So let's go ahead and call the meeting to order. We have a very lengthy agenda today. We have a very lengthy agenda today. I do not want to make it any longer than is necessary, but obviously today is a significant day in our country's history, and I think it would be appropriate in light of the sixth anniversary of September 11th if we might all stand for just a moment in a moment of silence in memory of those who lost their lives six years ago. Thank you. To begin with today, we have what I believe will be a very brief public hearing on the Urban County Government's five-year solid waste plan. We'll now open the public hearing session. Is there anyone here who wishes to comment on the solid waste plan? Anyone from the public? Are there any comments from members of the council? Well, seeing none, we will adjourn the public hearing and move on to open the work session. We have first public comment on items that are on the agenda. Let me say I know several people are here who wish to speak with regard to the liquor sales issue, and we are planning on having that at the end of our agenda today so that everybody who will who would like to be here in order to have the opportunity to speak can do so. So that will be at the end. Now, having said that, is there anyone here who wishes to address other issues that are on the agenda for today? Okay. Let me, before we move on, suggest if you are here to speak on the liquor sales issue, if you would be sure to register in the back corner there by the door. We will try to get everybody in, in the order in which you sign up. Council Member McCoy. Thank you, Mayor. As it relates to the length of today's schedule, if it would be okay with the council, I'd like to make a recommendation that we move council report above the last presentation since so many folks are going to want to speak. If we could swap those agenda items, I think that would be probably prudent. And we'll try to do the mayor's report in advance so that people, as many people as possible, will be able to be here after the work day concludes. Council Member Smith. Normally I would agree with that, but that number E is very different from the public input section. That's more for so council members still have some questions on that ordinance from ABC and other officials within government. And that was allotted for that kind of discussion for council because we have yet to have a discussion before we hear public input. Can we put the mayor's report in front of it? We can put anything you want in front of it, but that's what E was for. Okay. Would there be any difficulty then with just discussing that issue at the end of the agenda so that council would have an opportunity to ask those questions and then move on to the So as long as our ABC officers, we're not holding them up and other people that work for LFUCG can be here, I have no problem with that. I don't think that will. If we run into any scheduling problems, if anybody runs into any scheduling problems, if you would contact Mr. Green, he's out right now, but he'll be in and we'll make the necessary adjustments then. All right. That brings us down to the docket approval. And I think that has previously been circulated. Are there any motions? Is there a second? I have a motion and a second to approve the docket that has been circulated. If there's any discussion. There's a motion needed on number seven. It's a zone change request on whether to have a public hearing or not for it. Thank you, Madam Clerk. Are there any motions with regard to item seven by way of an amendment? If I hear no motion, I take it we will have no public hearing. Is that correct? It would be better to have a motion to not have a public hearing. All right. Farewell. Can I? Council Member Boyles. Somebody has requested a public hearing on. No, it's just standard that the council makes a motion whether to have a public hearing or not. Either way is fine. There's not been any requests that we're aware of. Good. Well, I move no public hearing. Second. Okay. I have a motion and a second to amend the docket to reflect there being no public hearing on item number seven. Any discussion? Those in favor, please vote aye. Those opposed, no. Motion carries. If I could get someone from the clerk's office to help me with my monitor, it's not coming up. Mayor, can I ask a question? Yes. On the public hearing that's going to be canceled for Thursday, do we have to do anything, Clerk? I've been given the. Thank you. Just for information purposes, it will be canceled, but we will officially take it off on Thursday evening. That's what we've been told by the law department. But for anybody's schedule, it will be canceled. As one might anticipate, the problem was mine, not the computer system, so thank you, Ms. Lamb, for getting me back on track here. Council Member Stevens. On ordinance number two, under second reading, there is a change on the effective date to December 11, 2007. Should I make that motion to change it on the docket today, or should I defer that until Thursday? Let's go ahead and get it cleaned up if we could. Okay. It will need to be made, actually, officially on Thursday. We can't change anything that's on there at this point. It's fine to make a preliminary motion, but we can't change it until a motion is made Thursday night. Okay. Thank you very much. All right. We have a motion on the floor to approve the docket now as amended with regard to item seven. Council Member James. Would this be the appropriate time to make a motion to place something on the docket for Thursday? Yes, it would. Can I do that right now? Yes, you may. Okay. I move to place on the docket for Thursday, September 13th, a resolution approving the issuance by the city of Stamping Ground of industrial revenue bonds for Central Christian Church, LLC, in an amount not to exceed $7 million. I have a motion and a second to amend the docket to include that item of business. Any discussion? Those in favor, please vote. Excuse me, Mayor. I'm sorry. I apologize. That should actually be $7.5 million in the amount. There should have been a corrected motion, but it's up to $7.5 million. I don't have that corrected motion, but I can amend that to say $7.5 million. All right. Second. We'll accept that as a friendly amendment. Thank you. Any further discussion on the amendment? Those in favor, please vote electronically. Motion carries. We're now prepared, I think, to vote on the docket as amended. Is there any further discussion? Then those in favor of approving the docket as amended, please let it be known by saying aye. Aye. And voting electronically. Those opposed, no. Motion carries. I like to go on record that I pounded this thing and it still doesn't work. I voted yes. Me too, Richard. Sometimes you pound too hard, Mr. Maloney. We'll note for the record that was a unanimous vote, and I think we'll be in good shape. We're now ready to move on to the approval of the summary of the August 28th meeting. Is there a motion? Second. I have a motion and second. Any discussion? Those in favor, please vote electronically. Motion carries. We're now prepared to address the budget amendments. Item four on the agenda, are there any motions? So moved. Second. We've got a motion and second. Any discussion? Those in favor of approving the or those in favor, actually, please vote. If you vote yes, it's in favor of approving the budget amendments. No vote, it's in favor of disapproving them. Motion carries. All right. Motion carries. We're now down to items of new business. Are there motions? Any discussion? Council Member Maloney. First one I want to talk about is P, and that is the, well, we're having someone contract outside to do the GIS database, and I'm wondering why we couldn't do that in-house and why we don't have staff. And we're paying $195,000 for it. I'll yield the floor to Mr. Bennett. Would you repeat the question, Mr. Maloney? Why aren't we doing this in-house? This is a far more complicated task than the people inside can do. It's very extensive work. It will take probably eight or ten months of the consultant's time. So our GIS guys couldn't do this? I don't think so. I mean, $195,000, I'm just wondering, should we hire somebody if we're going to be doing a lot of this and let them just focus on that? Would it be cheaper to hire somebody to do this? Yes, sir. In-house? Yes. I mean, let somebody be employed here, because it seems like we're going to be changing these things as the years go by. This is the first time I think we've done the impervious data. Ten years? I think it's been about ten years. Eighty? Twenty years. This is the first time it's been done in 20 years. Well, I just want to make sure, because I figure if you update it, we're going to make sure it's going to be changing as when the EPA and all, when we start going pretty forward. We're doing this to get ahead of the curve on that EPA issue. Okay. I just want to make sure. Thank you. Yes, sir. Any further discussion? Yeah, I was going to vote on this if I wanted to vote no on a few things. How would that work on this? I don't know the answer to that question. Perhaps someone from the clerk's office can help us. As long as you say it, I'll have it noted in the summary. As long as I say it? Okay. Thank you. Any further discussion? I'd like to call your attention to item R on the list. This is a substantial departure from the way we've done business in the past, but I also think it's a substantial improvement. Under Commissioner Helm's guidance, we have instituted a process by which we enter into purchase of service agreements with all of our partner agencies. While this may be an imperfect process on the front end, what I hope it will do is ultimately put us in a position where we can more closely monitor the manner in which those funds are being expended in the future. So this is materially different and an effort to try to make sure we're getting the best bang for the buck that we can, and I just wanted to call that one particularly to your attention. I think it will work better as the years go on, too. Unless there's some further discussion, I believe we're prepared to vote. Those in favor of approving the items of new business, please indicate by voting yes. The motion carries. Don't we need to go on record who we vote against? If you wish to vote against particular items. J, K, and L. Could you please repeat those? J, K, and L. I'll note those in the summary for you, Council Member Maloney. With those exceptions noted, the motion carries. I'm sorry. Let's move on. We're now down to the presentations. The first one is from the Budget and Finance Committee. Council Member Stephens. Thank you, Mayor. The Budget and Finance Committee met in its regular session on August 28th of this year. All committee members were present. There were four items on the docket for the committee, none of which will require a vote by the Council today, but of general interest. As you know, the Council developed a list of questions regarding procedures and other items related to the adoption of the 2008 budget. And some of those items were discussed in our meeting. Commissioner Coe told us about STARS and how it was still, I should say, not all the STARS are visible in the firmament yet. But progress is being made, and she hopes that that will be available soon. She does plan a presentation to the Council a week from today on September 18th for a further update. Mr. Deaton, the Director of Budgeting, also told us about the general fund capital improvement projects. There was some carryover money in that not all were expended by the Council people for their allotments, and an accounting of the money left, and the procedure for spending the rest will come forth later. A citizen had wrote me a letter asking about tax relief on property taxes by paying in installments. At that time, there was none of us at the committee meeting that knew about this, but since then it's been researched. And I'm told by state statute it is required that the property taxes be paid by a certain time in one lump sum. They cannot be paid in installments. So it would seem that if someone has a problem with a lump sum at the time of property taxes, they need to perhaps save their money in the year prior so that they can pay it in a lump sum. It cannot be paid in installments. The fourth item was the financial study which the government is undertaking. The mayor is in the process, I'm told, of appointing the members of this task force, which will review the financial matters that relate to the urban county government. And that completes my report, Mr. Mayor. Thank you, Council Member Stephens. Are there any questions? All right. That being the case, I'll turn the podium over to Mr. Kelly, Joe Kelly, who I think is going to provide us with a little information about the industrial bond review proposal. Mr. Kelly. Thank you, Mayor, Council Members. This is the project that Councilperson James made a motion on to get it on the docket for Thursday. We just wanted to give you an opportunity to ask questions if you have any questions about the project. There's a summary that was in your packet. This is a central Christian church project. It's a 27,500 square feet addition to the church's existing buildings. It will be a new parking lot, renovations and improvements to the existing building. And this will help in making recreational and cultural benefits available to the public and furthers their educational nonprofit efforts at the church. None of the proceeds of the bonds will be used for the cost of renovating or improving the church sanctuary. These bonds are going to be sold, actually, by Stamping Ground, but because the facility is located in Fayette County, it is required that it go through the council for approval. Mr. Hodge from Wyatt Tarrant is here. If you have any questions about the project, he would be happy to respond to those. Council Member DeCant. Yes, Mr. Kelly, were you there? And possibly you could, because I've had several people in the last year or so talk to me about these bond issues, and a majority of them going to churches. And how do we define, you know, the separation of state and church in these issues? Because many of them, you know, I've heard, you know, don't go to anything from the actual sanctuary religious part of it, although there's no question that what is ever added appears to the general public as promoting a certain religious aspect of the church. And how can the city be involved in this, in the bond issue? Because we float the bond issue so they can get a better rate as a nonprofit. Is that correct? Yes, sir, that's correct. But where does that fine line come in there of the separation of church and state? That's a wonderful question, a question that we've asked ourselves, and I would probably be better served to defer to Ms. Weddle, our council. But I will tell you that when these projects are submitted to our office for consideration and the Industrial Revenue Bond Committee meets and vets the projects, those questions are generally specifically asked about what the use of the facilities will be, whether the property, the facilities will be open to the general public, whether they may be available for the use of any group that might want to use them. My personal observation, I guess, would be that these have been done for apparently several years, and so I don't know if there is a specific audit function on the part of council or our office that's required. But I will tell you that the IRS will at some point in time likely visit the facility to make sure that it is meeting the requirements that are set forth by the IRS for the bond to be eligible. So then if it comes as far as really going back and seeing that these facilities are used as they are proposed in the application, that that then becomes the responsibility of the IRS? The IRS is, yes, sir, the final determiner, if you will. I actually about three or four months ago got a call from the IRS wanting to visit Lexington Theological Seminary to verify that a bond issue that had been done 15 or 16 years ago was being used as it was proposed. And so we made arrangements with the folks at Lexington Theological Seminary The IRS team from Louisville came over, visited, checked all the paperwork and everything, and were satisfied that it was being used in an appropriate manner. Well, I wanted to put this on the table. Simply in the last several years I have gotten calls from, you know, I rate citizens who say, you know, why is this continually being done? Because so many of the large industrial revenue bond issues that we do pass have to do with churches. A great number of them have. We've done some private schools, that sort of thing. But the majority of them are religious institutions. And I just thought it was a good time to put it on the table so that a lot of people who are listening to this have a better understanding of what we are required to do, and that it does go through a review, that there is an industrial bond review committee, and I'm sure that they know what the guidelines are and approve according to the guidelines. And these are federal guidelines, I assume. Yes, sir. That's correct. And so I hope that that clears the air somewhat on it. I personally have a little problem with it because I'm not sure that maybe on the federal level there is the kind of coming back and doing the sort of enforcement that probably needs to be done. Because, you know, out of sight, out of mind, five years passes, the facility which we have allowed to use this favorable rate is not being used at that time for what it was originally supposed to be used for. What happens? I mean, do you know of any cases where someone may have come forward and the facility is not being used as it was originally scheduled to be used, and is there a penalty that has to be paid? I am not aware of any. Councilman Beard might be able to shed more light on that. Over here, pulling at the reins, having dealt with this for four years previously, what they're doing, Councilmember DeCamp, is vetting their 501C3 status. That's the trigger that the IRS can pull to ensure compliance. And obviously the various entities, churches in this case, would not want that to happen in any way, shape, or form. The other thing is it takes the burden off of us and it gives equal, whether it's complete and as in deep as you might want, it's equal treatment across all communities within the United States, as opposed to one city deciding they're going to camp out every Sunday and make sure that nobody's there and other people might ignore it. You get different geographically and such. You get different approaches to all that. And the IRS is very interested in the fact that they would like to have it be consistent, obviously, so that it's a fairness type of a situation. We do get, within the application, we do get drawings and plans that indicate what is being added and the square footage and that type of thing. So the architect is putting his name on the line also. And thank you for letting me stick my nose in. But, again, you know, if one of the prerequisites is that it can be used by the public for certain meetings or whatever it may be, it just seems to me like it would be very hard to actually prove that these things are being done. And I think it does create, from the federal regulations, a real gray area in there, which have been brought to my attention on several occasions by citizens of this community. And I thought this would be the appropriate time to. I know it's been brought up before, but it's not a bad reason to not hear it again, so that there can be a better understanding from the public's point of view. Thank you. I understand. Any further questions or discussion? Thank you very much, Mr. Kelly. Thank you. The next item I have on the list is the Annual Safety Performance Awards. Mike Skidmore, if you would step up to the podium, please. Thank you. And Mr. Johnson. Thank you, Mayor. I'd like to thank the Mayor, the administration, and the divisions and employees of their active support and participation in safety this past year. It was a great year for safety. It was very difficult in selecting today's safety award winners from all that did so well. In the selection process, there are many elements that are considered in order to narrow the field. These include a statistical comparison of various safety indexes, size and complexity of the areas of operations in relation to daily challenges and demands of safety. We consider history and leadership of the area, safety activities engaged during the past year, such as training, program development, updates, and other safety improvements, and then the direct impact the areas have on other divisions, fellow employees, as well as our community. There are two categories of awards. One is for the administrative areas, and there is one for the operational areas. I'll announce the third, second, and first place winners of each category. All award recipients will receive a certificate plaque, so if the winning division would have a representative come forward when I announce the winners. We'll begin with the Office Safety Award. Is there somebody here to take photos? Mayor, we'd like for you to have a photo with the winners if possible. Beginning with the third place winner, this division achieved 100 percent participation with safety meetings and safety inspections. They had no vehicle accidents for the past three years, had no workers' compensation claims during FY07, and only one workers' compensation claim in the past three years. Having achieved and maintained an excellent overall performance record for the past three years, the Division of Budgeting is the third place recipient of the LFUCG Office Safety Award. Applause. The second place winner achieved 100 percent participation with safety meetings and safety inspections, had no vehicle accidents in the past three years, had no workers' compensation claims during the past three years. The job requires both work in the office as well as in the field to evaluate properties. This work requirement increases their risk of injury and their demand for safety on the job. Having achieved and maintained an excellent overall performance record for the past three years, the Division of Historic Preservation is the second place recipient. Applause. The first place recipient had a perfect participation with safety meetings and inspections since January of 2003, had no vehicle accidents during FY07, zero vehicle accidents in the past 12 years, had zero workers' compensation claims during FY07, operates a facility which increases their risk of injury and their demand for on-the-job safety. This division has consistently demonstrated leadership in the area of safety for over a decade, and they are the first place recipient of the LFUCG Office Safety Award, the Council Clerk's Office. Applause. For the operational areas, third place winner, 100 percent participation with safety meetings and inspections, zero vehicle accidents for FY07, had an OSHA reportable injury rate below the LFUCG average, has a long established and effective safety committees, worked to effectively implement numerous divisional requirements of the LFUCG Comprehensive Safety and Health Plan, and for their continued leadership in the field of safety, Family Services is the third place recipient of the LFUCG Operational Safety Award. Applause. Second place winner achieved 100 percent participation in both safety meetings and inspections, for the past two years, no workers' compensation claims during the past three fiscal years, actively involved in promoting safety both internally as well as externally throughout the community, coordinates a number of various safety programs throughout the community. For their excellent safety performance record and their significant contributions to the safety of the community and our organization, the Division of Environmental and Emergency Management is the second place recipient of the LFUCG Annual Safety Award. Applause. And for the first place winner, this division maintained a perfect driving record with zero vehicle accidents. They reduced the total number of workers' compensation claims for three consecutive years as well as their OSHA recordable injury rate, achieved 100 percent of their safety inspections, nearly 90 percent of their safety meetings with 47 percent of all meetings covering a compliance or regulatory-related topic, initiated a safety team to engage employees in the safety process and address the growing demands of safety at their facility. The division further worked to improve safety communications by creating an information board, has worked to update and improve written safety programs, has run a successful preventative maintenance program for their improved safety performance record over the past three years for their historic and new initiatives to further advance safety excellence in their division and for their overall impact on vehicle safety at the organization, is the first place winner of this year's award. Applause. