularly along major corridors, the issue there being should a fence, its superstructure, so to speak, its posts and its stringers face outward, away from the enclosure of the builder of the fence. So that was discussed to some extent. And this conversation will continue at the September Planning Committee meeting. Before that meeting takes place, Directors King and Crow of Building Inspection and CM Feigl and I will meet to discuss the facing issue. Welcome back to the Planning Committee to continue that conversation and hope to bring a recommendation to the full council. The other major item on the agenda was the secured by design, which was postponed until the September 21st meeting. Two items in committee were removed by unanimous vote of the committee members. That's the Parks Master Plan and the Downtown Master Plan. There were no motions coming forward to the full council. Any questions for Council Member Blues on the Planning Committee report? All right. Council Member Blues. The Water Resources Oversight Committee met on August 24th. Council members have been provided with the draft minutes and related materials. The Division of Water Quality Director, Charles Martin, reported on developing a demolished properties maintenance controls policy. He is working on a process that would establish a procedure for communicating between divisions when properties are purchased for demolition and for establishing maintenance responsibility. You can see on handout 40 a draft version of the policy under discussion. He's also working toward a policy that would enable willing civic groups or neighborhoods to create and maintain environmentally responsible natural spaces, such as community gardens or passive parkland. That would certainly relieve the city of the responsibility of mowing these newly created green spaces. We expect an update and further discussion at our September meeting. Addressing floodplain map revisions, Mr. Martin reported that there are approximately 138 residential and 53 non-residential properties in Lexington that may be subject unnecessarily to flood insurance because of outdated floodplain maps. Water Quality is now working on submission to FEMA of letters of map revision for affected properties in the Danby Corner subdivision, a substantial start on resolving this problem. You can see handouts 41 through 44 on that process. Commissioner Rumke and Stephen Milligan presented financials ending May 30th, handout 48. No significant or unusual changes in the accounts. CM Stennett requested a report on water quality fee revenues and expenses for our September meeting, and we expect that will be forthcoming. Regarding the stormwater priority list, which the consent decree requires us to review and to revise, Council Member Stennett moved to form a workgroup to develop the criteria for the redesign of the stormwater priority project list. The motion passed unanimously. I talked this morning, by the way, with Charlie Martin on assembling the workgroup and getting started on this important project. Thank you, Mayor. That's my report. Any questions? Thank you, Council Member Blues. Council Member Lane, you have some information about the runway dedication, I believe. Thank you, Mayor. The good news is the Bluegrass Airport's relocated runway number 927 was dedicated on August the 4th. And I mentioned that August 4th was the hottest day so far this year. The temperature on the tarmac during the dedication was about 110 degrees. Anyway, there's a short video that was produced by the airport that sort of gives you an overview of the dedication. And the good news, it's only about three minutes long. So I thought you'd like to take a look at it. Thank you. It's very rare for any airport director to get the opportunity to be part of the construction and opening of a runway. So I'm very pleased to be here and grateful for the opportunity to be here today. Over the past decade, this airport and our community wrestled over the best way to improve its aviation infrastructure for this region. And today, we're here to celebrate the final outcome. Building a runway is no small task. For this location, this new runway, we have moved more than 1.25 million cubic yards of earth. We've laid more than 35,000 cubic yards of concrete. And today, we proudly stand before you ready to celebrate the completion of this momentous project. The airport was built in 1941. And the two airplanes behind me here were made about that same time to fight a great war. We thought it was appropriate that we would bring those two out to help celebrate the opening of this new runway. While the focus of the general public typically concentrates on the airport's commercial air service, the reality is that general aviation makes up 65% of the operations at Blue Grass Airport. This 4,000 feet of concrete represents more than just a runway. It represents the vitality of this city and this community and this region and this state. With the opening of this runway and with the completion of the NewTak Air Terminal, I've got to think Lexington has some of the finest general aviation facilities in the entire country. That is remarkably important because whenever we're in the process of trying to create jobs, it's very typical that folks will utilize our general aviation facilities when they first come to Lexington. As the Department of Aviation's commissioner, we're so proud of what's happening out here today in Lexington. This means so much for Central Kentucky and really Eastern Kentucky