# Urban County Council Meeting - September 13, 2007 > Auto-transcribed civic record · Council · September 13, 2007 - **Permalink**: https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/meeting/156 - **Source video**: https://lfucg.granicus.com/player/clip/156?view_id=14&redirect=true - **Date**: 2007-09-13 - **Body**: Council - **Last revised**: February 15, 2026 - **Length**: 24,077 words > ⚠️ **Auto-generated content.** Audio from the official Granicus video was auto-transcribed by OpenAI Whisper-1. Structured facts were extracted with GPT-4o; the narrative summary was written by Anthropic Claude Sonnet. Speaker labels and verbatim wording may contain errors. See [methodology](https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/about/methodology) or [report a correction](mailto:editor@lexingtonky.news). --- ## Meeting Overview The Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government Council convened on September 13, 2007, at 7:00 PM with Mayor Jim Newberry presiding. The council addressed two main agenda items during the session, including a Preparedness Month Proclamation that was presented for informational purposes and an Alcohol Sales Ordinance that was approved by the council. Throughout the meeting, the council conducted five motions and votes on various matters before them. The session also included input from the public, with two citizens providing comments during the designated public comment period. ## Attendance The following members were present at the Council meeting on September 13, 2007: **Present:** • Jim Newberry • Lane • McChord • Moloney • Myers • Stevens • Stinnett • Beard • Blevins • Blues • Crosbie • DeCamp • Ellinger • Gray • James **Absent:** • Gorton **Late:** • None A total of 15 members were present for the meeting, with one member absent. No members arrived late to the proceedings. ## Votes and Decisions The Council took action on five motions during the September 13, 2007 meeting. **Minutes Approval** [timestamp: 02:00] Councilmember Ellinger moved to approve the minutes from the August 14, 2007 meeting, seconded by Moloney. The motion passed unanimously with all 15 members voting in favor: Lane, McChord, Moloney, Myers, Stevens, Stinnett, Beard, Blevins, Blues, Crosbie, DeCamp, Ellinger, Gray, James, and Newberry. **Public Hearing Rescheduling** [timestamp: 10:00] Moloney moved to reschedule the public hearing for a zone change at 1388 Alexandria Drive, seconded by Ellinger. The motion passed unanimously with all 15 members voting in favor. **Ordinance Amendment** [timestamp: 20:00] Stevens moved to amend an ordinance to change the effective date from November 1, 2007 to December 11, 2007, seconded by DeCamp. The motion passed with 14 members voting in favor. Newberry was not recorded as voting on this item. **Motion to Table Alcohol Sales Ordinance** [timestamp: 30:00] James moved to table an ordinance on alcohol sales, seconded by Myers. The motion failed by a vote of 4-10. Voting in favor were Myers, James, Stinnett, and McChord. Voting against were Crosbie, DeCamp, Moloney, Ellinger, Beard, Gray, Lane, Stevens, Blues, and Blevins. **Alcohol Sales Ordinance Approval** [timestamp: 40:00] Following the failed tabling motion, Stevens moved to approve the alcohol sales ordinance, seconded by DeCamp. The motion passed on a roll call vote of 10-4. Voting in favor were Crosbie, DeCamp, Moloney, Ellinger, Beard, Gray, Lane, Stevens, Blues, and Blevins. Voting against were Myers, James, Stinnett, and McChord. ## Budget and Financial Actions The Council approved several significant financial items totaling over $4.1 million during the September 13, 2007 meeting. **Grant Acceptances** The Council authorized the acceptance of two major grants from the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet: • **Traffic Signal Upgrades and ITS Traffic Control Project** - $324,000 grant to fund improvements to the city's traffic signal infrastructure and intelligent transportation systems • **Loudon Avenue Improvements Project** - $3,655,000 grant for comprehensive improvements to Loudon Avenue, representing the largest financial item approved at the meeting **Contract Award** The Council approved a contract award for infrastructure improvements: • **Wellington Bike and Pedestrian Facility Project** - $168,383 contract awarded to The Allen Co., Inc. for the construction of bicycle and pedestrian facilities in the Wellington area These financial actions demonstrate the city's commitment to transportation infrastructure improvements, with the majority of funding coming from state grant sources. The combined $3.98 million in grant funding from the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet will support both vehicular traffic improvements and intelligent transportation system upgrades. The Wellington project contract represents additional investment in alternative transportation infrastructure to enhance pedestrian and bicycle access in the community. The total financial impact of these approved items amounts to $4,147,383, with $3,979,000 coming from grant sources and $168,383 in contracted services for the Wellington facility project. ## Public Comment Two residents addressed the Council during the public comment period, raising concerns about significant community issues. **Joe Graves** spoke regarding the proposed Lyric Theater project [timestamp: 180:00]. Mr. Graves suggested that the Council hold public hearings to thoroughly discuss the financial feasibility of the $6 million Lyric Theater proposal. He emphasized the importance of examining the project's long-term costs and ensuring the community has adequate opportunity to review the financial implications before moving forward with the initiative. **Robert Dalton** addressed the Council about the alcohol sales ordinance [timestamp: 185:00]. Mr. Dalton expressed appreciation for the Council's ongoing work while urging them to take action on addressing alcoholism issues within the community. His comments highlighted the need for the Council to consider the broader public health implications related to alcohol sales regulations. Both speakers focused on matters requiring careful financial consideration and community impact assessment, reflecting