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you all. Congratulations to the winner and thanks to the folks from risk management for arranging to give some well-deserved recognition to those folks who make safety a priority. It is certainly a financial issue for us, but it's also a matter of wanting people to go home safe at night after a successful day at work, and we're appreciative of all the efforts that everybody's made to make that work. Next item on the agenda is a presentation, which I'll ask Commissioner Askew to bring to us about our insurance coverages. Thank you. Mayor, members of the council, what you've been passed out are the two proposals that were submitted to us this year in connection with our request for proposals for our excess general liability auto and public official coverages. As you all know, we have a $1 million self-insured retention fund, but we do purchase excess coverage over and above that million dollars. Currently, we are insured through AIG, which I believe has insured us for the last couple of years, and I believe in those two years and maybe some years preceding those, what has been presented to you is a quote that appears to be the best quote, and you have gone ahead on the recommendation of risk management and adopted that quote, and we've purchased that insurance. This year, we had a slightly different situation in that our incumbent, AIG, did make another quote, and you will see that in that middle column under AIG, in which they are proposing coverage with a premium of $491,481. In addition, this year, the Kentucky League of Cities also made a quote, and it made a presentation as part of their quote to our group, which included the law department and risk management and also Marsh out of Louisville, who is our insurance brokerage firm. Their quote for similar coverage was $615,010. However, there are some distinctions between the two coverages that we need to discuss with you. What you have highlighted under the program consideration column are the major elements of each of the coverages. The first line, of course, is the premiums, which I just indicated to you. But if you'll notice in the comments section, included with the KLC proposal is not only the excess insurance coverage, but also some additional elements, for instance, loss control and adjustment services, and also they have some other things that they would do as part of their quote that we currently do outside and over and above our current coverage with AIG. The limits that you will notice on the second line, $5 million in the aggregate under AIG, which means that in any given year, the amount of excess coverage that we have total is $5 million. The KLC coverage, on the other hand, is $5 million with no aggregate, which means it's per claim. So regardless of the number of claims we have, we have the $5 million of excess coverage over and above the first million, which we assume under our million-dollar self-insured tension. Under defense inside versus outside the limit, those would be defense costs, and in that particular category, the KLC has the edge there in terms of that particular consideration. Under sexual abuse coverage, there is a distinction there. Under AIG, they are $5 million, which is occurrence-based, which means that regardless of when the claim is presented to us, even if it's sometime down the road, the amount of the coverage is $5 million. Under KLC, that would be $1 million claims made, which is to say that not only is there less coverage, $5 million versus $1 million, but claims made means that that claim would have to be submitted within a policy period. Now, if you'll notice, Patrick Johnson has done a lot of research on this, and you'll notice historically we have not had that kind of a loss, and so that does not seem to be a major consideration as part of our recommendation. Under claims handling services, currently we use a group that we contract with directly to help us with claims adjusting. That's $53,000 that we pay over and above what we pay AIG and the premium. Under the KLC proposal, that's included, so that's not an amount that we would need to incur outside of the premium payment. The next item is consent to handling claims within the SIR, and essentially the policies are the same. Because it's our nickel, up to $1 million, we pretty much have control of the claims. They will not intervene until it appears we're getting close to that $1 million and get into the insurance company's pocket. They will also allow us to the extent that we want to use outside counsel, hire our own. As it turns out, KLC, because they insure so many folks, so many municipalities in the state, they do have a list of approved attorneys, and because of the volume of work they have, they sometimes can get better rates on legal counsel than we might be able to if we went to the marketplace, so there's a potential benefit there. The last item has to do with the cut-through endorsement. I'll try to explain this. It's a little complicated, but AIG is an insurance company. We have direct access to AIG and the coverage that they're providing. KLC, on the other hand, is not a company, but it's helping to purchase insurance for us through another company, which is ACE, which is also a highly rated company, just like AIG is. Our relationship is with KLC, not with ACE. So ACE is actually insuring us through KLC. So the issue becomes, if something were to happen to KLC, would we still have coverage? And the answer is yes. We've had some extensive meetings with KLC, and we're satisfied that under the circumstances we believe that we would have good coverage. Those are the major components of both proposals. Now, if you'll look down at the bottom, what we've attempted to do is to make some adjustments to the KLC proposal in order that we might compare apples and apples here. As I indicated a minute ago, we would not hire a third-party administrator, which currently costs us $54,000, and we would not have to hire out property appraisals, damage appraisals, those kinds of things, which we also currently hire out. So that would be $64,000 that we would need to deduct from KLC in order to compare that with AIG. We currently pay a brokerage fee to Marsh out of Louisville of about $80,000 a year. If we were to go with this policy, we believe one-half of that brokerage fee would go away. The other half is brokerage services that they're offering in connection with our workers' comp and property insurance, which, as you all will recall, was renewed earlier this year. So currently we would continue the contract there, although when we get to the next policy renewal, we might decide to make some changes there, too. We'll just see what insurers we might be able to get. As far as loss control services go, you see a figure of $35,000. Patrick Johnston has estimated that for us. One of the main attractive features of the KLC policy is that they are going to provide 1,000 hours of loss control service to us, which we would be able to use in a number of places. That includes training, seminars, those kinds of things. That 1,000 hours ends up to about one-half of a person, and Patrick has estimated that that would cost us about $35,000 if we were to hire out that service. So if you were to adjust that as well, then really where we are is the KLC premium of about $476,510, which makes it actually less expensive than the other premium. We are recommending that we go with the KLC proposal. I might say that in addition to these features that we've discussed, as you all know, KLC is a neighbor. They're here in Lexington. They're also involved with insurance for more municipalities in Kentucky than any other, and they insure most of the cities in the state. We are also a member of that group, and there are a number of other services that they provide to us, and I will tell you that they have worked very, very hard to make this proposal to us because they are very interested in having this business relationship with the city of Lexington. Mayor, I would be happy to answer any questions. That's a very brief overview. We have prepared a motion, which I believe Councilman Blevins has, to go ahead and adopt the KLC proposal or put it on the docket. I would be happy to answer more questions. There is all kinds of paperwork on this, if you all would care to see it. I will tell you this is for the policy term that begins October 1 of this year. So routinely, I believe in years past, we have been here about this time, so you can get two readings in. What has not happened in the past is that I don't think you've had two proposals to come to you where you've really had two good proposals from which to select. So this year is a little different, which is good for us. Councilmember Blevins, we'll go ahead and get the motion on the floor. Thank you, Mayor. I move to place on the docket for the Thursday, September 13, 2007, Council meeting a resolution authorizing and directing the Mayor to execute a contract with the Kentucky League of Cities to provide excess auto general public officials liability insurance coverage to the Lexington Fayette Urban County Government. The total price of the contract is $615,010. So moved. Second. We have a motion and a second. I think there are some Councilmembers who wish to speak. And due to technical difficulties, I'll let Councilmember Beard go first here. Thank you, Mayor. I don't think he'll be able to vote or anything, as it stands right now. Logan, a couple of questions. And getting these proposals on an apples-for-apples basis is very difficult. It is. And they're also working just as hard to differentiate themselves from each other. What would the premium be if AIG on the sexual abuse coverage dropped their coverage to $1 million also? I mean, if, in fact, we never had one, why wouldn't we, if we're willing to go below the $5 million? Councilmember Beard, I'm not sure. I don't believe that was not an option in their proposal. We did, however, have a discussion with Kentucky League of Cities to see whether they might be able to purchase that additional coverage through ACE. They did not believe that was possible. They went back and checked. We discussed the possibility of going ahead and eliminating that coverage as part of this package and buying separate coverage for that. And we could certainly investigate that. And then my second question really is somewhat rhetorical, but it says KLC is assured the LSECG would be kept financially whole in case they were to liquidate. That means they're going to take care of us but none of the rest of the cities in the state? No. I think what they're saying is that there's a contract for insurance that has been purchased for Lexington, and that money or that contract would survive their insolvency if that were to happen, but the benefits of that contract would flow through to us. And so I believe that we would be protected. We've had a number of meetings with Temple Jewett, General Counsel. I know Patrick was there. Marsh was there. And those were questions that we asked and explored pretty thoroughly. But we feel confident that we are protected there as far as our relationship with ACE would go. In other words, if KLC were to become insolvent, and let's say the state insurance group came in and took them over or there was a receiver or whatever in place, we believe that that obligation of ACE would be there to us and not to the general obligations of KLC. Okay. The only other thing I might say, once you make a change, it's very difficult to go backwards. Yes, sir. And the word gets out throughout the industry that if you're dissatisfied that they've got somebody between a rock and a hard place and sometimes the premiums go up even higher. So that is a consideration, I guess, on my part. Council Member Beard, I will tell you that was a consideration for us as well, and we specifically asked KLC if they could lock in premium for us for a number of years. They indicated after year one they may be able to, but they didn't have enough history with us to make that proposal at this time. I will also tell you that the AIG premium has diminished. I will also tell you that with the exception of one time, Patrick, I don't believe that our excess insurance company has paid us. I know AIG has not because we have not had a claim that succeeded that threshold that would trigger that insurance. So the last couple of years AIG has received a premium without making any payment on a claim. That makes the KLC proposal more attractive because in addition to providing the insurance, we're also getting these other services. I have been paying for life insurance for the last 40 years, and my insurance companies haven't paid off yet either. Thank you very much. I appreciate it. Thank you, sir. All right. Working down the list now, Council Member James. Thank you, Mayor, Commissioner. My question had to do, it was briefly answered, it had to do with premium and the rate of increase. Did you look at KLC and other municipalities just to see if there had been increases in their cities as far as premiums? Why don't you come on up? I'm going to let Patrick answer that. There had been some minor increases across other municipalities, and I think that's based on their loss history. Okay. Comparable to the types of claims that we would potentially have, you felt confident that? Correct. And what we're doing is we're not directly in their pool. We're outside their pool, going through to ACE as our reinsurer. So we incur the first million dollars of any claim. So we shouldn't see any effect of other cities across the state of Kentucky as a result of that. I wondered that as well, the risk pool. Thank you very much. My last question was are we locked in for a certain number of years to stay with KLC? No, we're not. This is a one-year proposal, and I believe that that's what we've always done. I don't know that we couldn't bid out and ask for a multi-year proposal. I assume we could. Patrick says we've done it once before for three years. Okay. And that's just to get the same rate. Does that help with rates? That's correct. The market has been in such a flux over the last five or six years because of 9-1-1 that nobody's willing to lock in to a three-year rate, especially with a public entity. Okay. Thank you very much. Council Member James, you're welcome. Let me make one other comment because something that Patrick said made me think of something else. In a typical insurance situation like KLC operates, there's a possibility that you can have assessments depending upon the loss in a pool. In this particular proposal, KLC has set this up specifically for Lexington to where we are not assessable. So, in fact, they have even offered to have one of the Collins & Company adjusters actually stay here at LFUCG just to handle our claims. So we've gotten a real attractive proposal. They've gone out of their way to really get this business. Thank you, Mayor. Council Member Maloney. Thank you, Logan. I appreciate your presentation, but I'm going to be honest with you. I'm not prepared to vote on this because this is something major in our department that I really think that I'd like to put this in the Intergovernment Committee for more discussion because I have to listen to some of these council members asking questions about different insurance policies and all that. I just feel like rushing this through right now that I'm not ready to vote on until we get more, a little bit more detail. And I would like to make a motion that we put this in Intergovernment to do more discussion on this. Is there a second? I second that. I have a second. And motion to refer it to Intergovernmental Services. I'm sorry, Intergovernmental Committee for consideration. Any discussion on the motion to refer? Let's see. We'll start with Council Member Blevins. Thank you, Mayor. Logan, do we have a timeline on this that you have to meet? We do. The policy, the current policy term expires September 30. So we're, and again, it's a one-year policy. I'm going to have to vote against you, Mr. Maloney, I'm afraid, because we need to get on with this. I have been in discussions on the side with Commissioner Askew, and I'm confident that they've done a good job. I would encourage you to feel the same way. I think we need to move on with this. So I'm going to encourage us not to do this. I do want to make a statement. I didn't know there was a deadline, and it concerns me that we're kind of rushing something through with this short notice, when we should have brought this back in June and April for discussion. And I feel like we're kind of being railroad put back in the corner, so I won't support this. Okay. Mayor, if I might just make one comment. I think that our proposals were actually submitted when the request for proposal went out by our broker. It went out in July, and the proposal submission date was August 15. So in the past, we've never had a whole lot of time to do that. If you all would like to see that bumped up in years past, it's never been a problem because you haven't had two competing proposals that were good proposals that were available to you. But we'll do everything we can in the future to bump that timetable up for you. Council Member James, did you wish to speak on the motion to refer? Does anyone else wish to speak on the motion to refer the item to the Intergovernmental Committee? Council Member? All right. I think we're ready to vote on the motion to refer the item to the committee. Those in favor of referring the item, just please vote electronically. We've got. All right. Can we just do a show of hands? Well, if they tell me to vote, I can put it up. Let's just raise hands and get it up. Those in favor of referring, please raise your hand. I see three. Those opposed? All right. Thank you. The motion fails. We now return to the item of business, which is to put this proposal or recommendation on the docket for Thursday evening. Any further discussion? Yes, Mayor. I think there's a couple other people on here. All right. Thank you. Council Member Stennett. Thank you, Mayor. I guess my question is going back, you know, the last two years on council we've had this discussion. Has KLC been looked at before? And why weren't they recommended last year, year before last? Why is all of a sudden this proposal before council? This is the first time they've been looked at. Well, I say been looked at. They've been invited to the table before but never have submitted a quote. On the workers' compensation, they've submitted a quote once in the past, and the premiums were much higher than what we had as a quote from our commercial carriers. So what changed at KLC to cause them to do a proposal this year? We were interested in going to the market. The public entity market has shrunk so much over the last five to ten years, especially post-9-1-1. We were looking for everybody that we could possibly get to include in our proposals, so we invited them to the table. So we did include other insurance companies. These are the only two we actually received back. We had seven carriers that we went to in the commercial market through our broker, Marsh, and only one carrier, AIG, provided us with a quote. So very few quotes, and we were very pleased that KLC offered us one. Very good. Thank you. Council Member Myers does not wish to speak. Does anyone else care to ask questions or discuss the proposal that we had this afternoon? I have one other comment, if I might, before we move on. Let me also mention to you that AIG did make a quote for additional insurance. I believe it was $10 million. Correct. And which the premium was more expensive. Same elements of coverage, just a higher amount of coverage. KLC also offered a half million self-insured retention or a half million deductible. The premium on that was going to be more than a million dollars. We looked at that pretty carefully, but we also, Patrick pulled together our loss history, and it did not appear that we would have that many claims above a half million to a million to where it would make that economical. We thought that that half million we might be able to spend someplace else. So those two proposals were not submitted because we did not believe that those justified making the presentation to the council. Thanks, Mayor Gray. Thank you, Mayor. I'd like to explain my vote against the placing of the committee, and basically it has to do with the timing. And I also want to say, you know, from a point of view of having had some similar experiences in the private sector, I understand that, you know, getting these quotes today can be challenging. And I think it's commendable that you all have actually reached out for this. Also, perhaps it illustrates that we could use more, maybe more education in terms of the process that's being employed today, not just with respect to the general and comprehensive liability policies, but maybe also workers' comp, health care. You know, there's lots of tumbling and lots of moving parts in all of this today. We recognize that. But maybe the real takeaway from today is that to place this somehow, well, perhaps that into that issue, that education cycle into intergovernment. Vice Mayor Gray, I think that would be a real good idea, to review how we solicit bids and that kind of thing, so the council can be aware of that. Any further discussion on the motion to add this item to the docket? Those in favor, please vote electronically. And if you are unable to vote, please vote now by hand if you wish to vote in favor of the proposal. Council Member Beard and DeCamp, anyone wish to vote against the proposal that is unable to do so? I see none. It appears as though the motion carries. Thank you very much. For the benefit of those of you who may be either looking at the agenda here or perhaps downstairs in the ballroom, we have agreed to move the discussion of the alcohol sale issue to the end of the agenda so as to maximize the ability of people to get here for that portion of our meeting. If you wish to speak and have not yet done so, please sign up in the back of the room near the door and indicate whether you wish to speak for or against the proposed ordinance, and we'll use those sheets to call people to the podium in just a bit. In the meantime, we're ready for the council reports. If you wish to make a council report, we can get the screen cleared. We'll... Council Member Blues. Thank you, Mayor. I just have a few announcements. The Great Acres Homeowners Association will have a planning meeting on Thursday night, that's September 13th at 7 p.m. at First Baptist Church of Bracktown. The Windburn Neighborhood Association will be meeting next Monday, that's September 17th, at 6.30 p.m. at the shelter at MLK Park. The Meadowthorpe Neighborhood Association meets Tuesday, September 18th at 7 p.m. at the park's shelter. And the Youth Issues Group, which was one of those established at the Needs Assessment Summit, will meet this coming Thursday evening at 5.30 p.m. September 13th at the Morton School on Tate's Creek. Thank you, Mayor. That's my report. Thank you very much. Council Member McCord. Thank you, Mayor. A couple of things. One is I'd like to make a motion to place on the docket for this Thursday, September 13th, an ordinance authorizing and directing the Mayor to execute a supplemental agreement, number one, with the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet for up to $7,063,231 in state reimbursable funds for road resurfacing in Fayette County. So moved. Second. Any discussion? Those in favor, please vote electronically. Those who wish to vote yes, please raise your hand if you can't vote electronically. F2. Does any member wish to vote no who is unable to vote electronically? I see none. It appears as though the motion carries. Council Member McCord. Thank you, Mayor. This Saturday at 10 o'clock at the Shiloh Toe Park Miracle League Field, we will be dedicating the new facility, the new building, the BB&T building at 10 o'clock and wanted to invite all those in our community to the Miracle League for that. The Miracle League, for those who don't know, is a special baseball field that was built by the Rotary Club in partnership with the city and with the South Lexington League a year and a half ago. It serves folks ages 5 to 19 that have special needs, physically or mentally challenged needs. And it's only the 17th in the whole country. It's a stellar, stellar asset to this city and this region. And at that dedication of the BB&T building, we will also be honoring the 12-year-olds from the South Lexington Baseball League that won the World Series for their age group. So please do come out for that. I also want to make the announcement that the Blue Star Mothers Community Picnic will be this Sunday at Jacobson Park, Shelter No. 5, from 2 o'clock to 6 o'clock p.m. Thirdly, I want to send out my condolences to a very special employee of LFUCG. Michael Lee Williamson passed away on August 30th, and he was an 18-year employee superintendent of our pools. And this is one of those folks who really, he's a very special person that made a lot of us have a lot of fun. His job was having other people have fun. And I just want to send out my condolences certainly to his family and this loss. Lastly, Mayor, I just wanted to ask, I've been getting a number of phone calls. I guess there's a bit of confusion. Apparently, the Fayette County Neighborhood Council has decided to do a kind of a neighborhood summit. And I know that your office for a year now has been working on a neighborhood summit. I don't believe these are the same thing. In fact, I know they're not because one costs more than the other. I believe there's a tremendous amount of confusion about the Fayette County Neighborhood Council, who they are, who they represent. I know they come and speak often. And I know I have neighborhoods in my district that do not feel like they actually represent them, and yet that is brought up that they do. I'd like, if it's okay at some point in time for us to just invite them in and maybe explain a little bit about what this is, why they chose to do it that particular way. And I'd also