as well. I moved here in 1954, and I've had a small plane of some sort on this airport ever since. This is the first thing people see when they arrive and the last thing they see when they leave. As a pilot, I couldn't fly out of a more beautiful airport in this whole world. And every time I come down to land, I tell the tower, you never look more beautiful. And Bluegrass Airport is like my home away from home. Very unusual at an airport you get an opportunity to open a new runway. There's so few built in our country, so it's just exciting for me to be part of that. But more importantly for the community, it just opens up so many opportunities with the general aviation and corporate aviation community that this community didn't have before. So we're very excited today. It's a very special day, and we had so many special guests that joined us. It was a wonderful time. Let me leave you with one final thought about this 4,000-foot runway. You can build a 4,000-foot extension to a road or a 4,000-foot drive, and basically you can go 4,000 feet. But if you build a 4,000-foot runway, you can go anywhere in the world. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. That's it. Congratulations to all involved with the airport, because it is a momentous occasion for our community to have a new runway open. Council Member Martin? All right. Then we'll go ahead to Council Reports. Council Member Martin and other members, please indicate a desire to give a report. We'll get to you. Thank you, Mayor. Tonight, again, is the Southland Jamboree. We've only got two left tonight on the Southland Drive next to Collins Bowling Lanes. And it starts at 7 p.m., so come early, have dinner on Southland Drive. Also, I want to be the first to welcome or to wish Council Member Feigl a very happy birthday. Thank you, Mayor. Happy birthday. Council Member Myers? Thank you, Mayor. I have a report out from the Citizens Advocate Workgroup, and the council members all received a memo from my office on August 26th, and we passed another copy of that out today. So in keeping with what was stated in that memo, I move to place on the docket a resolution by council to temporarily appoint Paula Campbell to the interim position of acting Citizens Advocate at a salary equal to 10 percent above the incumbent's current salary as determined by human resources, effective upon passage and continuing until a permanent appointment is made. So moved. I have a motion by Council Member Myers and a second by Council Member Beard to add that item to the next council meeting agenda. Any discussion? All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Thank you, Mayor. One other point. I mistakenly left off the attachment of the policy and procedure manual for the Citizens Advocate's Office and the professional standards. They were both voted on by the workgroup, unanimously voted to recommend a council approval. So with the grace of the council, I'd like to go ahead and make a motion to put these on the docket. They are in your mailboxes as we speak, so you'll have a chance to look at those as soon as you get back to your offices. That will give us, you know, time between now and second reading to review those if you have any questions about that. But I will tell you that they were in this workgroup for quite some time, many months. We even had an expanded workgroup after we came off of the budget cycle this past year where we included more people on that workgroup to determine not only what to do moving forward with that office, but also to look at the structure of the office. And so let me make the motion to go ahead and put onto the docket the Citizens Advocate's Policy and Procedure Manual and professional standards. So moved. I have a motion to Council Member Meyers, seconded by Council Member Crosby. Any discussion? All in favor say aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. And one final thing, Mayor. The workgroup also, the expanded workgroup also voted to recommend to the Council that we move forward with this office in the future with a full-time citizens advocate without an assistant. And so we wanted to get that out so that the workgroup could move forward, or the committee, the search committee could move forward with trying to find a permanent replacement. So that's just out for information. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you. Council Member McCord. Thank you, Mayor. A couple of things. One is tomorrow at 1030 is the ribbon-cutting in Shillitoe Park for the original Healthway Trail, really the trail project that kind of started all the momentum. And it is extremely gratifying to see 2.25 miles in Shillitoe that now connects to the 1.5 miles we have in Wellington Park, along with the half miles in Old Higbee Mill Park and eventually on down to Waveland. And what really serves as the model, the statewide model, for how you assemble lands, publicly held lands for trail connectivity. You basically have connected three city parks and a state shrine by a trail. And what's great about that is that Shillitoe is obviously one of the signature parks in our city. It's 100-plus acres. But many of those acres I've never even seen, and I've played in that park my whole life. Not until this trail started to go through some of those areas did we even activate it. So what is great about some of this trail infrastructure is that we have this great green place to live, but so much of that is unenjoyable or unaccessible until you put a trail through it. And