at that time would like for them to bring maybe a letter from each of the neighborhood associations that show up on their website or folks that I guess they claim that they represent. I would like to know if they do. So if that's okay, I'd just like to place that in your office to maybe help have that happen. Mr. Green, if you would follow up on Council Member McCord's suggestion and make arrangements for the Fayette County Neighborhood Council to come in at a work session that appears to work well. That would be great. Thank you, Mayor. That ends my report. Thank you. Council Member Stephens. Mayor, this morning the Infill and Redevelopment Steering Committee launched Phase 2 of the efforts that many members of the Council and of our community have been working on throughout this calendar year. As you know, the Planning Commission adopted the five-year comprehensive plan at the end of last year, which did not include any enlargement or expansion of our urban service boundary. This has created a much greater emphasis on infill and redevelopment as we accommodate growth in our community, which we hope will continue. But in the urban service area, the Steering Committee and others have been working up to now developing a plan to consider infill and redevelopment. And what we've produced is a group of task forces, which will have professional facilitation, which will meet regularly over the next four or five months to hammer out the issues that are involved with infill and redevelopment from affordable housing, regulatory processes, historic zoning, and other issues that affect infill and redevelopment. Each task force will have about eight or ten people on it, with chairmen of each and a facilitator assigned to each with some technical support. The object is to bring a report back to the government first of next year, outlining recommendations for infill and redevelopment. The meetings are being scheduled as we speak and will be occurring in various times. All this will be posted on the website of the urban county government and will have the agendas for the various meetings. Citizens and other interested people who may not even live in Lexington, I guess, are invited to attend and will have a chance to comment at these various meetings. And as the process goes on, we'll keep you informed. Thank you. Thank you very much. Council Member James. Thank you, Mayor. I just want to let everyone know that we had a very exciting weekend in the First District. We held the 19th annual Roots & Heritage Festival, which was highly attended, as it always is, a fun and festive time, lots of entertainment, lots of fellowship. I see people at Roots & Heritage I haven't seen since the previous Roots & Heritage. So it's a great event. If you haven't been out, check it out next year. It's the second weekend in September every year. Very exciting. And this year we were able to have the doors open to the Lyric Theater. So those of you that have not seen the Lyric on the inside, if you're not held up here beyond 7 o'clock tonight, try to go by Greater Liberty Baptist Church. They're having a public meeting where you can also see the plans for the Lyric there tonight. We had 1,107 people that went inside of the Lyric on Saturday between the hours of 11 and 6. So there's a lot of interest there, and just look forward to more information coming up about the Lyric. A couple of announcements regarding some neighborhood meetings. Tonight at 7 o'clock, two different neighborhood meetings. Meadow Park will hold their meeting right over there on Meadow Park, which is right off of Bryan Avenue. And the Martin Luther King Neighborhood Association will meet as well tonight at 7 o'clock at the Living Arts and Science Center. Gratz Park will be holding an event. The Gratz Park Neighborhood Association will hold an event at 6 o'clock on Sunday. And I don't know the date of Sunday, but it's on Sunday, 6 o'clock on the 16th. For more information on that location, please call my office at 258-3216. And also Fayette Park Homeowners Association is having an event there at 6.30 on the same day, on Sunday, September 16th. Please come out and help Fayette Park celebrate their beautiful neighborhood. Also, on Saturday, the 15th, there will be at Duncan Park, there are some neighbors there that are meeting to clean up the neighborhoods. They've been cleaning alleys and along streets. I believe they've chosen to clean up along Limestone, which if you've seen the article in the paper recently about Limestone, it's happening in place over there now. So they want to make sure they're sprucing it up and making it look good for everyone. From 9 to 11, they're planning on cleaning that area. For more information, feel free to call my office, 258-3216. That's all I have, Mayor. Thank you. Thanks very much, Council Member Blevitz. Thank you, Mayor. Two things. First, I'd like to move approval of the NDF for this week, please. Second. Any discussion? Those in favor, please indicate by voting aye. Those opposed, indicate by voting nay electronically. Are you all able to vote now? I don't see where you have voted. There we go. There we go. All right. Very good. Motion carries. Council Member Blevitz. Thank you, Mayor. The other thing is we had a festival this weekend in the community that generated a fair amount of noise. We've all received several complaints in this regard. I'd like to make a motion that we move a review of the noise ordinance with respect to special events into the Services Committee. So moved. Thank you. Any discussion? Those in favor, please vote aye electronically. Those opposed, vote nay electronically. I'd love to. I can't vote. All right. Those in favor, vote aye. I vote aloud aye. Aye. Motion carries unanimously. Thank you, Mayor. That's all I had. I'm sorry this has been so difficult, but we'll try to work out the bugs next time. All right. Council Member Maloney. Thank you, Mayor. I'd like my condolences to go out to Gabe Brewer and his family. We lost a great leader here from Lexington who was probably the greatest golfer Kentucky has ever had. And I really appreciate the council and the mayor for their dedication to pick it up a couple months ago. And he really will be missed. The second thing is we had a little experience last week on Town Branch, and I know that you're going to come out with a presentation on that, and I'm looking forward to hearing concerns. But as I keep telling the council, it's the biggest mistake. We just can't even control what we have now. Now we're going to get Hamburg, the diversion line, and all those sewers coming through to Town Branch. It's just really an eye-opener that I hope you all realize was overwhelmed, and I don't think we can really control what we have now. And then when all this diversion line starts coming in, I don't think we're going to definitely be able to control that. So I just hopefully I want to hear what problems we have, because it's going to be a lot worse when we get the diversion line there. Thank you. Thank you. Council Member Maloney. Council Member Myers. Thank you, Mayor. Just a couple of meetings to announce. Gainesway Neighborhood Association will be meeting tonight at 7 o'clock p.m. in the apartment at Tates Creek Golf Course, and then also Center Parkway Neighborhood Association will be meeting at 7 o'clock p.m. tonight at St. John's Church in Gainesway Center. And then finally, I just want to say that I too went down to Roots and Heritage this weekend and met Councilwoman James there and had my family with me and my niece and nephew, and we had a great time. And it was my first time being in the Lyric Theater, and it's very exciting what's going on down there, and I look forward to that project being completed. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you. Council Member Stennett. Thank you, Mayor. Briefly earlier, several of us had a conversation with our County Attorney, Larry Roberts, during the Intergovernmental Committee. We talked about several things, including some of the alcohol sales. But most importantly, we talked about his relationship with LFUCG. And continuing working with the County Attorney, Larry Roberts, there's a couple of things the committee asked. The first thing is to prepare a presentation financially as to how LFUCG can assist his office in doing some of the work they're trying to move forward with. The second thing we've asked for is to come back and see how his office can assist the Law Department and LFUCG in handling some of the cases that we're currently litigating in court. So I'll make a motion to move our relationship in working with the County Attorney's office in an effort to better that relationship out of the Intergovernmental Committee into budget and finance. Second. Any discussion? Those in favor, please vote aye electronically. Those opposed, vote nay electronically. Council Member Stephens. It says motion to approve NDF on mine, but I'll vote for whatever's there. All right. Motion carries. Thank you, Mayor. Anything further? It's the last council report I show. Council Member DeCamp. Thank you. Just a couple of quick things. As I said earlier, the public hearing that we were supposed to have Thursday night will be canceled. They can't officially take it off until Thursday night, but I thought I'd let everybody know so they can adjust their schedules accordingly. Also, a week from tonight, there will be a meeting of many of the neighborhoods that surround the University of Kentucky, and there is put together by those neighborhoods to discuss some of the problems that exist by being in the proximity of the campus. It will be held at 7 p.m. at the Southside Church on South Limestone. I think the Mayor is going to be there. I'm going to be there to listen to some of the problems that might exist and see what we can do as a city to alleviate some of that. So I just want to remind you, and I'll remind you again next week. Thank you. Thank you very much. Council Member Wellinger. Thank you, Mayor. I chair the Services Committee. And one of the issues, and I will talk about it next week when we have a readout from the Services Committee, but in the interim, we talked about the Meadowbrook Golf Course, and it's been a big issue in this community. And in the committee meeting today, we have decided that we're going to have a subcommittee. And in that subcommittee, Mr. Beard has said that he would chair the subcommittee along with Dr. Blues and Mr. Blevins will serve on that committee. And they will report back to the committee. I would like them to talk to the administration and also to the school board. One of the big issues was the contract that was between the administration in 2002 and also to talk to the Larry Gilbert Foundation with Veterans Park. So they will be reporting back to us. But just let this council and the mayor know what we're doing there, that it's been a big issue, and let the citizens know that we're looking at Meadowbrook and trying to come up with a resolution there. Thank you. Council Member Maloney had raised some similar issues three or four weeks ago. I can't remember exactly when it was, but we had, in response to that, prepared some information, which I'm going to ask Commissioner Askew to share with us here in just a minute. And then to the extent we need to do more than that, we will be glad to later on. Vice Mayor Gray. Thank you, Mayor. Council Member Maloney already mentioned the passing of Gabe Brewer. I just want to acknowledge that Council Member Maloney's influence in naming the Picodome Course, he was out there early on that, and he was in his usual relentless way, wouldn't let it go away, and it was for good reason. Secondly, I want to follow up on one thing that Council Member James mentioned. That was in the Northside neighborhood, North Limestone, and really the regeneration and reclaiming of the neighborhood that's occurring there and how much energy and enthusiasm in that neighborhood exists today. I attended the Neighborhood Association meeting the other night along with Council Member James. And one of the things that illustrates an opportunity that we have with the city, with as many projects as are underway in the city, the interventions that we make can be really meaningful. And one of them is the LexTrans new facilities that are being planned there. And our ability and our attention to that being done well can influence in a really substantial and meaningful way the reclaiming of that neighborhood, and I'm hoping that we'll be very careful about that as we proceed downstream. Mayor. Thank you. Council Member McCord. Thank you, Mayor. Just one point is, as we were talking about kind of the afterglow of U.K. games and the trash that's on Elizabeth Street, and we've heard, you know, neighbors saying, please help. I just struck Council Member Blevins and I that we had an opportunity. Fortunately for us, the Director of Corrections is sitting in the back of the room, and we do have this inmate cleanup program. And I just took the opportunity to ask him if we could organize inmate labor to go in and clean those streets after all U.K. ball games, and he said, absolutely. So if it's okay with you, Mayor, can maybe we get folks together before Saturday's game and figure out which streets need it, and we'll just put good use to a great program. That's a marvelous suggestion, Council Member McCord. Thank you for making it. And we'll work on that this week. Anything further in the way of council reports? I have two or three items. First, let me mention that our community was saddened by the news of the death of Sergeant Delmar Wright not too long ago. As some of you know, he was an LFECG employee at our Community Corrections Division. His visitation will be Friday evening from 5 until 7, excuse me, Thursday evening from 5 until 7, and Friday morning from 12 until noon at Crow Brothers on Harrodsburg Road. The funeral will be at noon. As I think most of you know, Sergeant Wright's career here was outstanding. He returned to the National Guard and lost his life in Iraq approximately two weeks ago. So please keep his family in your thoughts and prayers, and if possible I'm sure the family would welcome seeing you on Thursday evening or Friday morning. Second, I think we previously distributed electronically the mayor's report, and we'd entertain a motion to approve that. Any discussion? Thank you. Those in favor, please vote yes electronically. Aye. Those opposed, vote no electronically. Thank you very much. Motion is approved. As Council Member Ellinger indicated, the Meadowbrook golf course was the subject of some discussion this morning, and we have been working to respond to some questions that Council Member Maloney had previously raised. So I'd like for Commissioner Askew to make a little presentation on the Meadowbrook situation for you. Good evening. Thank you. Yeah, we'll see what's coming back. Let's see. Mayor, members of the Council, two or three weeks ago, Council Member Maloney raised a question concerning the relationship between Fayette County Public Schools and urban county government with respect to the Meadowbrook golf course, and I at that time indicated that I would research our files and get you a report. Frankly, that report was getting its final touches when Council Member Maloney apparently raised that issue this morning. What I have for you is a packet with a chronology based on the files that we have in the law department. It is a memorandum from Tracy Jones, who is seated next to me, one of our staff attorneys who was involved with a portion of the history of this transaction. But what I would like to do, you all can read that information at your leisure, but let me see if I can just hit the high points real quick. There was a discussion that began in the summer of 2001 between then Mayor Pam Miller and the superintendent concerning some sort of relationship involving the Meadowbrook golf course and also the property over near Tate's Creek School. You all may be aware that I believe it was since 1968 that we've had an arrangement with the school system that we would lease that property for $1 a year and handle all the maintenance on it, the golf course property. Subsequent to that meeting, both properties were appraised by the same appraiser. Copies of those appraisals were there. This actually goes to the question that Council Member Maloney asked a couple of weeks ago, and that was were there appraisals of the property and was there some sort of contractual relationship where one of the properties was reduced in price as part of the consideration. And what you'll see is there is an $800,000 appraisal on the Meadowbrook golf course. There's a $170,000 appraisal on the Center Parkway property over near Tate's Creek. But you will also notice that that appraisal dealt with five acres. What was ultimately conveyed to the school system was two acres. The Council approved in December of 2002 an agreement between the city and Fayette County Public Schools under which we would purchase Meadowbrook, have an opportunity to lease it, continue the lease agreement, and then they would have an opportunity to purchase the property over at Gainesway. Mayor Isaac signed that agreement on February 23, 2003. There is a copy of that agreement in your documents. As part of the preparation for the closing of that agreement, there was a subdivision of that property which required a plat to be drafted, a survey conducted, and the school board had a problem with some of the utility easements that were set forth on the plat of the Gainesway property. And for that reason, there was a delay. In fact, if you'll notice on the timeline, there was a delay of almost two years. During that time, there were some discussions between the in-house as well as with the school system about pushing ahead with the deal. But for that two-year period, there wasn't much effort to try to go ahead and get either transaction closed. In June of 2005, the school system indicated it was ready to close and there was a closing date set of August 2005. There had actually been some other efforts to close prior to that time, but as you will see in your narrative, their closing date was never, they never were able to get everything together to get it closed. On August 9, 2005, the school system terminated the agreement claiming that LFUCG had breached it, that they had been ready to close and that we had been unable to close. We, LFUC was notified, the mayor and the council were notified of that action by Chuck Ellis, who was then head of parks, and in that letter that you see there, he indicates that the school board has terminated the agreement and that they do want to go forward, however, with the Gaines Way property. That was subsequently docketed on January 10, 2006. To put that on the docket, and there was also a budget amendment to allow for the receipt of those funds. That was on the work agenda on January 10, 2006, and in that, under subsection Y, you will notice that the termination of the agreement is specifically referenced. On January 26, 2006, the council unanimously approved the transfer of the two acres over by Tate's Creek High School to the school board for the $60,000 purchase price, and on February 16, 2006, the deed was executed. That is the chronology that we have according to our files. You will note that during a part of that delay, there were some discussions about not going forward with the golf course property because there was a discussion about some other properties with the school system at that time. Mayor Isaac was involved in some negotiations, but the decision was made to go forward, and the council approved the decision to go forward and close out the Gaines Way property, and that is where the matter has stood. Earlier this year, the administration became aware that the property had been appraised, reappraised by the school system, and that if we were still, in fact, I believe, Mayor, correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that the school system approached us to see whether we were still interested in purchasing the property at that increased price, and that is what has led to the recent discussions about it. That is a very, very brief overview, but I would be happy to answer any questions now, or we can come back to Councilmember Ellinger's committee. We have not discussed this matter with the school system, this presentation today. This was done at the request of Councilmember Maloney, and what they may have in their records, I'm really not sure, but frankly, it appears that we had a deal. For whatever reason, we decided not to go forward with the deal, and we went ahead and conveyed the property to the school system for the $60,000 with the knowledge that the school system had terminated the contract, claiming that we had breached it. That is what our files show, Mayor. Thank you. Councilmember Maloney. Logan, I appreciate the information. The question I have is the appraisal that we did, and I don't think you'd be able to answer, I guess. Did we appraise it on what is zoned now for the $800,000? And it's like, I think it's AU, right? Is that correct, what is zoned now? And this $2.5 million that they've come back and appraised it as, is it as if zone change was there? Councilmember Maloney, I haven't seen the appraisal, so I don't know. But I do know that on this appraisal that was done by Mr. Rolfing, he actually did both appraisals. He did the Meadowbrook and the Gainesway properties. But you'll notice on both of them, he says, as is, current use. So, I mean, with Meadowbrook, that would make, you know, it was being used as a golf course, so that's how it was appraised, and I assume the same would be true with Gainesway. So, how they did this last appraisal, I don't know, whether they zoned it for purposes of a golf course or whether they zoned it for purposes of development. I'm not sure. Because if that's true, and we appraised as our property $170,000 as what it was used for at that time, and if they're starting to play hardball with us by saying this is going to be residential, what would this property have been if we sold for $170,000 and been zoned if it was residential? And here we're trying to work with the Monarchs, and it just concerns me that they're already going out and put some appraisal that hasn't been, the zone change hasn't been effected. I'm not sure. I'm sure we could get a copy of that appraisal. We don't have it. I will also tell you that while we did sell the property for $60,000, you'll notice that appraisal is on, of the $170,000 appraisal, it's on a five-acre tract of property over on Gainesway. What we ended up selling was two acres. And I don't believe that we have found anything in our file to indicate how that price was reduced. But if you look at that 170 and consider what the per acre value would be, 60 seems to be fairly close. Whether that's what was used or not, we're really not sure. Well, I want to say one other thing is that I hate to see that we had a good chance to get a piece of property like that, and I can't answer why the administration at that time didn't go forward and how the Board of Education terminated it first. It sounds from what the letter they sent to us, they terminated the deal without discussion with the city, if I'm correct. Maybe there was an oral discussion. They just went ahead and terminated it without having a discussion with the city? That's correct, as we understand it. And that, I mean, and at that time, now, I mean, you all weren't here, and there were some council members. I mean, we were, but it just seems like to me that the administration at that time should have found out why you're terminating something that, and we've already did our part of our bargain, and you're not coming through with your part of your bargain. So. Council Member Maloney, let me also tell you there's some gaps that you can't really figure out. Between 2003 and 2005, where nothing happened for two years, we're really not sure exactly what was going on. Neither side was really pushing to get the transaction resolved. When the school board made the decision to go ahead and terminate the agreement in August of 2005, I'm not sure why. I mean, the next thing we have in our file is the letter from the parks director, Chuck Ellis, advising in December of 2005. So we can assume that there was some, probably something else going on during those gaps. We just don't have it in our file. Okay. Well, I think we're going to continue with the discussion in the service committee, but I just hope there's a way that we can get the speech copy back at that price. Do you want to? We did our deal. Well, now let me, Council Member Maloney, at the end of that letter, I think one of the questions you asked was whether we might be able to go back and say, well, because you got it for $60,000, can we go ahead and require the sale for the $700,000, whatever it was, close to $800,000. And based on what you will see in those materials, I don't know that we can. Because it appears that we went ahead and accepted the termination of the contract and went ahead and sold the other property for $60,000. Now, we can get that appraisal from the school system if you want. I'm sure they'll share that with us. Council Member Beard. Somewhat of an informal inquiry as far as sharing that with us, and it was refused by their law department. All right. Which I find maybe strange in that we were probably the most immediate possible buyer of the property. All right. Let me see what we can do. Council Member Beard. I'd be surprised if that's ultimately an issue. I don't know what the communication problem was there, but it's a legitimate request. Well, that's what I thought. That's why I made it. We'll try to work through that. I know this may not address all of the issues that came up in the services committee earlier today, but I at least wanted to go ahead and share with you what we had since it was this close to being complete. And I hope we'll address some of the questions that you have and maybe enable you to get to the final questions a little faster. So, Council Member Beard. Yes. Those gaps you're talking about, Logan, I think part of what the subcommittee will do is attempt to fill in some of those gaps. I've already emailed Kathy DeBoer, and she's indicated that she'd be interested in trying to help us there. That would be very helpful. Without some additional information, Council Member Beard, we're not going to be able to sort it out. Now, I will tell you, Tracy Jones will be available. She was involved in a number of these discussions with what had been shared with her. And if you would like for her to come present or me at any time. That would be fine, Tracy, if you would. I'll let you know when we meet. It will be sooner rather than later. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Anything further on the Meadowbrook matter? Farewell. That concludes the mayor's report. And that concludes the agenda except for the discussion of the Sunday alcohol sale issue, which I know many of you are interested in. Let me again ask, if you wish to speak and you have not already done so, please sign up in the back of the room. Are there sign-up sheets downstairs? Yes. If you're in the ballroom and you wish to speak, please go ahead and sign up. I now have, I think, three lists from folks who wish to speak for and against. What I am going to try to do is alternate back and forth among those who are in favor and those who are against. We will ask you to limit your remarks to three minutes, as is the normal rule of thumb here in council chambers. If you have a situation where your comments have already been made by someone else who has already spoken, I'd ask that you consider the possibility of just referencing those comments as opposed to requiring everybody to hear the same thing 14 times. But having said that, this is your evening, and to the degree you have things you want us to hear that you think we need to hear, then that's your prerogative. I'm just going down the list in the order that I received these. Council Member Stennett. Mayor, I think, as we talked about earlier, there's some council questions we need to discuss regarding the order that was written. You're correct. We have ABC folks here, and some of that needs to be conveyed out before we have the public comment section. Thank you for calling that to my attention because we do have some items that we need to address. Unless there are any further questions, Council Member Stennett, I'll go to you. Thank you, Mayor. I know earlier last week there were several questions as we started discussing this issue that, from a legal standpoint, we wanted to have answered. And I petitioned the law department and asked several questions. I know David Barbary is here. All the council members have received his memo today in regards to a couple of questions, one being the referendum question. One of the questions posed to the council was, in 1986, when this community did approve the Sunday sale of alcohol by the drink, does that also tie the council or this community to also put the current issue back on the referendum ballot? And, David, can you come up and just reiterate the legal department's opinion on this? Once again, we're talking about the 1986 referendum that was passed. Does that obligate this council to put this issue back on the referendum for a vote? No. The intent of the legislature was specifically not to have a referendum vote on this issue. And is that due to the most recent passage of legislation? Yes. It's totally due to the most recent legislative change that went through earlier this year, yes. Okay. So having said that, if this council wanted to put it back as a referendum or the citizens wanted to come to us, as they did in the water issue, and ask for a referendum, could they do so? Could we do so? As an extension of Sunday sales? No. If you wanted to bring the – if you wanted to put the same – if someone wanted to put the same ordinance that's before you all as a citizen referendum, it would be our opinion that you couldn't do that under the current law. Okay. Fair enough. And then the last question that was asked to your department was about excluding certain entities from the ability to serve alcohol on Sunday. I know we're dealing with two separate licenses, one being mall beverages, the other being distilled spirits. Could there be some – or are there ways to exclude certain businesses, such as package stores from the current ordinance as it's written? The concern – the short answer is yes. There is – you can make distinctions between buy-the-drink sales and package sales and the types of establishments that sell. Our concern with mall beverages specifically is there is only one type of retail mall beverage license, so we think there would be a potential legal issue if you all decided to allow extended mall beverage sales on Sunday and did not offer that same privilege to package stores because of that single licensure with the state, and they control how many licenses there are and that kind of thing. Okay. And so in terms of number of licenses, are we at the max in terms of number we can issue in this community? I'd defer to ABC on that. I think we're possibly at a quota issue with respect to what you would consider to be your typical bar, retail, liquor-buy-the-drink type establishment, but I think that varies from – literally from month to month depending on who's turning their licenses and that kind of stuff. Okay. Well, I have you here. The one last question is does the current state law as it's written that we keep referring to, tell this county and this council the earliest start time or the latest ending time that alcohol sales can be had on Sunday? No, the state law with respect to Sundays leaves that to the discretion of this body to make those decisions. So for discussion purposes, it could be 8 a.m. or 1 p.m. It wouldn't matter on that day. That's correct. The state law does not preclude you or restrict you from setting your hours on Sunday. Okay. Very good. And if the ABC officers can come forward, we had a couple of questions for you as well. And, again, these are a lot of the same questions we've been getting e-mails and phone calls on that just need to be clarified before we start our discussion. Welcome. How are you doing? A couple of questions that have come up. As the current law as written ordinance that's before us today, a package store, such as a Rite Aid that sells both malt beverages and distilled spirits, how would they operate on Sundays with an 11 a.m. start time and a 1 p.m. start time? The problem that we see from the ABC aspect and also the enforcement aspect, a true package store to operate malt beverages and distilled spirits and wine, basically what they would actually have to do is between 11 o'clock and 1 o'clock, they couldn't be open unless they locked their distilled spirits and wine to sell malt beverage. Then from 1 to 9, they could be open to sell anything. And then between 9 o'clock and then 2.30 in the morning, they would have to lock their distilled spirits back up again to sell malt beverages. Now, there are some facilities in Lexington that have the capability to separate their distilled spirits and wine and malt beverages and lock those up. But then there are some package stores that don't have that ability to do that. So by the drink, anyone that has a license for by the drink, whether it be a bar or a restaurant, could do everything at 11? Yes. The way it's currently written? Yes. Only the people affected by the 1 o'clock time would be our actual package stores? The actual package stores, between 1 o'clock and 9 o'clock. And then the ones that sell both malt beverages and distilled spirits would have that issue? Yes. And the state law says they have to lock up the distilled spirits? They would have to lock them up under lock and key or some type of lockout device on the cash register. But the actual stock would still have to be locked. So a store that doesn't have this already in place would have to spend a lot of money, such as a liquor bar or things established such as those, to meet your enforcement issues? Yes. Or not be open during those times other than 1 to 9 to sell everything? That was my next question. So they could just defer to a 1 and be open only 1 to 9 and forego the rest of the hours? Yes. That would be up to the choice of the individual business, of course. Yes. Okay. Mayor, that's all the questions I have for now. I don't know if the council members have other questions. Council Member Maloney. I need to ask the law department, Mr. Barber, beer license. You said that when the councilman in the Senate said it would be hard to enforce certain beer licenses because all the beer licenses are the same. Is that correct? There's only one. When you get into liquor drinks, there's a lot of different types of licenses. When it comes to a retail malt beverage license, the state makes no distinction between selling by the drink and selling it in a package. It's one type of license. And, in fact, you can walk into a bar legally and buy a six-pack beer if that's what you choose to do. And that's because it's only one type of license. Now, let me ask you how we've been getting away with this the last 20 years. To my knowledge, we haven't been challenged on it. The current structure is that we allow under our current hours, we allow malt beverage by the drink sales on Sundays in certain types of establishments, the same ones that the voters voted on back in 1986. So we're simply letting you all know that if you expand this to a bunch of different establishments, we have a legal concern that because there's that single type of license, someone could challenge you all and say that you had to make it available to the malt beverage package stores as well. So they could have challenged us now is what you're saying. Anybody could have gone in and challenged us now. Because, legally, this law that we're trying to pass today could have been, if somebody would have gone back 20 years ago and said, This is not right. We should be allowed to sell. I suspect one of the reasons it possibly hasn't happened is we had only opened it up to such a limited extent that it wasn't worth pursuing. From what it sounds like to me, we've been doing something wrong. And then, you know, there's some other issues that we're going to have to address administratively that we may have to change our current practice on as well. Okay. It just sounds like we've been doing something wrong. But I can't answer why someone wouldn't buy. We're just pointing out to you all, if you expand it to the extent that you are talking about in the ordinance, and then you come, if you attempt to cut it back to eliminate the malt beverage package stores type sales, you're potentially going to have a legal issue because of that single type of license. Okay. Thank you. Does any other council member have questions for either the law department or the folks from ABC? And we're prepared to hear comment from the public. Very well. As I said a few moments ago, we'll alternate back and forth. We'll begin with Pastor Fugate. You'll have three minutes, please. Thank you, Mayor and Council. Thank you for the opportunity to speak today against the expanded sale of alcohol in Fayette County. I ask the council to vote against the expanded sale for three reasons. First of all, statistics tell us that more alcohol, more alcohol-related injuries, accidents. There are statistics some say are too old, going to a Supreme Court case that upheld the blue laws, not for religious purposes but for the sake of supporting work and labor unions and associations. There are statistics as recent as New Mexico that I think the council is familiar with, saying that there was an increase in accidents and deaths by 29 and 42 percent. And so statistics. Second of all, I ask you to vote against it because of my 21-year experience as a pastor. You see, as a pastor in a church, this is where people come to when they face the negative results of alcohol consumption, the breaking of families, marriages, children. I have children in our church that have no mother and father because they were killed by an intoxicated driver. That child had no choice. We're talking about choice as far as who can and who can't, but those folks have no choice. My experience as a pastor, I have four immediate family, two brothers and brother-in-law who are currently state policemen. And anybody who deals with those who drink alcohol, the more alcohol you have, the more alcohol-related accidents and incidents. And then the third and final reason I ask you to vote against it, for more than 200 years, since the beginning of Lexington being a city, we have respected Sunday. And we have not sold alcohol on Sunday, 1986. If you go back to the arguments, you'll find that those that were for it, they said, if we can just get alcohol on Sunday, then we'll be satisfied. And now we're back again 21 years later asking for even more. I'm asking the council to continue to keep a little bit of respect for the Lord's Day by saying no to expanded alcohol sales on Sunday. I thank you very much. Thank you very much, Pastor Fugate. If you would, when you step to the podium, please give us your full name and residence address. I'll try to give you notice around 20 or 30 seconds to go if you're getting close to running out of time. The first person on the list to speak in favor was Renee Jackson. Renee Jackson, 743 Zandell Drive. Thank you, Mayor and council, for opening this up for some public discussion. As you've all received a letter from me and my executive committee, you know that we just think this is going to make us more appealing to other communities and also people that are seeking to relocate. I know we have a big push to try to attract young professionals. We feel like this will be a plus. We think it will keep us competitive with Northern Kentucky and Louisville. The existing laws discriminate against small restaurateurs, and they completely neglect bar owners. And we just think that the economic impacts will far outweigh any negative impacts. And that's all we have. Thank you. Thank you very much, Ms. Jackson. The next individual against I have is Bill Dale, I believe. And then the next speaker for will be Ben Dulanier. Okay. If you could step over and be ready to speak, it will help us move along just a little bit. Mr. Dale. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. It's Bill Dale, a physician here, local physician. I'm coming to speak. I'll leave to my colleagues to address their religious, moral, ethical issues. I just want to discuss the scientific and medical issues. What is the data against this scourge? What's the data on medical data? Well, let's look at the national data. I won't trouble you by going over my address, by the way, is 3111 Maria Drive out in the county district 12. I won't trouble you by going over the New Mexico study. That's a statewide study, which Pastor Fugate just referred to, considered the premier study, with tremendous increase in not only collisions but deaths related to increased alcohol sales on Sunday. Won't trouble you with that. What about other national studies? Well, let's look at the other national studies. Five percent, and this study, this is not from some religious source. This is from the National Center for Disease Control. Five percent of Americans drink heavily. Fifteen percent are binge drinkers. Now, this study defined binge drinkers as men and women who drink, anybody who drinks more than four drinks at a time. Okay? Approximately in 2001, approximately 75,000 deaths attributed to excessive alcohol occurred. And alcohol abuse is the third leading lifestyle-related cause of death in our country. Okay? As Pastor Fugate well pointed out, more availability, more use, more abuse. Is this just for people over 21 years of age? Contrary. People under 21 years of age, it's a major health problem. Alcohol is the most commonly used and abused drug in America today, more than tobacco and illicit drugs. That's the Center for Disease Control. We'll tell you that. What happens to children from 12 to 20 years of age? Twenty percent of all the alcohol in this country is consumed by this age group, 12 to 20. All right? That group, even more disturbing, is that 90 percent of these individuals binge drink. Okay? On the average, underage drinkers consume more drinks per drinking episode than older adults. And in 2004, over 140,000 emergency room visits were caused by this group, 12 to 20 age individuals related to alcohol. Dr. Daley, you have about 30 seconds. Thank you. Okay. Is this true just nationally? No, it's true in Kentucky. An impaired driving study in Kentucky, a study by the National Highway Administration, pointed out that the average alcohol death in Kentucky costs $3.2 million. The survivor costs $21,000 to take care of. Alcohol, public costs, Kentucky, 1.6 billion deaths in Kentucky. This is a catcher. Of this 1.6 billion, $1 billion were paid by us non-abusers. All right? Dr. Daley, your time has expired. Thank you so much. I urge you to vote against this. Thank you. Thank you very much. Mr. O'Daniel, if you would step up, and Shannon Back. Shannon Back, if you would stand by, please. Good afternoon. My name is Ben O'Daniel. I reside at 6825 Old Richmond Road. I'm the owner and winemaker for Gene Ferris Winery and Bistro. I'm here not as a doctor, not a pastor. I'm a farmer who has a small family and small business. We're one of the top wineries in the state. We're the most highly internationally awarded winery in the state, currently holding and employing about 30 some odd employees. Winers are directly tied to tourism. We sit on I-75, which is a major thoroughfare for the east coast, north to south. Currently, we're closed on Sundays. We're not the only ones who would benefit from having Sunday sales being a destination for tourism, but so do local farmers who are growing grapes, vegetables, produce that we sell. Also, local restaurants, gas stations, lodging, hotels, grocers. The entire community benefits not only from that revenue that's brought in and the taxation based on that, but also from employment opportunities. I worked in Tennessee for about five years in wineries which had Sunday sales, and 23 percent of their sales were derived from those Sundays. We were open for fewer hours but had more traffic and appreciated those sales. Twenty-three percent of our total sales were from those Sundays. Lexington's trying to be raising itself in the eyes of the world community. They've gone out and promoted themselves. We've worked very hard to obtain the equestrian games. I've worked a great deal with both the state and the local tourism departments. We are currently in the current issue of Keeneland magazine, getting ready to come out in Southern Living magazine. And quite honestly, I think it's a shame that not only myself, but Lexington as a whole has to be closed on Sunday for the world. It's coming, and I would like to be able to show them how great we truly are. So one more day is one more day. Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. Back. If you would step up, and Fran Taylor, if you would stand by. We need your name and address. Thank you, Mayor and Council. My name is Shannon Back, the pastor of Broadway Baptist Church here in Lexington. I reside at 1425 Saddle Club Way. Dear Mayor and Council members, I would like to address the collective council chamber on this important issue from both a spiritual and what I call a physical or logical perspective. In my estimation, first, God cannot bless a nation or a city, Lexington more specifically, whose desire is to willfully walk in disobedience. Proverbs 14.34 says, Righteousness exalteth a nation, but sin is a reproach to any people. Some in this chamber may not view the consumption of alcohol as sin. However, one would be hard-pressed to argue against the tragic fallout of alcohol use, misuse, and abuse, particularly the impact that alcohol abuse has on the family. We would be hard-pressed to find one family member who would claim that they are well-pleased, that in their family they have an alcoholic father, a mother, or child. Alcohol abuse has, for millenniums, destroyed many families. Certainly those families impacted by the misuse of alcohol can reason with the aforementioned proverb, Righteousness exalteth a nation, but sin is a reproach to any people. From a physical or logical perspective, expanding the availability of liquor sales in our city will not facilitate long-term financial support for Lexington. In my estimation, the local economy will not be emboldened by extending the availability yet another day. Logically, our support services will need to be expanded, which will require, number one, more local law enforcement, number two, longer hours for present employees of local law enforcement, and number three, extended hours for local EMTs and the like. I am certain that the delinquency of employees who cannot get up for work on Monday as a result of the Sunday binge will diminish the efforts to promote efficiency in our community. I am certain that the educational pursuits of our children will be hampered as tragic accidents extend in the early morning hours of Monday. Those families will have yet another day to hope that Dad makes it home alive. Dear Mayor, Vice Mayor, Council, and Chamber at large, I find it personally somewhat ironic that this public hearing is taking place on the sixth anniversary of the most horrific act of terrorism ever perpetrated on American soil. I personally will never forget September 11, 2001, so long as I live. But if I might reason from a logical perspective, the effects of continued alcohol abuse have a far more reaching impact on our local citizens, our culture, and our country than the events of September 11, 2001. In my estimation, more children, wives, husbands, mothers, and fathers will be affected long term by the approval of this single ordinance than those who lost family members in the tragic events of September 11, 2001. I strongly urge you to vote no on the expansion of liquor availability in Lexington, Kentucky. Thank you, Mr. Bennett. Let me, in the interest of trying to move this along and keeping everybody here as short a period of time as is necessary, ask that you refrain from the applause. If you need to do that, you can go downstairs, but we need to be moving along as rapidly as we can. So, Ms. Taylor, if you'll step up. And the next person I have is David McCracken, if you'll stand by. Fran Taylor, 722 West High Street, Lexington, 40508. I'm speaking on behalf of the Blue Grass Hospitality Association, a body that I am currently president. I'm also past chair of the Lexington Convention and Visitors Bureau Tourism Commission and have been a destination marketer bringing people to Lexington and the Blue Grass for over 20 years. As we already established earlier in this session, the existing ordinance is uneven in its application of how it treats local bars, restaurants, and hotels. The larger bars, restaurants, and hotels already have the ability to serve alcohol on Sunday. It's an uneven application, and it's a fairness issue. It's also a confusing issue for visitors who come to Lexington. Lexington is also in a position now where it is less than other communities related to its ability to attract and host tourism-related events. Over 20 cities around Kentucky and towns ranging from Augusta, Maysville, and Louisville, in terms of scope and size, currently have eliminated the uneven Sunday ordinance. I would ask you to vote in favor of this ordinance to keep your eye on the ball on the fact that we have accepted the obligation to host the 2010 World Equestrian Games, and we need to put our best foot forward as a community and not tread water on this particular issue. I think we have a lot more ground to cover between now and then. Thank you. Thank you very much, Ms. Taylor. Mr. McCracken, if you would step up, and Debbie Long, if you would stand by. I'm the pastor of Lafayette Church of Nazarene, 264 Lafayette Parkway. I've been there 30 years. I would like to start off, Mayor and Council, by a picture of seven U.K. students plus another student I picture killed in the last six years. It's a dilemma at the University of Kentucky. Will you help or will you hurt? There's seven. They're about worth seven students, plus another friend. It is and will be obvious to you that when this hearing is finished, this proposed ordinance will adversely affect the citizens of Lexington that you represent. You have heard, you are hearing, and you will hear of avenues of destruction that lick or travel, and you know in your heart it is true. Do you vote to increase the scourge of liquor? If so, the prophecy is this decision will boomerang upon you and your family, and you will feel personally the consequences of more liquor. However, God and man put you into power, and God and man can take you out of power. Heed the proverb, wine is a mocker, and strong intoxicating drink is raging, and whoever is deceived thereby is very unwise. May God give you wisdom, and please, no more liquor. I think I