now folks can have the opportunity to have expanded park experiences. And so it's extremely gratifying to be with you tomorrow, Mayor, for that ribbon-cutting. I've been looking forward to that for quite a while. Along that same line, let me just point out to folks that we are less than 25 days from having the world as our guests. And possibly the most monumental event that Lexington has had, Kentucky has had, and we should all be mindful of who is coming and how they view our city. And I just wanted to say publicly, I wanted to thank Commissioner Mike Webb publicly. I wanted to thank George Milligan publicly and every single person in this government who has made the physical transformation of our town possible in this very compressed period of time. What we are doing and how we have done it is truly amazing, considering that for 25 years basically this downtown has sat stagnant. And to be a third-generation Lexingtonian, to look at your city and recognize the effort and energy that's been put forward, I want to thank all those involved, but I especially want to thank you, Commissioner, because you and George's willingness to get into the ditch, so to speak, is really what made a lot of this happen. And we're a better city because of it. Lastly, I want to just go ahead and start putting it out there for folks that the second Sunday of September, September 12th, from 1 o'clock until dusk, is the premier opening of the Legacy Trail. Again, a project that probably, if not for the community effort and not for the political will, not only locally but statewide and federally to make this project happen, this is a trail project that probably would have taken 15 years at a minimum, given everything, all the hoops that have to be jumped through. And this project was basically done in four years. And it is a testament to our community and how things can get done. And what's interesting about this trail is that it's a whole lot more than a trail, and this premier is just the opening of it and an introduction to the community for an amenity they get to enjoy for the rest of their lives. But this actually physically connects our urban core with our rural setting. And we talk a lot about the preservation of that rural setting. We talk a whole lot about its importance and why everybody should care. And what's interesting is that you have folks who have lived in Lexington their whole lives that have never seen it. And you have children who you might as well be talking about Mars if you're talking about the farmland. And what has happened with this trail is that you've knocked down every physical and social barrier so that everybody can experience all the great things that we have, both in the urban setting and in the rural setting. It is also something that is an amenity that can be touted to workers and workforce that we are trying to bring here. It takes traffic off the roads. It improves the environment. It's the longest stretch of pervious paved concrete in the state. It is a project that everyone in this community needs to understand how important this thing is. And you need to have the opportunity to come and enjoy it on September 12th and tell all your friends. But if you miss it September 12th, the great news is you have it for the rest of your lives. And so, again, I want to thank all those who made that possible as well because, again, truly it is all of our legacies to go back and look at these great physical things that we've done to change our town for the better. Thank you, Mayor. Council Member Beard. Thank you, Mayor. I would move the approval of this week's NDF. I have a motion by Council Member Beard, second by Council Member Myers. Any discussion? All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Thank you, Mayor. Council Member Henson. Thank you, Mayor. I wanted to take some time. Last night, yesterday evening, there was a meeting of business owners, property owners, multi-housing property owners for a revitalization of Oxford Circle. It's a gateway into a neighborhood that has been neglected for some time. And after meeting with the clear unit officers and code enforcement and different folks, it was Sergeant Chris Young came up with this idea. I just wanted to personally thank him on behalf of the folks that live in the Cardinal Valley neighborhood and along with Shannon Gayhafer and Keith Gaines, officers of the clear unit, and code enforcement, David Hollingsworth and Mike Ferguson. I think we have a lot of great employees in city government across the board. We've got lots of folks that help out, and I don't think they get the thanks that they need or deserve. But I really, really appreciate it, and I hope that our plan for revitalization works out. Also, the Y property, the old former Y property on Cross Keys Road should be demolished by the end of this, not this month, but by the end of September. And it has been transferred ownership, and it's been a definite eyesore in the Gardenside area for quite some time. So I just want folks to know that. Also, I wanted to thank the mayor for appointing me to the Keep Lexington Beautiful Commission. We had our first meeting yesterday, and this is something that's very, very important to me, our waterways, our environmental quality, and so forth. And I really feel like it'll be a real positive commission for Lexington. Thank you. Council Member Lawles. Thank you. I don't really have an announcement, more of a report back on the end of our meeting on Thursday evening where we discussed Mr. Sellers' contract with the city. And it was going to be, I think, discussed today, but Mr. Sellers said he couldn't make it, and I never felt like Mr. Sellers needed to be involved. I think we really, at the end of the day, have our answer to that as to whose responsibility it is. And certainly it's the administration, the mayor, and the commissioner ask you hired or contracted with Mr. Sellers and report to them. So it's not the council's issue to deal with. Certainly, Council Member Lane, as a member of the Internal Audit Board, said he couldn't comment because of pending litigation, and I expect Mr. Sellers would have no other answer than that. So I think that's something that, even though Mr. Sellers said he would have time on September 21st to address the council, I don't see any reason for that to go forward. Thank you. Council Member Feigl. Thank you, Mayor. I have three announcements. Tonight is the final jazz concert at Acton Park beginning at 7 p.m. And on September 4th will be the culmination of the jazz concert series that we have at Acton, but it will be at Ashland. And it will begin at 1 o'clock with a wine tasting event. The concert, which has historically been there for I don't know how many years, will begin at 5 o'clock, and the concert is the DiMartino Oslin Jazz Orchestra. So we invite you to come out on Saturday. I realize there's a U.K. ball game that day, but hopefully you can stop by before the ball game. Help us celebrate this vintage Kentucky event and help raise funds for Ashland. So thank you very much. Oh, excuse me, one other thing. On Thursday, September 2nd, this Thursday, we will have the final public meeting for the Chevy Chase redesign, and that will be at 530 at the Park United Methodist Church. Thank you. Council Member Crosby. Thank you, Mayor. I just wanted to announce for all of our area that is feeling the pain of the Todd's Road expansion. I know Kevin and I probably get a little bit more bombarded than most with this. We had our MPO meeting on Wednesday, and they are sticking to the mid-September timeline, so we're almost there. Just patience a little bit longer. And I just wanted to take the opportunity to thank our division of police. They have been out patrolling a little extra heavy because, of course, when you have this much construction going on, the neighborhoods really feel the burden. And then also to Traffic Engineering for working with signaling with lights, and hopefully we'll be able to hold them to the timeline. They keep saying mid-September, so fingers crossed. Thank you, Mayor. Council Member Stennett. Thank you, Mayor. Just a couple things today. One, I just want to give our condolences out to the family of Michael Allen, not a long-time LFUCG employee, but he came on when I came on Council as our Human Resource Director, and we hope his family the best through this time in dealing with his loss. Also, as this Council knows, we voted to extend Avon Golf Course through Labor Day and continue to keep it open up until September the 6th. Obviously, that deadline is a quick approach. I know we've been all approached about extending that out. If you also recall, Council Members, we did vote to keep the pro who is staffing that on a full-time basis until the end of this calendar year. So I think there's some need for discussion. But having the schedule that we have, we no longer have a work session for the next two weeks. We do have a Council meeting on September the 9th, which we could pass a resolution to extend the closure of Avon until the end of November through the main bulk of the season where they're actually earning money at this time of year. So I think it would be appropriate maybe to hear from Jerry Hancock and see what those numbers look like, see if it would be a break-even proposition to keep it open through the end of November, since we do have the full-time staff there anyway, instead of trying to relocate them to another golf course. So I'll make a motion to put it on the docket on the September 9th Council meeting, a resolution the Council desires to keep that golf course open through the end of November, which would be November 30th, would be the closure of it instead of September 6th. So moved. I have a motion by Council Member Stennett, seconded by Council Member Blues. Any discussion? All in favor say aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. And just a follow-up. I will have all the information out to the Council Members, have Park and Rec and Commissioner Coe and Mr. Hancock get all the information, so we can make one way or another decision then and move on one way or another. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. I appreciate your mentioning Mr. Allen's untimely death. He had quite a battle the last few weeks, and we will certainly miss him. I know the folks in Human Resources are missing him, as are his colleagues in our Department of Finance and Administration, and I appreciate your mentioning that, Council Member Stennett. I have no report beyond that. Is there any public comment on issues not on the agenda? Seeing none, we need to have a very, very short closed meeting, probably three to five minutes. Council Member McCord. I move pursuant to KRS 61.8101C to go into closed session for the purpose of discussing potential litigation involving the Urban County Government, so moved. I have a motion and second to go into closed session. Any discussion? All in favor say aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Thank you.