have a little time left. Robert Walker, assistant professor at the University of Kentucky, has made a study of what it costs, what liquor costs, all the problems. We're talking about how much money is going to be made to all the liquor. The liquor people will make clear profit, but let me tell you, according to his study that he made for Governor Fletcher, that it's costing Kentucky on the problems of alcohol abuse, it's costing $5.9 billion a year. And that averages out for every citizen, every man, woman, and child of Kentucky to over $1,400 per year. That's what it costs to take care of all the problems, all the havoc, all the carnage that comes from liquor sales. Everyone's a loser. Everyone. You'll be a loser. I'll be a loser. Everyone's a loser. You have about 30 seconds. That's good. The only one that goes away with clear profit is the liquor industry. And certainly, the love of money is the root of all kinds of evil. May God give you wisdom. Please, no more liquor. Thank you very much, Mr. McCracken and Ms. Long. If you would come forward, and then the next person I have is John and Sally Weber. Okay, thank you very much. And then Reverend Joseph McDowell, if you would stand by, and Ms. Long. Debbie Long, 1313 Richard Road. I want to thank the mayor and council for giving us this opportunity to speak today. I have two restaurants, Dudley's Restaurant and Buddy's Bar and Grill. We were both open on Sunday. One has been open 21 years on Sunday, and the other has been open three years on Sunday. And mine is really a simple, I guess I'm evil, but this is a simple, it is really an opportunity for my business, a small business owner, to be able to increase my Sunday liquor sales by probably 5 to 10 percent. And as you all know, if you're a business owner, if you're able to increase your sales without increasing your expenses, it's a win situation for us. So I am here to say that I am in favor of expanded liquor sales on Sunday, and I hope you all look at that as a possibility for small businesses to be able to increase sales without increasing any of their expenses. Thank you very much. Thank you, Ms. Long. Mr. McDowell, if you will step forward, and then Allen Cloud. Allen Cloud, if you will stand by, please. Mayor, Reverend Joseph McDowell, Pastor of the Eddington Baptist Church, 2995 Royster Road, I urge you this evening to vote no on this issue of liquor and the opening of alcohol sales on Sunday. All I hear is how much profit that these individuals are going to make. I don't hear anybody who's saying vote yes, saying anything about their lives that are going to be lost, children that are going to be lost, teenagers that are going to run rapid because they'll have access to alcohol seven days a week. You might not sell it to them, but somebody will buy it for them. This council needs to look at the fact that not only that, you'll pay for all of this. Your detention centers are going to get overcrowded. Your police department is going to have to work. Alcohol sales are not good for anybody. I don't care whether you're in a restaurant, a hotel, or whatever. Somebody has to draw a line and say no to this issue. Sunday is the day of the Lord. And when we get to the point where we disrespect what God tells us not to do, every one of us will suffer. I'm not ready to suffer for somebody because they want a half a pint of alcohol. I'd rather enjoy what God gives me on Sunday. And so I'm asking each one of you to think real hard and look in your hearts and look at these little children. I look at the councilman over there with that baby in his lap. That baby's got to grow up. Are you going to be able to say if that baby gets killed by a drunk driver, can you say with a clear conscience, I voted, and it happened on a Sunday. I voted to sell alcohol on Sunday, and that baby got killed by a drunk driver. I ask you, vote no on this issue. Thank you, sir. Thank you, Reverend McDowell. Allen Cloud, if you'll step up. And Reverend Chris Clay, I believe it is, or Cloy. Allen Cloud, 405 Lenny Drive, Lexington, Kentucky. After many years working in the bar business, probably 15, 16, I must say that there were rare times that I saw good, clean, without even speaking morally or ethically, outcomes from the over-intake of alcohol. And what I'm seeing is that we're six days a week, we're going seven days a week. And it frightens me because just what all of these others are saying, do we want to have this community and try to encourage people to come to this community because we serve alcohol on Sundays? And it does scare me. For families, what I did see in the bar business was a lot of deaths, a lot of marriages that were absolutely wrecked, ruined, families that were ruined. I became an alcoholic, and I'm one of the blessed ones. One in 30 alcoholics gets sober. The deaths of alcohol is absolutely stunning. Broken families continue to rise, and the number of unalcoholic treated persons in this world would probably blow your mind. I'm sure each and every one of you guys, ladies, have somebody that you know that it's ripped them apart. I'm very blessed to be able to stand here and see you guys because it put me on my deathbed many times. I don't know why we would want to add any evil to this beautiful city that we're trying to build, why we're going to go to Limestone and pick up the street and then throw them liquor on Sundays. It's a killer, and I think it's a no-brainer. Thanks. Thank you, Mr. Crabb. I had you signed up on the for list, but I think you were speaking against it, so let me call to the podium a couple of people for Larry Bell, if you'd come forward. And then is it Ted Mason? Ted Mason from the Kentucky Grocers Association. Good afternoon. I appreciate the opportunity to speak. My name is Larry Bell. I'm the general manager of the Hyatt. I'm the vice president of the Blue Grass Hospitality Association and the past chair of the Lexington Convention and Visitors Bureau. We'll just have a couple of points to make. First of all, this isn't really a business issue for the Hyatt. The Hyatt already has a convention liquor license. We've been serving, I'd like to think, responsibly for 20 years since the referendum, and I think you could count on that. I think it is the responsibility of the council, and I think they've been very responsible about alcohol service. I know, I think two years ago, I believe it was, there were some changes made to the ordinance that required businesses to ensure that their employees that serve are properly trained because people that have had too much to drink shouldn't be served. I can tell you that the ABC enforcement is vigorous in the area, as it should be, and, you know, there are rules and laws against serving underage people, and they are enforced and they should be enforced. I think this is a question, as far as we're concerned, about choice, about choice for patrons that are here. I would submit to you that there is, you know, widespread availability of alcohol, but it's not impartially. Basically, if you own a small business, you're not able to serve now. If you have a large business like the Hyatt, you are able to serve. So it would be easy for me to argue against this because, to a degree, we have an exclusive situation. But I think to make our community more progressive, to make it more competitive for attracting more business, and to make our city more progressive, it's just the right thing to do to support the ordinance, and I appreciate the opportunity to speak to you. Thank you, Mr. Bell. Mr. Mason, if you'll come forward, and then Reverend Chris Clay or Cloy. All right. Then Pastor Jim Muncie. Pastor Muncie. All right. Pastor Duane Walker. Yes, sir. All right. Go ahead. Ted Mason, 3908 English Oak Circle here in Lexington. Sometimes distance adds a little bit of perspective. I was fortunate that I was able to live away from Lexington for a number of years in our national capital, working there in an area that did have Sunday sales. I would like to say that it became something that we were all used to. It was not anything that was bad and any different than any other day. Some people may say that this is different than any other day. But with that perspective of being away and then coming back and seeing the opportunities that we have for our community, I would like to hopefully that the council will move forward with this ordinance change, that there's not all of this fear to be had that it becomes a normal part of everybody's day on Sunday. So with that, I would like to ask for support of the ordinance, and thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mason. Pastor Walker, if you'll come forward, and Robert Dalton, if you'll stand by. Thank you, Mayor and Council. I stand here today as a pastor, Dwayne Walker, Mount Olivet Baptist Church, 1008 Delaware Avenue. On a professional level, our church is close to Winchester Road. And even early Sunday morning at quarter to six when I'm on my way to church, there are people that are still staggering down the street. I guess that will continue the next day. So it will affect us. We have about 200 people that go to church on Sunday night. That's the major thoroughfare for them to get home is on Winchester Road. And so on a professional level, I would say we have one business day Sunday. Everybody else has six. That's six to one. It's a little bit out favored there. I would love to have seven days a week to have church. Many of our recovering alcoholics in our drug addiction program on Friday night say, If I could come here every day, I'd make it to have a quicker recovery from this alcohol. And on a private level, I never knew my grandfather. I wear this black armband today in remembrance of him who died in an alcohol-related boating accident. And, by the way, we did get the 2010 games without this ordinance. And I encourage you to vote against it. Thank you very much, Pastor Walker. Robert Dalton, if you'll come forward. And Elizabeth Ellenberg, if you'll stand by. Let me mention now, I don't have anybody else signed up to speak for the ordinance. If you wish to do so, please sign up in the sheets in the back of the room so we can get you in the rotation here. Mr. Dalton. Thank you, Mayor. Robert Dalton, 520 Douglas Avenue. I don't have any interest in any of the industry with alcohol or anything. There's been a lot of comments today that you should not vote for this because it is in violation of religious Sabbath. But I remind you that this is the Christian Sabbath we're talking about. We also have many other religions in this community that do not have their Sabbath on Sunday. Are we going to change the laws to respect those people? Are we going to be able to stop alcohol sales on Friday evening from sunset to Saturday evening sunset in view of the Jewish? Or how about the people that are atheists? Are we going to make changes for that too? The Christian movement has decided that they want to tell everybody else in this community how we should practice our religion. And I don't think this is right. God gave us the right to choose. We all have that free agency. If you want to worship on Sunday, if you want to keep Sunday Sabbath for you, then that's your choice. But also, if that's not your day, if you choose not to, that should also be your right too. And we are taking that away from people. Another thing that's been mentioned is the accidents. We already allow alcohol by the drink on Sunday. People can go on Friday and Saturday to the stores and buy up their liquor. They take it home, have their parties. We're not stopping the drinking. All we're doing is just making it a little less convenient for them by not having the Sunday sales. Something needs to be done. We need the changes. And so I say, you know, please allow this alcohol sales on Sunday. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Dalton. Ms. Annenberg, if you'll come forward. And we have had another individual sign up to speak for Ms. Fibash, if you'll stand by. Council Mayor, Councilmen and women, my name is Elizabeth Annenberg. I live at 1714 Sarasota Court here in Lexington. And I'm here to ask you not to expand the sale of liquor on Sunday. Some say it's only a few more hours. Having suffered at the hands of an alcoholic and very abusive father, I say even a day, even a few hours, makes a difference to that child that's being abused and hurt. They can buy their alcohol on Saturday, Friday, whatever, and they can drink it on Sunday. I realize that. But if they cannot go out and drink it, at least the roads may be a little safer. Some say that the present laws are unfair to small restaurants and bars. I say what's fair about children being beaten and abused, having to go without proper food or warm clothing in the winter because money was used for alcohol? What's fair about families that are destroyed? Some say we need to do this to compete with Northern Kentucky and Louisville. I say what's wrong with making a difference and going against what everybody else is doing when we compete with everything these other cities do, even at the risk of hurting our children? My dad went out to the bars a lot to do his drinking. And then he came home in a drunken, vicious stupor. I can tell you from experience that most of the weeks, the only peace we saw was on Sunday. If he were physically able to be here and stand by my side this evening, he would finally say to you at the age of 69, please do not do this expansion. He would tell you that one day does make a difference. As an adult survivor of an alcoholic father who neglected and hurt his family and destroyed his own body, I plead with you not to allow this expansion of Sunday liquor. Thank you so much for letting me speak. Thank you, Ms. Ellen Berg. Ms. Fivash, if you'll come forward, and Patrick Schneider. Dr. Schneider, if you'll stand by. Mayor and Council, Sherry Fivash. I live at 4133 Amberwood Court. I'm the Executive Vice President for Commerce Lexington. And on behalf of Commerce Lexington, we believe that it is the sole purpose to create the environment and opportunity for economic prosperity. And to that end, the organization opposes anything that stifles the economic potential of a business to reach its full potential, and that it is why it is the position of the Commerce Lexington Economic or, excuse me, the Commerce Lexington Executive Committee to support the expanding Sunday alcohol sales in Fayette County. Commerce Lexington's full board will vote on this issue at its next Monday, September 17th, 2007, board meeting. With so many people traveling to our city and, again, with the aforementioned World Equestrian Games and conventions and international audience in just those three short years, this is a great opportunity to make Lexington more attractive to visitors and residents and more viable for a variety of restaurant and business owners. Lexington's existing liquor laws are antiquated and hindered the sales potential of small restaurantiers and bar owners, especially those located downtown and might not be large enough to meet the minimum seat requirement under the current ordinance. Therefore, we would encourage you to have this expanded liquor license law. Thank you, Ms. Five-Ash. Dr. Schneider, if you will come forward. As I indicated a moment ago, I have no one else who wishes to speak for on my list. So, Ed McCracken, if you will stand by, please. Thank you. Hello. My name is Patrick Schneider, 668 Mount Vernon. I'm a local family doctor, and I'm here to ask you to please think again about this ordinance. Mr. Mayor and Council Members, if you think our nation has been going down the right road for the past 40 years, if you think America is saner and safer, if you think our schools are better, if you think our leaders in government, business, and entertainment are more honorable, then vote for it. It's just another step down the very same road. If, however, on this most special day of remembrance, you have an uneasiness that America has gone too far, too far down the wrong road without its moral compass, then you might want to think again. If you think that opening strip and booze bars on Sunday is keeping Holy the Lord's Day, or quite frankly, just don't care, then vote for it. If, however, you wonder whether a country that throws the Lord and his laws out of its schools, its laws, its government, and yes, even its churches, is asking for trouble, then you might want to think again. If you think opening booze and strip bars on Sundays is going to make families and communities stronger, then vote for it. If deep down you really know better, then you may want to think again. If you think that servicing the lewd and secret desires of visiting conventioneers is more important than our own children, then vote for it. If, however, you really don't think we need to imitate the convention prostitution capital Las Vegas, then you may want to think again. Lastly, if you think the admonition, if you deny me before your fellow men, I will also deny you before my father, doesn't really apply to Lexington's elite, then vote for it. But if you think just maybe pride does come before the fall, then please think again, please vote again. Fellow citizens, we have not been given the whole truth. There is a hidden agenda here, and it is about more bucks for more smut. This is not good for our families, our children, or our community for one very simple and one very elementary reason. It is not a good idea. Thank you, and may God bless America. Thank you, Dr. Snyder. Mr. McCracken, if you'll come forward, and Angie Tedder, if you will stand back, please. Thank you, Mayor and Council. I've come before you also using statistical data that supports, totally supports the fact that the negative impacts are overwhelming and staggering. I think most of us read the Lexington Herald-Leader article that clearly indicated, referenced a study, I think out of New Mexico, that delineated these negative impacts. I believe, Dr. Stevens, that you were quoted in the paper, if it was accurate, that if you had any idea that such negative impacts could occur, that you would certainly not put this forth. You would not, you would withdraw this, as a matter of fact. There are other studies out there. I have emailed each one of you a copy of a study from Minnesota. It's pretty current. It was updated March 2006, and it really indicates that the just cost alone is staggering. For instance, in Minnesota, which is considered maybe a little bit above average as a state, but it's close, the cost for every person there, $900 a year for everybody in the state, the cost of the negative impacts on human and economic cost due to alcohol and expanded sales. It gives the statistics. I trust that some of you have read this. That indicates that alcohol contributes to violence such as child abuse, homicide, suicide, personal assaults. The list goes on. I don't know whether or not anybody has bothered to take a look at data here supporting voting for this. I know that you certainly made a good decision concerning smoking. Somebody mentioned choice. You know, we have choices. We don't have a choice whether we're going to smoke in a restaurant or not. The negative impacts are clear. The statistics were there. Good decisions were made. And Lexington is going to survive, and other cities are going the same way. The binge drinking in Minnesota for this study was around 16.5 percent. Binge drinking of all drinkers. So just using statistics alone, I think some of you are certainly familiar with how to use the statistics. You can do the calculation by expanding liquor sales. It's going to be negative. It's going to have a great impact on us. It will be negative. I encourage you to vote no on this. Thank you, Mr. McCracken. Ms. Tedder, if you will step up. And Nicole Anderson. Ms. Anderson. Good. If you will stand by, please. Yes. My name is Angie Tedder. I live at 188th and Masters in Georgetown, Kentucky. I'm right next door to you. Whatever you decide here could happen in Georgetown where I live. I emailed each and every one of you. I sent an attachment, and it was the eight guidelines to making really good decisions. I didn't hear back from anyone that you read it. I wish that you would because I think you would be on this side. The second thing I'd like to say is that all of you became doctors. Louisville became doctors when it came to smoking. You all knew what was best for everyone. Secondhand smoke can kill you. Okay. But so can a drunk driver. So can an abusive husband or father. You have babies that have died because of a drunken killer, a motorist, excuse me. But you don't hear about babies dying because someone took them to a restaurant and someone was smoking somewhere else. So all of you were real wise in that decision. So my question is, is there more money in one thing than in another? You thought it well enough to close a business that was next to the Shays. Okay. But then you expanded the hours for drinking. It doesn't make any sense to me, and I don't know how it can to you. If you're talking about health, I challenge any one of you to tell me that alcohol is healthy. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Tedder. Ms. Anderson, if you'll step forward. And Mr. Glasper, Alfred Glasper, if you'll stand by. As a college student in Lexington, I'm glad that I have a place to come and study that is opposed to alcohol on Sunday and that doesn't sell it. I hope that we continue to not sell alcohol on Sundays, and I would just plead with you, please, to not sell alcohol on Sundays. Thank you very much, Mr. Glasper. If you would step forward. And then I have Jim Cloud. Mr. Cloud, if you'll stand by. Yes, Mr. Mayor, I'm Alfred G. Glasper and council members, 477 Scottsdale Circle. Also, it has four names, so I just put my name, not a title. But I am a pastor for 23 years in this city. I have seen the Maloney case in Kentucky. I've heard the stats. I've heard the mayor say that we should not do a repeat. I will not do a repeat. I'll do a reference to the fact that I've heard several mention the stats. And I thought, well, if the stats are what they are and they're pretty well accurate, you will not be able to enjoy the possible profit if we pass this ordinance, to even enjoy the benefits. Family, my whole family and I were going north, I mean going south on a major interstate. Never happened in my life. The city, I must confess, I'm afraid to even drive every day. I never know who is going to be impaired. Whether it's malt, wine, whatever, it is true that wine is a marker. Strong drink is raging. And whosoever is deceived thereby is not wise. The question comes, when is one deceived? It is obvious. You will not be deceived by drinking alcohol because you know it's alcohol. You will not be deceived by the very thing we hopefully will not do today or this week or in the days to come. And that is simply this, that to be deceived means just what it means, deceived. We are being deceived if we choose as a council of this city to vote in favor of such an ordinance. Because in the long run, it may not seem like it's a big deal with the alcohol expansion. But that's the very fact. We are deceived by thinking that it won't happen. It won't be me, my child, my daughter. But I spend time meditating and praying for it. And I ask God to also give me a word of prophecy to help us to please not vote in favor of this expansion. Because, again, the revenue may come in, but who is going to be left to enjoy it? What profit a man, Jesus said, if he gains the whole world and loses his own soul? Or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? Thank you, Mr. Glasper. Mr. Cloud, if you'll step forward, and then I have, I think it's Okari Dishman. I'm Jim Cloud. I was born and raised in this community. My wife, likewise. I'm 72 years old and appreciate the opportunity to speak. And I appeal to your fair sense of judgment. My primary concerns are abusive drinking and nude dancing, which I understand from very good sources is happening all over the place. And then we have this new ordinance that nude dancing will take place on Sunday, too. I don't think this is the kind of thing that we want to promote in our community. I want to particularly mention something that everybody else has mentioned some really good statistics and what have you, and enough of that. But except for something on divorce, Reverend Wayne Smith recently said on the radio, he says, I've never had a divorce case because of smoking, but many divorces caused by drinking. And that's so true. Excessive drinking and drugs contribute to a large measure of divorces. These are some stats produced recently by Dr. Judy Wallenstein. After being convinced that divorce was okay previously, these findings went parallel to God's plan for marriage and family. After 40 years of studies, she had to confess that she had been wrong about the impact of divorce on children. It was recognized in the 60s that divorce was a good thing if people didn't get along. Children are resilient and will get along. Children don't need both parents. Well, her studies found that five times more children with a single parent are likely to be poor, three times more likely to fail in school, three times more likely to commit suicide, 2.5 times more likely to require serious psychiatric treatment, 40 times more likely to be abused. So I just wanted to mention those things because they're kind of newer items. And I ask you, please, let's go back to the pristine 60s that I once knew right after the Second World War when our fathers literally sacrificed their lives and our mothers sacrificed themselves building weapons. I didn't know of this kind of thing going on in my teenage years. And I wish we could continue that. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Cloud. Mr. Dishman, if you'll come forward, and then Paul Jorgensen. Mr. Jorgensen. All right. My name is Corey Dishman, and I live 284 Glenda Avenue. And I'm a 17-year-old that goes to Dunbar High School. And I hear a lot of people talking about statistics, but I'm not going to mainly go to statistics. I am a statistic, matter of fact. Alcoholism runs in my family. It runs from my grandfather on both sides of my family to my father, my aunts and uncles. I know a lot of children that don't get to see their fathers at all because of alcohol. And I didn't get to see my grandfather because of alcohol. He died before I was born. My grandfather on my mother's side, he beat my grandmother to a pulp sometimes, even with an iron, hot iron, because he was drunk. He didn't even get to see me make it to middle school. My father, he beat my mother excessively. He didn't get to see me make it to high school. And it's a cycle because since it does run in my genes, I'm blessed enough to have it stop where I am right now. And I think of my children. See, it makes you bitter. See, it made me, when I was little, seeing all that violence and it makes me want to go out and do it. It's not worth it. And to think of seeing my children going out and beating another child because of what happened to him when he was younger and what's going on around them, I just can't imagine it. So I urge you to vote against alcohol on Sundays. Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. Dishman. Mr. Jorgensen, if you'll step forward. David Blakeman. Mr. Blakeman, if you'll stand by. James Paul Jorgensen, 1021 Wedgwood Road, Lexington, Kentucky. Why would we want to increase the opportunity for that to happen? It makes no sense. September 11, 2001, I stood before roughly 50 high school students as they were weeping their eyes out, crying uncontrollably watching the tragedy of that day. As we watched the Pentagon burning, I pointed to the screen and I said, Students, please listen. That is not the capital of the defense of this nation. The headquarters for the defense of our nation lies in God, and he has not been hurt. Psalm 33, 12 says, Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord. 400 years ago this year, Jamestown was founded. That colony only existed because of the biblical philosophy, 2 Thessalonians 3, 10. If you don't work, you don't eat. For 400 years, the Lord has been our God, and this has been a nation that is blessed by God. It's the only way you can explain the blessing of this nation. No other nation in the world has risen to power, world power, so quickly. I challenge you to find it. You won't. I pose the question, half America forgotten his maker. Prophet Hosea in Hosea 8, 14 posed that question to the nation of Judah. He reminded Judah that God had Israel. Judah founded you. He sustained you. He blessed you. He worked for you, but you left him out. Read the book over and over, all through 14 chapters. The nation of Israel left God out. What was the prophecy about? The coming destruction of that nation 200 years after the statement, you've left God out. When I moved to Lexington roughly three years ago, four years ago, I learned two things. One, bleed blue. Two, spit every time you say Louisville. Why do we want to become a little Louisville? I moved here from Gary, Indiana. In Gary, Indiana, you can have the liquor sales on Sunday. You can get all you want, everywhere you want. You can get drugs anywhere you want, everywhere you want. Gary, Indiana was the 93rd murder capital of the world, 98th world's most dangerous city. Why do we want to go from being the Athens of the West to the Gary of the South? Let me remind you, tourists, no tourists go to Gary. They probably won't come out alive, and that's a true statement. Mr. Jorgensen, you have about 30 more seconds. What is the economy? It's already been told, $5.9 billion lost. What is the result? My work in succession planning, my work in culture development in industrial manufacturing facilities has been translated into several different languages all across the world. If you think that a major corporation, a Forbes 500 corporation, is going to move to a city that votes to raise health care costs, increase employee turnaround, increase death rate, if you think that a city is going to look, that a company, a major company, is going to look at that and want to be here, you're sadly mistaken. Mr. Jorgensen, your time has expired. Thank you very much. David Blakeman, if you'll step forward, and is Jim Blakeman in the back of the room? Jim Blakeman, if you'll stand by. Let me interrupt for just a moment for the benefit of those who are downstairs. I understand there are seven individuals from downstairs who wish to speak, and I'd like for them to go ahead and come on up now. We have several vacant chairs here. James Jorgensen, Karen Guarneri, Gino Guarneri, Amy Ramsey, David Biber, Joel Beharie, Jeff Smith. And if you would come on up to the council chamber so you can be prepared to speak here in just a moment. Mr. Blakeman? Yes. I'm David Blakeman. I live at 1360 Saddle Club Way. I'm one of Councilman Maloney's constituents, and I'm adamantly opposed to this ill-conceived proposal. Right now we've been hearing two sides about this whole proposal. One side is represented and is concerned about money. The other side is concerned about lives. Which side are you on? We've heard Renee Jackson from the Downtown Lexington Corporation wrote to the Herald-Leader, this alcohol proposal is, quote, one small step in making us competitive with Louisville and Northern Kentucky. Apparently she thinks that if you can't drink downtown, you can't do anything. So what other steps are in store for us if this is one small step? Yesterday Commerce Lexington released a statement saying that it, quote, opposes anything that stifles the economic potential of a business to reach its full potential. Does anyone on this council agree with that statement? Opposes anything that stifles the businesses. Do you agree to an unregulated, unrestrained environment in Lexington? Apparently the liquor lobby believes you should. They want to be able to sell alcohol by the drink, by the bottle, any way they can, to as many people as they can, to people who are desperate for a drink and can't wait until Monday. As long as they have money, that's good enough. They care about the money, not about the damages caused. According to the Journal of American Medical Association, alcohol causes more than 100,000 deaths a year in the U.S., costs us $184.6 billion a year in health costs, businesses, criminal justice costs. According to the Department of Justice, underage drinking costs us $52.8 billion a year. Alcohol-related car crashes are the number one killer of teens. Alcohol use is also associated with homicides, suicides, and drowning, the next three leading causes of deaths among youth. In 1997 in La Crosse, Wisconsin, they've had eight college-age men wind up in rivers around the area after drinking in bars. They thought they had a serial killer. No, it was just alcohol. But the truth is, alcohol is a serial killer. We talk about money all the time. How much money will the businesses make? How much money will Lexington make? Mr. Boykman, you have about 30 seconds left. Okay. I hear we need to be more inviting to foreigners. In all honesty, all we need are a lot of jet-lagged people coming over here, having a lot to drink, unfamiliar with our roads, and then trying to remember is it the left side or the right side you drive on. Six years ago today, we were faced with terror in the skies. Today, Lexington is faced with a proposal to put more terror on our streets, on our highways, and in our homes. I ask you, I urge you, please, vote against this insanity. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Boykman. Mr. Jim Boykman, if you will step forward, and I have a speaker who wishes to speak in favor. Ms. McBrayer, if you would stand by, please. Mr. Boykman. Mr. Mayor, council members, Jim Boykman, 4934 Heartland Parkway. You've seen this picture of the seven U.K. students who were killed as a result of alcohol. We need less alcohol, not more. I wear this button that says, please, no more liquor. I don't see anybody wearing one that says, please, give us more liquor, give us more alcohol. I rode over here today with a man whose wife was maimed for life by a drunken driver. You've heard about the New Mexico study where the Sunday sales had a distinct impact on drunken driving deaths on the highway. If you look around tonight here, you'll find about 50 to 1 against this ordinance. Please, please, council members, please vote against this ordinance. Thank you, Mr. Boykman. Ms. McBrayer, if you'll come forward. And Mr. Jorgensen, James Jorgensen, have you made your way up? If you'll stand by, please. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Vice Mayor, Council. I appreciate you listening to me today. I am a business owner here in Lexington and a member of Commerce Lexington. And we have had sales on Sundays since 1986. This is nothing new. This is just something that will make a level playing field for all businesses. And that's what I'm concerned about. I am concerned about the 2010 games when they come, about, you know, tourism and everything. And putting us on a level playing field with Louisville, northern Kentucky, you name it, there are a lot of cities here in Kentucky that have sales on Sunday. This is nothing new. And I applaud you all for everything that you have done with the industry of alcohol for server training. The things that you all have put in place for server training, it's a great program that you have. Alcohol is not a bad thing. And moderation, it really isn't. Moderation is important. And being responsible is very important. I'm a mother of three kids. I know. You know, I am a believer in responsibility. So thank you for your time. Thank you very much, Ms. McBrayer. Mr. Jorgensen, if you'll step forward. Sharon Grineery. Ms. Grineery. Is Gino Grineery here? I can't read whether it's Guy or Amy Ramsey. Ginny, I'm sorry. You'd stand by. Thank you. Jim Jorgensen, 2161 Rollingdale Road here in Lexington. I would oppose this expanded sale of liquor on Sunday. I think first place that we ought to honor God on one day of the week. Her testimony already or her statements, the fact that a Christian nation, God has blessed this nation, I think we ought to continue to honor him. As I've sat here and listened to the different speakers speaking for and against it, some have said that the expanded sale would be a financial benefit and that you're choosing between finances and lives. To be honest with you, it seems to me that the finances are negative, that the impact on the city as a whole or the community as a whole or me as a taxpayer are going to be negative by expanding Sunday, expanding liquor sales. People have said, well, I've tried to hear a good argument for expanding it. They said, well, it's going to help industry come here or something. Toyota moved to Georgetown. As I understand it, Scott County is completely dry. Yeah, I don't know what we're hoping to attract bigger than Toyota, but that's had a big impact on Scott County. I've thought of, you know, they've said, well, the convention business will be hurt, but the conventioneers are going to the Hilton and the Hyatt and the Marriott where they're already serving liquor on Sunday. They're not going to the neighborhood bars. Conventions aren't going to make a decision one way or another according to whether or not they can get liquor by the drink in a bar or buy it at Kroger's on Sunday. Now, moms and dads and family members may go out to local bars to get drunk and come home and see their kids or not see their kids or not see things and so on. You know, we've tried to protect the city, and you've tried to protect me when I go to a restaurant by having a smoking ban in place so I don't have to breathe secondhand smoke. But, you know, on the other hand, why wouldn't we do the same kind of thing for liquor? The benefits or the destruction from liquor is far outweighs what you'd have in smoking. You know, the financial benefit of this is nonexistent as I see it. I've heard, I think, maybe three people with small businesses stand up and say, we'd make a little more money. But you balance that on the other side with the thousands of dollars that are going to be lost other places, it just doesn't make any sense any way I see to approve the thing. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Jorgensen. Ms. Ramsey, if you'd step forward. And Mr. Biber, David Biber, if you'll stand by, please. Hi, I'm Jenny Ramsey. I live at 322 Ridgeway Road, but I'm the co-director of the Catholic Action Center. And I'm here to be the voice for those who are the most marginalized in our community. Now, they might want to say yes, vote for it, please vote for it so the packaged liquor can be available. But I want you to think about those who are the most broken. We entrust our city to you. We ask you to keep it as a safe, healthy community. Please give us one day of rest. Please. The economics do not make sense. When we look, you've heard it, all of you all are wise human beings or you wouldn't be sitting there. So all I say is that a community is judged by how it treats the least of its people. Remember that our broken folks, who many can only come to the Catholic Action Center, need to have one day of rest where that occasion of getting drunk, getting high isn't there. Thanks. Thank you, Ms. Ramsey. Mr. Biber. And then Joel Beharie. Thank you, Joel, if you'll stand by. Mr. and Mr. Mayor, members of the council, I appreciate you allowing me to speak today. I have just two reasons why the expanded sales of alcohol on Sunday should not pass. That should not happen. First of all, also the results of alcohol. You've already heard, mentioned already the statistics, and I won't go back into that for the sake of time. But you have heard all the statistics. Many of you, I'm sure, also have had members of family, friends, and loved ones who have been killed because of an alcoholic driver hitting them. I, too, also have some family that have been ruined because of alcohol, that have been totally brain dead because of the alcohol. They're still alive, but they're living with their scars. They're still living with everything that alcohol has done to them. So I'm sure you know the results of alcohol, so I won't believe it then. But also, to keep good name, the subject right now is the expansion on Sundays. I'm a Bible college student at Commonwealth Baptist College there on First Sales Road, and I come from the state of New York. Many of the people that have visited south from New York have always mentioned a famous restaurant that's down here that we don't have up north, which I wish we would, Chick-fil-A. Chick-fil-A is not open on Sundays, but if I recall, the business of Chick-fil-A has been very high compared to some of the other fast food chain restaurants. But that's not my point. The main point is that they have a good name. They have a good name for themselves and also have a good name of Lexington. With the 2010 Olympic Games coming here to Lexington, and obviously we're honored by that, but also what are people going to think of when they find out that alcohol is being promoted? Every Super Bowl results of arrests, injuries, and all the other things of alcohol that have been sold, you've heard many stories about that. It doesn't give a good name. Give Lexington a good name and don't wait for the results of expansion on Sunday for expanded killings and other injuries and things like that to have a good name. Mr. Barber, you have about 20 seconds. Yes, sir. Thank you. The Bible says in Proverbs 22.1, it says, A good name is chosen than great riches in loving favor rather than silver and gold. Also, it says in the same chapter, verse number 6, Train up a child in the way he should go, and when he is old he will not depart from it. What are we going to be teaching our children in the future? Thank you very much, Mr. Baheri. If you would step forward. Jeff Smith. Mr. Smith, if you would stand by, please. Good afternoon. My name is Joel Baheri. I'm a student here in Lexington, Kentucky at Commonwealth Baptist College. I'm also a member of Clay's Mill Road Baptist Church. Upon the authority of the Bible, I would like to say that I am against the expansion of liquor sales in Lexington on Sunday. It can be simply put and simply said that to expand the sales of alcohol is to expand the number of deaths and injuries due to alcohol-related accidents. The only industry or business that would actually benefit or even prosper from the expansion of alcohol sales is the funeral business. I do ask that you consider and cherish the value of human life. Most of all, I ask that you would make a decision to honor and respect Sunday, which is still the Lord's Day. One of our great founding fathers and one of our great American past icons, Patrick Henry, once said this, It cannot be emphasized too often and too clearly that America was founded not by religionists but by Christians, not on religion but upon the gospel of Jesus Christ. Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord. I am an American. This is my country. This is my city. I am against the expansion of liquor sales on Sunday in Lexington. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Baheri. Thank you, Mr. Baheri. Mr. Smith, if you'll come forward. The next person I have is Jim Rollins. Mr. Rollins. Jim Rollins. All right. Thank you. Mayor, Vice Mayor, Council, thank you for hearing me. The first thing I'd like to say is this being the sixth anniversary of September 11, 2001, I'm saddened that we're even having this meeting here today. I don't think our government should be in session today. I think this is a hallowed day, and we shouldn't. I don't like that we're having this discussion at all, but we certainly shouldn't be having it today. That having been said, we're here and I'm here. I've taken a time out from my observance of 9-1-1 to come down here and speak about this. Economic impact I've heard talked about today. I don't believe it. I don't buy it for a second. I think the bucket that we gain as a community is a lot smaller than the bucket that we fill negatively to pay for the negative aspects of expanded alcohol on Sundays. Like the other folks, I could care less about being more like Louisville or Cincinnati. Don't need it. Thank you very much. Also, like some other people that spoke, I've lived in other communities all across this country. I've heard people say that the only difference between a Yankee and a blessed Yankee is a Yankee comes down and visits and goes back home. A blessed Yankee stays. Well, I stayed and I feel blessed. One of the things I feel blessed about was the blue laws here in Kentucky and in the South. I loved it. You know, I used to drink a lot. There's a couple of police officers in this town that might recognize me if they're watching the TV right now. Thankfully, I've grown out of that and away from it, and I abhor it. They say some of the worst people that speak against alcohol are former drinkers. Well, I guess I'm one of those. I haven't heard anybody talk about the quality of life here in Lexington. I would think that's what you people should be most concerned about, not fill in a bucket with a few more dollars. My quality of life in the South Point subdivision went down when you all voted, not you, but some of you and others that were here at that time to punch through South Point Drive and have more cut-through traffic. We've got more litter now. We're begging for more stop signs and speed bumps. My quality of life went down, and for my family it went down. Well, now you want to allow more alcohol sales on Sunday. I'm watching the clock, Mayor. Well, that's not going to enhance the quality of life in Lexington in any way. I don't know how allowing more alcohol sales on Sunday enhances life for anybody in this community at all, except maybe some selfish people that will stand up and say, we're going to sell more alcohol and make more money. Give it a break. I speak for the Sabbath being kept holy. I know we've already damaged that in this community, and we're already selling it, but we still have a little bit left on Sunday in this town. We'll make Sunday different from any other day of the week. Are you going to be the council that goes down in history as the council that ended the Sabbath being different in any way whatsoever? I urge you to vote against this. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Smith. Mr. Rollins, if you'll step forward, and I need your home address if we could, and then John Slaybaugh. Mr. Slaybaugh, if you'll stand by, please. Jim Rollins, 3440 Versailles Road. Thank you, Mayor and Councillors. I appreciate the kind letter that you sent back, Mayor, responding to this meeting. I followed a hearse about three years ago out to a cemetery to bury a twin brother because of whiskey. I know what it can do, and I'm asking you all, please. I know what it can do in my own life, and I'm asking you all to please not let this pass. Thank you very much, Mr. Rollins. Mr. Slaybaugh, if you'll step forward, and Jared Carwell. All right. Thank you. My name is John Slaybaugh. I just moved to Lexington about last fall, and I'm originally from Akron, Ohio, which allows alcohol sales on Sunday. And one of the biggest differences I noticed about this city compared to Akron is it's a lot prettier. There's not as much ghetto as in Akron. There's not as much beer and bars and stuff like that that I see all over Akron. And I'm representing two different sides here. First, I used to work for the Ohio State Highway Patrol, and I saw what alcohol does on the legal side of things. I saw how it affects young people, the increase in car crashes. And you'll know that Friday, Saturday, and Sunday nights are the three biggest drink times for people. And by adding Sunday, you're going to increase weekend DUIs by at least 33 percent if Kentucky is anything like Ohio. And then the other side, I'm a Christian, and I go to Bible college. That's why I came down here. And back home, I worked on a bus route, picking up kids on Sundays, bringing them to church for over six years. And in my Bible, I carry a picture of a lot of kids who come from broken homes. And I wrote down just a couple names of some of these kids who I love very much. Amanda and Brittany Stevens. They don't have a dad. They don't know who he is. They never met him. Their mom's an alcoholic, drug addict. Their grandma's an alcoholic. They live with their grandma. And then there's Tiffany King. He's in jail for beating his mom with a broomstick while he was drunk. Then there's Christina Ross, who her dad is dead right now. He was an alcoholic. He shot himself. Cheyenne Higgs. Her dad's in jail, too. Been in jail since she was six years old, and she's nine years old now. Mr. Slabo, you have about 30 seconds. One story about Cheyenne. She told me one day that she couldn't wait until she was 21. I asked her why, and she said because that's when her dad gets out of jail. Alcohol, beating his mom, same thing. The list goes on and on. If you pass this law, this list here in Lexington is going to get bigger and bigger and bigger. I wonder real quick how many of you have been to the Hope Center and have seen what alcohol does to men. How do you expect to tell your kids not to drink if they find out that you voted for alcohol sales on Sunday? Thank you very much, Mr. Slabo. If you would, please step to the podium and give us your full name and address. My name is Jared. Okay, if you'll hang on for just a second, Jared. Bill Haddix. Are you in the room, Bill? Bill Haddix. Okay. If you'll stand by. Also, I only have, after Mr. Haddix, one other individual who has signed up to speak. So if anyone else wishes to speak, please sign in in the back of the room, and we'll proceed. Jared? My name is Jared Carvell. I'm from Commonwealth Baptist College on Versailles Road, and I'm very opposed for the alcohol sales on Sunday. I'm opposed to alcohol altogether. But I believe the Bible says that it is wrong. And I know God inspired people to write the Bible. And so I believe God says that the Bible is wrong. And I know the Bible works because I've seen people that have read the Bible, have gotten saved, and became Christians, and have seen a whole completely different change in their life. So I know that the Bible works, for one thing. And my other point is there's going to be a lot more deaths if we have alcohol on Sundays because any alcohol at all has already, we've seen, caused deaths. And if we expand it more and more sales, there's going to be more chances of death and probably a guarantee of more deaths. So I believe that if you want to expand alcohol, I believe you're wanting to expand murder through using a car, causing accidents, beating of children, anything like that. I personally, I take it personally for myself because that's going to be causing more problems on the road, more cause of accidents, something like that, and I drive on the roads. So I take that personally because that could be me that was killed in an accident because of somebody else's foolishness. So I personally oppose alcohol on Sunday. And thank you very much. Thank you, Jared. Thank you, Jared. Mr. Haddix, if you'll step forward, and Tom Renu from Curtin Drive. Tom. All right, thank you very much. Mr. Haddix. My name is Bill Haddix. I'm at 4816 Brennan Drive. I want to thank you, Mayor and Vice Mayor and Council Persons, for letting me speak. I've only been here five years. I moved in from Ohio. My wife and I came here. One of the things that impressed me about Lexington is how it's economically wonderful. I looked at this town, and I never heard anybody complain. I thought this place really has it going. It really is a great city. I didn't hear this problem five years ago. Then I heard something that was mentioned a while ago about smoking a couple years ago. Oh, if we do this, it's going to destroy our city. But you know what? The city passed that, and it became a beacon. Other cities started saying, Hey, we're not going to have smoking anymore. And we didn't have it. Now even the state of Ohio is doing it. People are saying, This is good. It hasn't hurt business. It helped businesses. And one thing I can't understand is that why everybody has pointed, You know, this whole thing boils down to, as was mentioned a while ago by someone downstairs, the year 2010. That's what we're focusing on, 2010. That's the big day. All the money is coming from 2010. Folks, those people will leave, pack up their bags and go home, and then we're left with all the excess luggage. Where will the money come from then? And I have yet to find someone that I hear of my colleagues that say, Hey, I'm going out to drink responsibly tonight. I do hear them say, Hey, I'm going out to get drunk tonight. I do ride a bike at times, and I see guys sitting there just down on them right and left and getting on their bikes acting crazy going out. I see this happen all the time, gentlemen, ladies and gentlemen. I see this. And now I'm not trying to make this a big issue of just religion either, but, you know, that also boils down to that. And people can say what you want. You can say what you want and say separation of church and state. But my forefathers said, and Thomas Jefferson and also Benjamin Franklin even said that, Hey, we need to have prayer. And matter of fact, even Congress has prayer before we start, and you don't even meet on Saturdays and Sundays because that was ordained as special religious days. This country recognized Saturday and Sunday as holy days. That's why you don't meet on them. Are you going to change that tradition? Why are we leaving out all of a sudden God for 2010? Why are we looking at just one day? Are we that short-sighted? I will say this. And there's some teens and there's some people killed on a Sunday night or Monday morning from drunk. Are we going to sit back and say, Well, they got killed, but it was worth the sacrifice because we put a couple of bucks in our pocket? I don't think so. I'm proud of Lexington, and it's a shining light. And let's be an example to other countries. I'm sure when the people come here for the Olympics, there's going to be people saying, I'm not coming. I can't smoke in that restaurant. Let's go home. It's not going to happen. And I'm sure people aren't going to pack up their bags. It's the Olympics. Why do they want to drink anyway? They need to be in shape. Let's start thinking properly and think about our country. Think about our citizens. Think about our health. And let's be a light. Let's don't be like everybody else. Let's let everybody else want to be like us. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Renaud. Excuse me, Mr. Haddix. Mr. Renaud, if you would come forward. And then Sean Taylor. Sean Taylor, if you would stand by, please. My name is Tom Ruge. I'm the father of an 8-year-old, a 5-year-old, a 3-year-old, and a 7-month-year-old so far. And I would like to ask you to protect my children, protect their virtue. That's what I want. I don't want the assault on the virtue of my children. Drink is available six days a week. People are going to get drunk. People are going to get on the roads six days a week. Would you stand up and protect the virtue of my children? Would you please do that? It's my understanding that Dr. David Stevens sponsored this bill. The Hippocratic ethic says do no harm. Do no harm. Do no harm. On behalf of my four children, maybe a few more if I get around to it, do no harm. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Taylor, if you would come forward. And Louis Cobb, if you would stand by, please. There are many people present today who would convince you that a vote for alcohol sales on Sunday will mean moral bankruptcy for the city of Lexington. Mr. Taylor, I'm sorry to interrupt. We need your address, please. I'm sorry. My address is 120 East Main Street, apartment 1710, 40507. There are many people present today who would convince you that a vote for alcohol sales on Sunday will mean moral bankruptcy for the city of Lexington, the Commonwealth of Kentucky. They will tell you that this vote will turn this town into another Las Vegas, a den of the iniquitous drunkard. They say that a vote for alcohol is a vote for the devil, a vote against God. First of all, though present, there may be many who oppose with great resolution the sales of alcohol on Sundays. Outside the walls of City Hall, there are myriads of everyday people, people just like me, who are not criminals, who have great compassion for their fellow man, who would say yes to this vote, to a vote for freedom to purchase this product on Sundays like they can any other day of the week. It may seem a far stretch to tie alcohol to liberty, but I'm pretty sure Benjamin Franklin, the man who is regarded as second only to George Washington as the champion of American independence, once said, beer is living proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy. If one of the most pivotal founding fathers in our nation's history had no problem with alcohol, I don't either. Secondly, though it may be legal to buy alcohol on Sundays in Las Vegas, I do not know. I have never been there. I think this comparison, with all due respect, is a deception. I was not born in Kentucky. I'm a Missouri boy by birth. But in the Show-Me State, the laws regulating alcohol for purchase on Sundays is remarkably similar to what it would be if the council votes yes today. And in my home state, in my home state is no Las Vegas. In fact, it is right next door to the Commonwealth. And don't be confused. We Missourians don't like drunk drivers or lawbreakers any more than the folks in Lexington do. But we do like freedom, and we don't like the government playing big brother with our moral judgment. Yes, Missouri is no Las Vegas, and neither is Kentucky. Finally, when it comes to the mind of God, I don't claim I can read it. But I do know Jesus changed water to wine, and I remember being taught that the religious leaders who hated Christ accused him of violating the Sabbath. But really this matters not. This city, this Commonwealth, this great nation called America is not a theocracy. It is a federal republic. And on this local level, you, the Urban County Council, are our representation. I urge you to consider not the preferences of the few, numerous as they might be here, but to consider the will of the many. I am certain the vast majority of residents of Fayette County will approve of safe legal alcohol purchases on Sundays. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Taylor. Mr. Cobb, if you'll come forward. Then William Davis. Mr. Davis, if you'll stand by. Thank you. My name is Louis Cobb. My address is 2001 Cornerstone Drive, number two. Peace and love to the council. We're dealing with a serious issue here. My occupation puts me in direct contact with alcoholism, drinking. And I've seen it firsthand, the damages of alcohol. Although I might profit from it as a shoe shiner, if you sell alcohol on Sunday, it's not worth it. We've got to have a line that we can't cross. Even me as considered a man, a proud man, there's certain lines I can't cross. It's a cause and effect. We don't know what we're opening up if we allow alcohol on Sunday. You still can get it on Sunday now. But by saying, okay, there's a limit, we're holding on to some of our integrity. Lexington is a beautiful town. We need to open up other areas for other people. Let them see the beauty of Lexington, its diversity. And alcohol ain't the way. I like to drink, but I've got to have a limit. And if we say there's no boundaries, there's no limits, a city with no rule over its spirit, it's like a kingdom broken down. We're opening up gates. And if it's just for money, it ain't worth it. We've got to have another reason behind it. My soul ain't worth it. Ain't no money on the world going to make me bow. And we've got to say that to Lexington, to our community. Say no. You still can get alcohol on Sunday, but we can say no, we're going to leave it at this level. If you won't get it, make it a little harder. Please, say no. Thank you, Mr. Cobb. Mr. Davis, if you'll come forward, and David Darnell, if you'll stand by, please. My name is William Davis, and I'm no stranger to standing before a city commission and council and addressing the issue of alcohol. I stood on February 27th in the city of Richmond, and we addressed the issue of alcohol Sunday sales there, and the whole issue was about how Lexington is taking all of our restaurant business and how all the restaurants are coming this way, and that that's the reason that they're not coming to Richmond. And that council, after a bunch of people like to happen here, stood against it, voted 5-0 that we weren't having alcohol sales. In July, I battled it in Berea as they voted to go moist or wet against dry. We won that battle also. Berea is still dry. And then in Richmond in July, the commission re-voted. Six months after it was 5-0, they brought it back up on the docket and re-voted the issue. And with a room like this full of more people that were against than for, they voted 4-1 to institute Sunday alcohol sales. Now, my intuition and what their website says is that the council is supposed to represent us, represent the people of the city. If this is passed, it will trickle down to Richmond. And Richmond will begin selling boxed and malt beverages and beer and all that on Sunday. Now, yesterday I pastored a church there in Richmond, a lady with two black eyes that's in Lexington today, because on Sunday when I went by to pick up her little girl that we pick up on the bus, her husband had blacked both her eyes and took all their money and kicked her out, and her mother from Lexington was coming to pick her up. She's here. I sat there on that day in July and saw a commission, though there were far more against than for, vote yes to alcohol. You are supposed to represent the people, just like that young man that was for said just a minute ago. If I'm not mistaken, and if you'll listen when I get through talking, you'll hear them downstairs, there's a lot more people here today that are against. That's them right there, than for. At first, they're right. At first, this may seem like a great idea. More businesses selling more liquor, making more money. But it ain't at first you've got to worry about. It's at the last. Because at the last, the Bible says, it biteth like a serpent. Thank you, Mr. Davis. Mr. Darnell, if you'll step forward. And Dave Smith, if you'll stand by. Thank you. David Darnell, 2628 Buck Lane. I hesitate even to come up and to say anything. But in 1993, my cousin was hit by a drunk driver on her way home from a softball game. He had gone to a bachelor party to have a good time with his buddies and thought he was going to be able to go home. He made a wrong turn down a two-lane highway and hit her head on it. She was driving a sports car. He was driving a Toyota 4Runner. To this very day, she and I are the same age. She is partially paralyzed on one side. She walks with a limp. She was in a coma for months, had to go through rehab. Her mind is still not right. The doctors have told her that she will never enjoy the benefits of having children because of the physical problems that it caused. The gentleman who hit her has got his driver's license back. He's at work. He has his house. He has his car. He's enjoying his life. He made the decision to get drunk. My cousin is paying the consequences. You put this law into effect. You make the decision. You make the choice that people can go out and get drunk on Sunday. The other people in this city are the ones who are going to be faced with the consequences and have to live with the damages that come with alcohol. As a Christian, I oppose drinking whether it be on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, Saturday, Sunday. Alcohol is wrong. The Bible teaches that alcohol is wrong. You've heard that today. But we're not asking you to change the law on Monday through Saturday. We're asking you to keep Sunday holy. We're asking you to have a backbone, stand up to the rest of the communities in this state and say, You know what? We don't care what you're going to do. We're not going to sell alcohol on Sunday. Do you have the backbone to be different? Or are you going to have a noodle for a backbone and follow suit with everybody else in this state? Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Darnell. Mr. Smith, if you'll come forward. And Nathaniel McLean. Mr. McLean, if you'll stand by, please. Mr. Mayor and Council, my name is Dave Smith, 133 Bass Pond Glen Drive. My entire life has been given to working with teenagers. And my entire life has been a burden and a broken heart for teenagers. You don't have to go very far in statistics to realize that the ages of 7 to 12 years of age, over 70 percent of the young people in the United States of America, have already tasted some type of alcoholic beverage. You don't have to go very far in our great city of Lexington to knock on a door to see a home of a result of a teenager that alcohol has been a negative influence upon. If we're talking about the future of our community, let's talk about the future of the people of our community. The front page of the Lexington Herald-Leader less than two weeks ago stated the situation that we have with the drug issue and the suicide rate of young people here in the city of Lexington. Not the United States. We're zeroing in on Lexington and Kentucky. I beg of you, and I plead with you today, that the teenagers need to be heard. And the teenagers need to be felt. And the heart of the teenager for their future, because the future is the teens. The example that will be set by this Council, the example that will be set by us adults, is it decency? Is it respect? Is it honor? Or is the future if you can just do whatever you want to do? I thank you for the time that you've given, but I wrote down a quote. The future of our city is not in the restaurants. The future of our city is not only in the commerce. The future of our city is the destiny of our youth of this city. Thank you very much. I plead with you and urge with you to please vote against this. Thank you, Mr. Smith. Mr. McLean, if you'll come forward, and Norma Reynolds. Ms. Reynolds, if you'll stand by, please. My name is Nathaniel McLean, and I live out here now at 3440 Versailles Road, Lexington, Kentucky, 40510, at Commonwealth Baptist College. I'm attending there for about a year, and I plan to attend there for the next three years. Getting married in a year. I just want to say, our people here, about 101 now, it looks like, that we've had a vote against alcohol. Very few have voted for it. If they wanted to, they would have been here. They didn't, so they don't want to. As you see, this is what we agree for. And right now, you guys represent us. It's your decision. If you want to go against what people are saying, then it's your fault. People have died from that result. It's everyone here's fault. We've spoken. Thank you, Mr. McLean. Ms. Reynolds, if you'll come forward, and Pablo Ramirez will step up. My name is Norla Reynolds. I live at 137 Rose Street, Apartment 414. I wear this armband. In 1994, a good friend of mine came knocking at the door. She had news. It was in the middle of the night. Her niece and her niece's fiancé had been killed in a head-on crash. The other driver had been drinking. Two weeks before, I had been with that young lady and her mother as she was planning her wedding. Much has been said about commerce, the Olympics, and the equestrian games. Let me share an experience with you. It has only been a few years ago. I was either walking or driving down High Street in a downtown area of Lexington. As I passed, I saw a man laying in the grass. I stopped. I think I went on. I think maybe I was driving. I pulled into a parking lot. As I walked down, I said, Oh, Lord, please don't let him be dead. You know, I thought, Is this a dead man? He was motionless. I got there, and I looked for signs of breathing. Thank goodness he was alive. Intoxicated. Probably homeless. Downtown Lexington. Is this what we want our tourists to see? That man has a soul just like I have. His dignity, not only for our highfalutin society Just so tourists won't see a drunk man lying out on the grass. But consider that man as a human being. Please vote no. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Reynolds. Mr. Ramirez, if you will step up. And Joel Fugett. Mr. Fugett, if you'll stand by, please. I need your home address, and you'll have three minutes. All right. My home address is 3440 Versailles Road, Lexington, Kentucky. I'm attending college at Colonial Baptist College here. I'm from Mountain Home, Idaho. And over there in Idaho, they do sell alcohol on Sundays. And I've seen too much of drunk drivers coming and hitting people out on the road. I've seen too many husbands beat their wives over there. I've seen too much. And I'm here to say I'm tired of it. I'm tired of seeing it, and I don't want it to happen here in Lexington either. If you guys have any dignity in you, you will vote no on this. My grandfather, he was killed by a drunk driver. He was mutilated when, you know, through the crash. And I just want to tell you guys, you know, enough is enough. We don't need this anymore. I'd like to say to get rid of drinking altogether, but right now all we're asking is just keep Sunday holy, keep it holy. Thank you, Mr. Ramirez. Mr. Fugett, if you will step forward. Aaron Jones. Mr. Jones, if you will step around. My name is Joel Fugett. I currently live actually in the city of Nicholasville at 108 Song Sparrow Run, but I live most of my life in Lexington, Kentucky. Every week I spend many hours in the inner city more. I won't pinpoint streets because I wish to protect them, and I understand what sin does to people. Just this last week I drive a Mustang, and where I go on the roads I go I get a lot of attention. And the clothes I wear, I wear a tie, I get a lot of attention. I have nice shoes. I get a lot of attention. But just this last week I had an experience that happened to me. A guy was bragging on my car. He was talking to me, oh, yeah, yeah, you must be rich and all this. I explained to him, no, I work. I work for a living, and I work to pay for what I have. He said, and I saw his little kid playing with the fishing pole. I said, do you all like to go fishing? He said, well, we like to go, but we really can't go because we don't have any money. Right beside him was another man that lived in that same house who was drinking alcohol. See, alcohol doesn't affect you. It doesn't always affect me. Sometimes it does by drunkenness. But those that affect are mostly people that are spending their welfare money on alcohol. It hurts them. Most of the people I talk to and I reach every week on the bus is they can't. Actually, most of them don't even have cars. They can't afford cars. So their only avenue is there's two stores in the Windburn area that sell alcohol. Both of those, neither one of them are run by Americans. So you'll get a little bit of your money, but most of it will go to the Arabic countries, and you won't get much of it anyway. It all just will be imported out of the country. The money that goes to that will come from the same money that that man could have took his little boy fishing. The same money could be for the people that could afford the shoes that you have on your feet right now and I have on my feet right now. Welfare helps them just for a little bit, but it only helps them until that same money is being stolen from their parents and then sold and then used to buy alcohol. It only destroys the lives of the people I try to reach. I wasn't originally going to speak, but I didn't feel like I could preach and talk to my kids on Sunday to try to help them if I didn't say something about it to you. I don't speak because of myself, but I speak because of the almost 30 kids I picked up Sunday and the hundreds and hundreds of kids I pick up every week. I thank you for your time, and I urge you to please vote for not expending alcohol. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Fugate. Mr. Jones, if you'll come forward. Michelle Powers. Ms. Powers, if you'll stand by, please. Good afternoon. Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. My name is Aaron Jones, and I don't think I gave you my address. It's 1357 Deer Lake Drive, Lexington, Kentucky, 40515. I'll be brief. I know it's been a long afternoon, and I know that you all have heard a lot of arguments, moral, economic, and many others. I know that you've heard from reverends who have counseled those who abuse alcohol and their families. I know you've heard from the doctors who have treated the victims of alcohol abuse, and I know that you've heard from the victims themselves. But the argument that I want to make to you is very simple. If you pass a measure which allows expanded alcohol sales, you will not be reelected. I just came from downstairs, and I can tell you there's a lot of irate people down there, and those are your constituents. They are citizens of Lexington who have a moral conscience, and they are outraged. Every one of them is. Think about this. We've been here for three hours. We've been sitting down there, and we're not going anywhere. We're just coming in through the door, one after the other, to voice our opinions. We're united, and as a team, as an institution, we can be very effective. For everyone that is sitting downstairs, there are 10 more, 20 more like them here in the city of Lexington. And if you think that they will not just vote for you, you're wrong, because it's not just a matter of them voting for you. They'll be out campaigning for your opponents. They'll be handing out pamphlets. They'll be cooking dinners and holding campaign fundraisers, and some of these women can really cook. I've tasted it. So let me just say this to you. If you want to pass this measure, go ahead and do it, but enjoy the term that you're serving now because it will be your last. Thank you, Mr. Jones. Ms. Powers, if you'll step forward, and then Mr. Johnson, J.P. Johnson, if you'll stand by, please. My name is Michelle Powers. I am currently residing at Commonwealth Baptist College, 3440 Versailles Road, 4051-0. I am originally from Indiana. I came down here to complete my education degree, and I have no statistics or anything. I just have my personal convictions in the Bible. I am a new member at Clay's Mill Road Baptist Church under Pastor Fugate. In Indiana, I have a cousin who is in prison, and he won't be there for the next year and a half because he was drunk, and he killed someone. And the family of the man he killed was so irate, they pressed charges. I have a cousin in Arkansas who was bragging to me personally because she was throwing up, and she was drunk, and she's a year older than me. I have co-workers that I work with in Indiana who brag to me about sneaking in underage, who think it's a bunch of games of getting drunk, and will come to work with a hangover, and they complain they can't work. As a Christian, that's heart-rending. I can't stand for it. In Indiana, when Walmart was pressing to sell alcohol, my church stood against it and we lost. And as a Christian and as an independent fundamental Baptist, I cannot stand by and watch expanded sales of alcohol on Sunday. People cry about it not being fair that they have one day they can make more money. As a Christian, I cry it's not fair that they're trying to take away one day of rest. I can't stand for it. And I thank you for your time. Thank you, Ms. Powers. Mr. Johnson, if you'll step forward, and then Ms. Lewis, Stephanie Lewis, if you'll stand by, please. Mayor, my name is J.P. Johnson. I live at 120 East Main Street. I feel like I'm surrounded by a lot of people who need you to save them. They can't make decisions for themselves, can't take responsibility for themselves, for their drinking, that they just need that one day. They've talked to you about one day of keeping the Lord's Day. Well, if you were Jewish, that would be Saturday. If you're a Muslim, that would be Friday. So there's three days of no alcohol sales. How much more saving do they need? People need to make responsible decisions about consuming alcohol. I have all kinds of friends who drink throughout the week. They responsibly go out on Saturday and buy their alcohol for Sunday. You can buy alcohol until 2 o'clock Sunday morning. You can buy alcohol all day on Sunday at a restaurant. The point is mute. I feel like if people were really serious about what is being talked about here, we would start trying to repeal alcohol sales on every day. As for, and that seems to make them happy, as for other people being here who are for alcohol sales, I believe you were handed a petition that within about an hour, those are over 100 signatures that I gathered on Saturday of people who were in downtown at the time. There are a lot of people who are supportive of this measure for other reasons besides just the 2010 games coming or some other economic reason. Even though they are not here as these suburbanite out-of-towners are here, they are here. And I thank you for your time. Thank you, Mr. Johnson and Ms. Lewis. If you'll step forward. And Jeff Morgan, is that correct? If you'll stand by, let me, since Mr. Johnson made reference to the petitions, let everybody know I've received two. One in favor, one against. And I'll pass this along to the clerk's office and ask that copies be made available to members of the council. Ms. Lewis, if you could give us your home address and you'll have three minutes. My name is Stephanie Lewis. I live at 311 Mallard Drive in Frankfort, Kentucky. But I am a member of the Clayton Laurel Baptist Church and I also attend Commonwealth Baptist College. And I am here practically all day on Sundays. But also on Saturdays I spend several hours out in the inner city of Lexington visiting my Sunday school children. And I have a great burden for these children. And I see the effects of alcohol on where they live. And I walk around on the streets and I can see the broken beer bottles. And I can see the effects on their lives and how when they come to church, how much they're starving for attention. And how much they know how much we care. And how much they love to see the smiles on our faces and that we give them just a few minutes of our time. And just to think that if alcohol sales are allowed on Sundays, that this could take away their opportunity of being able to come to church. Because their parents might be drunken and not allow them to come. Or they might have to stay with another parent because several of them come from divorced families. So maybe their parents are involved in parties or something. They might have to be somewhere else in order to be able to come to church. And I just know it would really hurt them in that way. And I just feel that as children and even adults, it's good for everyone to be in church. And to seek God and to be saved and to follow His plan. And the Bible does say for us to remember this Sabbath day and keep it holy. And I just don't want to take away this opportunity for these children to be in church and to live good lives. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Lewis. Mr. Morgan, if you'll step forward. The next person I have on the list is Sean Harris, I believe. Sean Harris, if you will stand by, please. Good evening, Mayor and Council. My name is Jeff Morgan. I'm here tonight and I attend church regularly and I have a home church. And when I'm on the road, I also attend church. Mr. Morgan, could I get your home address, please? 315 Avocado Street. Thank you very much. First and foremost, I haven't heard anything tonight from anybody about why Sunday sales makes any difference than Saturday sales. And secondly, everybody in here is talking about let's keep Sunday holy. I just want to ask a question. How many of you go to Walmart and eat out on Sunday? Probably true for everybody in here, if I was honest. And also, I've heard a man say, well, let the people vote. That's good. Twenty years ago, people did vote and they voted for it. Two thousand more people voted for Sunday liquor sales than they voted against it. So I would like to ask the council tonight, first and foremost, if they would consider putting it on the ballot so that we can show the people, yes, we do want Sunday liquor sales here on Sunday. Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. Harris. If you will step up. And Brett Lemke, if you'll stand by, please. Actually, my name is Sean Hamm. I live at 2149 Sovereign Lane. And I would have called you, and I thought about calling you many times, to say don't vote for expanding alcohol sales on Sundays. But I had heard how some of you just said that you hadn't really heard anything from the opposition of this. I, too, own a small business. I have employees, some of which may be not in my employment right now, but I have had. They won't be there Monday. I frame houses and I work with people that are not of the education level of you folks. And many of them turn to alcohol to erase problems that they have in their life throughout the week, real problems. Alcohol doesn't take care of that problem. It hides it for a while, but they rely on it. I moved here two years ago. We've heard business people say that it's going to help Lexington if alcohol sales is on Sunday. It will promote business. It will promote. I moved here to have a place to raise my three children and be with my wife. I didn't move here for alcohol. I moved here for a church that stood for right. I looked all over America. I made phone calls, talked to people on the phone, talked to preachers on the phone and gave them questions. Very carefully, me and my wife spent a year choosing where we would move. When I got here, I found out that Lexington didn't have alcohol sales on Sunday. I was happy about that. I was proud about that. Three years ago, I pulled up. I, too, work in a bus ministry. I deal with children. I had a friend that did that two weeks before he turned 25 years old. I came to church one Sunday morning. My pastor walked across the parking lot with tears in his eyes. And I had known him since I was a teenager. I thought some tragedy must have happened either in his family or my family. You have about 30 seconds. He met me and told me that Dwayne Robinson had been killed by a drunk driver. That was on a Sunday morning. You see, Nebraska doesn't have those laws against alcohol sales on Sunday. We say flippantly most of the time, God bless America. I wonder if you expand it, if he will. Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. Linke. If you will step forward. And then John Goodloe. Mr. Goodloe, if you will stand by, please. My name is Brett. Sorry. My name is Brett Wade Linke. I go to Clay's Mill Road Baptist Church. My address is 2315 Harrodsburg Road, Apartment 44, Lexington, Kentucky. I'm originally from Medina, New York. And I framed houses there. I work with Nehemiah Builders here. And we've done quite a bit of construction around town. I've also done some factory work in Findlay, Ohio. And I'm here to speak on being against liquor sales on Sunday. I believe it's wrong. As a young professional, I'm 28 years old. Most of my graduating class told me, in a drunken stupor, it was the best decision I ever made of being saved, of being a Christian, and never starting to drink alcohol. I've worked with many men throughout different realms of employment, through different avenues, and I can see firsthand the effects of people my own age, young professionals, drunk. They come to work Monday, stupor. They don't show up Monday because they're still drunk. And that was just from Friday night and Saturday night, and we're talking about expanding it to Sunday. Have we no fear of God in our eyes? Have we turned our hearts completely against God? Do we see our children and don't care? I work on a bus route. Brother Sean Hamm is the driver for that bus route. He sees those kids almost as much as we do. I've seen the parents. Maybe one's home because the other one's asleep, or one didn't come home. The kids don't know where Dad is, but he's still drunk at the bar. My dad goes out once a week to a bar. He's a drunk. My uncle, I don't even know where he is. I don't think he remembers his daughter's wedding because he was drunk. I can go through the course of my own life and I can see family members drunk. I'm not. I praise the Lord for that. But I say this. I've seen firsthand the effects on different age levels, drinking and drunkenness and a little bit of alcohol, and I've heard moderation is okay. I believe that moderation is good if moderation is as far away from you as humanly possible. I believe this. If we expand liquor sales into Sunday, we will cause the hand of God's judgment upon us as a city, as a nation, as a town, however we want to call ourselves as individuals. We will have to look at our own kids someday and tell them that, yes, I voted for that, although it's good for you not to drink. How about it's good now not to drink? You have about 13 seconds. Yes, sir. In American history, it talks of Prohibition, the 18th Amendment. I know it was repealed, but there was one group of people who actually made a good amount of money during that time, and that was the organized crime. I believe liquor is wrong. Thank you very much, Mr. Goodloe, John Goodloe. If you would step forward. Then I have Stephen Johnson and Kevin Spears as my last two speakers. Mr. Johnson, if you would stand by, please. My name is John Goodloe. I live here in Lexington. I've been living here for 70 years. I've seen a lot of things happen. I've seen our city go down. It keeps going down. I've seen a lot of things happen. I want to ask you all sitting over there on the councils, if you would be responsible, if you pass this bill, if you would be responsible to indemnify all these people who are going to get killed, I don't think you want to do it. You want to go ahead and pass one of these laws and then not have to worry about it because when you get your pension, you can go live in Florida or Hawaii or wherever you want to go. But if you stay here and have this law, it will be hard to ever get rid of it. So I want you to think about it and wonder if you can find it in your heart to not put this on us because it's a heavy burden to carry. And I have friends that are dead today because of drinking and getting drunk and getting hit by wrecking cars and all that. It's senseless. Now, I'm not a lawyer, but I hope somebody can write up an indemnification bill and let you all sign it to find out whether you all are really on the ball or not. I wouldn't sign it because I wouldn't want to have that responsibility on my shoulders. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Goodloe. Mr. Johnson, if you'll step forward. And Mr. Spears, Kevin Spears, if you'll step up. Unless someone else signs up, you'll be our last speaker this evening. Mr. Spears. Steve Johnson, Christman Mill, Nicholasville, Kentucky. As of a few weeks ago, I lived in Masterson Station. Mr. Blues spoke with you in my front yard. I remember you having this on your resume as wanting to have this fast-forward. But I have the privilege to work in Lexington, to live here. I lived here for many years, but I work here still in church. On Sundays and Saturdays, I visit the families of hundreds of children every week that we go out and knock doors and talk to people about the Lord. When I'm out on that Saturday and I'm out on that Sunday, not one time has I had a mother come to me and say, Brother Johnson, you got some beer you could give me? We couldn't afford alcohol this week. Would you get me some beer? They don't ask me for that. What do they ask me for? They ask me for shoes. They ask me for clothes. They ask me for some bread. Why? And I'll ask them because I'll help them out, but I'm not going to help out somebody. A lot of times they won't help themselves. And a lot of times they say, well, my husband went out drinking Friday and I haven't seen him. They spend those monies for those things. The devil's got a hold of them. We can't expand that. We can't expand it. We try to teach those kids to respect their elders, respect their mom and dad. And it's hard to tell a child to respect their dad when he's laying in there drunk. But you know what? They have to do that. They have to respect. And we try to teach them that. Teach them respect of the Lord, respect of the people in authority that have been appointed here. You know, the Lord puts us in those things. If we were to expand alcohol, we're not going to fill our coffers. We're going to fill the coffins. We're not going to grow. I just wanted to have a word of prayer with the remaining time. Dear Lord, I ask that you be with these council members, Lord, as they have a decision here before them. Lord, we all have decisions every day that we must make. But, Lord, I pray you'll be with these men and women, Lord, that you've put in position, Lord. Lord, I pray they'll make the right decision, Lord, to not expand the filthy alcohol sales. Lord, I pray your hand be upon them and put the conviction in their hearts, Lord. Lord, we know, Lord, we see the miracles, Lord, that you've performed. You can heal the sick, Lord. I know you can change the minds of those, Lord, that are for this. Lord, I pray you'll be with these council members, Lord. Lord, we thank you for the support of all those that have come out this evening, Lord. Lord, there's people here that are for you, that are against this alcohol, just as your Bible says. Lord, I pray you'll bless the thoughts, the prayers, the actions of those, Lord. I just pray, Lord, you'll be with these council members, Lord. We ask this in Jesus' name. Amen. Thank you, Mr. Johnson. Mr. Spears, if you'll come forward. Is there anyone else who wishes to speak? Is there anyone else? All right. If you'd go to the back and be ready. Mr. Spears. Yes, sir. I live at 2540 Sunseeker Court, and I am in opposition to the expanded sales of alcohol. It is unfortunate to see Mr. Blevins wasn't here. I thought he was going to be here today. I have a deep respect for him. He's been corresponding with me. I live in his district, and I appreciate that. That means a lot to me as a citizen. Sometimes email is not the best communication, and I appreciate him going back and forth, and you can pass that along to him, and I'll email that to him later. But I wanted to mention, as a citizen of the States and, of course, a resident here in Lexington, I've been here seven years, and I grew up in a small town in Illinois, a little town called Big Rock, Illinois. It was a town of 1,000. And adjacent to that town is where my father grew up. It was even smaller than that. It was actually about 600 people, and my grandfather owned a liquor store. Now, this is pretty relevant to the issue. He owned a liquor store in a town of 600. We're talking about small business owners profiting. About six months ago, my grandfather passed away. And can I tell you, he died broke. Now, I understand that's not every case, but that is a case. He died broke. Now, every argument that I've heard, it's pertained to money, every single one here. Let's make it fair to the small business owners. Let's see what kind of revenue we can bring in. He died broke. My father knew a man named Dave Houston. He was an alcoholic. He worked for my dad for several years. He became so bad, and my dad recognized that, that he tried to get him help. Mr. Houston denied help, and Dad finally had to go to the store where he bought his liquor. And he demanded, he said, to the owner of the store there, he said, please do not sell any more alcohol to Mr. Houston. He is going to die. And this is the fellow exactly what he said, and I called my dad and got the exact quote. He said, he'll get it somewhere. We've heard that argument, haven't we? They'll get it somewhere. Well, they'll just go on Saturday, and they'll get it somewhere. Can I tell you, he got it somewhere, and he died because of it. Mr. Blevins emailed me and said that the New Mexico report, as I don't know if it's believed by the complete counsel here, but by him to be full of flaws and not a trusted report, and that they would not release the data. Well, I called the people who were in charge of putting that report together. Not only is it well documented, they were very willing to give me the report. In fact, I had it within an hour. Mr. Cruz, you have about 10 seconds. Good. I'm very amazed. Now, what would it take for you guys to vote no on this issue? What would it take? We've heard testimonies. We've heard personal testimonies. We've heard the statistics. We've heard everything that it takes to vote no. And now it's in your hands. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Spears. Sir, if you'd step forward and if we could get your name and address. I'm Ed Tedder, and I live at 188 The Masters in Georgetown. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Tedder. If you'll hold on for just a moment. Mr. Perry, Blake Perry. Okay. Thank you very much. Mr. Tedder, please go ahead. I'm a certified alcohol and drug counselor, and I've been so for a number of years. And over the years, I've had many heartbreaking stories that I've had to listen to from those I've counseled. But one that really remained with me was a young lady who told me the story about her coming home one afternoon. Her daughter was there. Her estranged husband was there in the house, and the daughter met her at the door and said, Mom, you'll never guess who's here. She said, Who's that? And she mentioned his dad. First, when she came in and was surprised to see, his first statement says, Let's go. Let's go get a case of beer. And she said, Well, no, I spent all night drinking. I don't need any more beer. And he said, No, I insist. You know, let's go. I'll pay for it. You know, if you'll drive. She said, Well, I don't think I want to do that. He talked her into it. The daughter said, Mom, 12-year-old daughter, Mom, can I go with you? She said, Oh, no, you're not going with us to get alcohol. Please, Mom, please, let me go with you. She gave in to their daughter. They were going to the liquor store. This happened in Richmond, Kentucky. On their way to the liquor store, and she was still intoxicated. Alcohol doesn't just stop once you stop drinking. The effects continue. As she was going to the liquor store past the curve, she took the curve too wide, hit another car head on. Her daughter sitting in the back seat was thrown to the front window. Laying out on the ground, she tried to get to her. As she did, the daughter breathed her last breath. And because of extended hours, she was able to drink later in the evening. Extended hours, we're going to have a problem. You may not think that that's going to cause so much of a problem, but it will. And I can attest to that. And I ask that you vote against it. Thank you, Mr. Tedder. Mr. Peary, if you'll step up, and Nick Blades or Bladies, if you'll step around, please. Yes, I'm here in opposition against expanded sales of liquor on Sundays. I'd like to thank you all for allowing me to speak. Please don't excuse what I'm about to say because of my age. I see a big effect of alcohol in a lot of places, mainly with young children. I myself am a painter. That generally is associated with people that are not educated and generally drunk a lot. We get that sort of a joke a lot of times. People joke to me about drinking. I take that pretty seriously. My father owns his own business. He's a business owner. We work for some of the most affluent people in this state. We paint a lot of very nice homes. We do a lot of good work. I take pride in my work. It's hard to find somebody that's willing to show up on time every day, especially on Mondays. It's already hard enough for them to get over being drunk when they don't sell it on Sunday. And I just, you know, I ask that you wouldn't allow it to be sold on Sunday. I mean, you know, there's plenty of ways for them to get it already. It's hurting our communities. It's hurting our businesses. I've heard a lot of people say it will help them, but it won't. You need to talk about personal character. And, you know, if you so believe it, then don't buy it and don't drink it and have enough character not to do it well. I ask them to have enough character to show up on work on time on Mondays and have enough character to be a good employee. And smoking causes a lot of problems in businesses where people take an excessive number of breaks and don't put out a good quality of work. And I beg the same thing for alcohol. I think if you didn't drink as much, your work would probably be better. And I don't know if any of you drink, but I say that stands for you also. So I ask that you vote no. Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. Pierre. And, Mr. Blades or Blades, you'll be our last speaker unless someone else indicates a desire to speak. My name is Nick Blades. I live at 145 Town Center Drive. I'm a U.K. student. I'm also a Christian, and I attend Clay's Mill Road Baptist Church. The most important thing to me is that Sunday is the Lord's Day, and I think we should preserve the Lord's Day and keep it holy and not defile it with drinking and all that stuff. But you've heard that. I want to tell you, as a U.K. student, I don't want to see broken beer bottles on the side of the road down South Limestone Monday morning. I think Lexington, as a college town, I mean, do you want people to see this town as a college town, a center for learning, or do you want people to see it as a town for drunken parties and college kids having fun all weekend and drinking and throwing beer bottles out the window and drinking and driving and all that? I don't want to see my classmates come in drunk Monday morning. They don't need any help being any more stupid than they are, quite frankly. But doing stupid things. I ask you, please, don't allow liquor sales on Sunday. Thank you. Thank you, Nick. Tell you what, is there anyone else who wishes to speak following this last speaker? All right. All right. Go ahead. My name is Paul Chamberlain. I'm from Cynthiana, Kentucky, 170 Country Lane. I guess I come from a pretty good age. I remember when a lot of things were closed on Sunday. I remember fighting the blue laws. I remember losing. Today there is a safety net in place for Sunday sales, and I know you've heard from a lot of folks up here tonight. I heard a fellow talk about Jesus turning water into wine, and I'd like to clarify that right off the bat. In the original Greek, that is for alcoholic or non-alcoholic. And in that case, I'm sure it was because Jesus said, unto him, give his brother a drink. As a matter of fact, it says, don't even look at it when it turns itself in the cup. I'm talking about fermentation. Somebody else has already said tonight, wine is a mocker and a strong drink is raging. I've heard people tonight talk about drinking responsibly. I feel that that is an oxymoron. There's no such thing as responsible drinking. I see the way it impacts lives. I have buried friends. The heaviest coffins I have carried have been the shortest by lives that were cut short by drunk drivers. I've never seen alcohol turn a bad man into a good man. I've never seen alcohol turn a liar into a truth teller. I've never seen it turn a non-providing husband into a provider. I've never seen it turn spousal abuse into love. But I've counseled plenty of people where I've watched it turn good men into bad. I've seen it turn truth tellers into liars. I've seen it turn providers into non-providers. I've seen it turn love into spousal abuse. The way I see it, we're on the edge of a cliff right now. We are on the top side. And we're standing there waving to you, asking you for you to slow it down and stop it. And we're not asking for a new law. We're just asking for the law to be enforced. And what we want is this one day to be kept separate. We're on the top side of a cliff right now, and we're waving and saying stand back from the edge. It's dangerous. Mr. Chamberlain, you have about 30 seconds left. Yes, sir. Thank you. Now, as you continue this and you vote it in, countless people will march off the edge of that cliff. I'm sure we're on the top edge of the cliff tonight. We'll be the same people that are on the bottom of the cliff tomorrow as we pick up the shattered lives of children and wives that are held by what you vote on here today. Thank you, sir. Step forward, please. Does anyone else wish to speak this evening? All right, this will conclude our hearing, sir. My name is Francis Francois. I'm from Commonwealth Baptist College and a member of Clazeman Road Baptist Church. I'm against the selling of alcohol on any day, but mainly on Sunday because it's God's day. But there was a statement that brought me up here was that there was someone that had the audacity to say that alcohol is not so bad. And if alcohol is not so bad, then why is divorce rampant today? If alcohol is not so bad, why is there so many children not having their parents home anymore because they died because of alcohol? If alcohol is not so bad, then why do we have so many problems today? It's not because you – the thing is, if you want to help Lexington, it's not to bring in more problems. It's to solve the problems and to stop alcohol, period. And I'm against it, and it's hard. How you can go up to someone and say – who lost their families, who lost their friends, who lost their loved ones – and say alcohol is not so bad. That's pretty rough for someone to – because I lost a cousin a few years ago, and that's pretty upsetting to me because of a drunk driver. And how can you go up to someone and tell them that – who lost a loved one – alcohol is not so bad? And so city councils, I urge you and plead that you make a wise decision and to stop it on Sunday. And all I have to say is six days not enough, and just give us a break on Sunday for – just to stop it. Thank you. Thank you very much. I want to thank all of our speakers this evening for the very courteous and civil way in which you have conducted yourselves. It's been very helpful to me, and I expect it has been to others. If there's no further business, I'll entertain a motion to adjourn. All those in favor, please let me know by saying aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Thank you. Thank you.