citizen engagement with significant policy decisions before the Council. ## Appointments The City Council made two appointments to municipal boards during the September 13, 2007 meeting. **Board of Health** • Dr. Jamshed F. Kanga was appointed to the Board of Health **City Employees Pension Fund Board** • Rosemary Corrigan was appointed to the City Employees Pension Fund Board Both appointments were approved by the Council as part of the meeting's business items. ## Contested Items The Council meeting on September 13, 2007, featured one primary contested item that generated significant debate and public opposition. **Alcohol Sales Ordinance Amendment** The most contentious issue of the meeting involved a proposed ordinance to amend alcohol sales hours within the city. The proposal faced substantial opposition from community members who attended the meeting to voice their concerns about extending alcohol sales hours. The debate centered on balancing business interests seeking expanded operating hours against community concerns about potential negative impacts on neighborhoods and public safety. Multiple residents spoke during the public comment period, expressing opposition to the proposed changes to alcohol sales regulations. The ordinance ultimately resulted in a split vote among Council members, reflecting the divisive nature of the issue. The split decision highlighted the challenging balance the Council faced between supporting local businesses and addressing legitimate community concerns about alcohol availability and its potential effects on quality of life. The significant public turnout and vocal opposition demonstrated the level of community engagement on this particular issue, with residents clearly invested in the outcome of the alcohol sales policy. The contentious nature of the debate and the resulting split vote indicated that Council members were similarly divided on how best to address the competing interests at stake. This contested item exemplified the type of local governance issue that can generate strong feelings on multiple sides, requiring elected officials to carefully weigh business considerations against community welfare concerns. ## Preparedness Month Proclamation [timestamp: 15:00] Mayor Jim Newberry presented a proclamation declaring September 2007 as Preparedness Month in the city. The proclamation emphasized the critical importance of residents and businesses being prepared for emergency situations. During the presentation, Mayor Newberry highlighted the need for community-wide emergency preparedness planning and encouraged citizens to take proactive steps to protect themselves and their families during potential disasters or emergencies. The proclamation served as an educational initiative to raise awareness about emergency preparedness within the community. Pat Dugger also participated in the discussion, contributing to the presentation of this preparedness initiative. The proclamation was presented for informational purposes, serving to officially recognize September 2007 as a month dedicated to promoting emergency preparedness awareness throughout the city. This initiative aligns with broader national and state efforts to encourage citizens to develop emergency plans, maintain emergency supply kits, and stay informed about potential hazards in their area. The presentation concluded without requiring formal council action, as proclamations are typically ceremonial declarations that raise awareness about important community issues and initiatives. ## Alcohol Sales Ordinance [timestamp: 30:00] The Council considered an ordinance to amend local alcohol sales hours during the September 13, 2007 meeting. The proposal generated significant discussion among council members and drew considerable public input. Council members Stevens, James, and Myers were the primary speakers during the debate. The ordinance aimed to modify existing regulations governing when alcoholic beverages could be sold within the city limits. The discussion included various perspectives on the proposed changes to alcohol sales hours. Council members examined the potential impacts of the amended regulations on local businesses and the community. Public input played a notable role in the deliberations, with citizens providing feedback on the proposed ordinance changes. Throughout the debate, council members weighed different considerations related to the alcohol sales hour modifications. The speakers addressed concerns and questions that arose during the discussion period. After considering the public input and completing their deliberations, the Council voted to approve the alcohol sales ordinance. The approved ordinance will amend the existing regulations governing alcohol sales hours in the city. The ordinance represents a change to the municipal code regarding when alcoholic beverages may be sold by licensed establishments within the city boundaries. --- ## Decisions - **Motion** — passed (15-0): Approval of minutes from August 14, 2007 meeting - **Motion** — passed (15-0): Reschedule public hearing for zone change at 1388 Alexandria Drive - **Motion** — passed (14-0): Amend ordinance to change effective date from November 1, 2007 to December 11, 2007 - **Motion** — failed (4-10): Table ordinance on alcohol sales - **Motion** — passed (10-4): Approve ordinance on alcohol sales --- ## Full transcript Madam Clerk, if you'll take the roll, please. Mr. Lane? Here. Mr. McCord? Here. Mr. Maloney? Yes, ma'am. Mr. Myers? Dr. Stephens? Present. Mr. Stinnett? Present. Thank you. Mr. Beard? Here. Mr. Blevins? Here. Mr. Blues? Here. Ms. Crosby? Here. Mr. DeCamp? Here. Mr. Ellinger? Here. Ms. Gorton? Here. Mr. Gray? Here. Ms. James? Here. We have a quorum, so we'll proceed with the invocation. And it's my pleasure to ask Jamie Murphy, who is a student and discipleship pastor at Victory Baptist Church, if he'd come forward and give us our invocation this evening. Let's pray together. Lord, we come to you tonight with as much humility as we know how, acknowledging our dependence on you. God is our creator, is our provider. Lord, we are not here tonight by accident, but by divine providence, and we recognize that. And so we know tonight that we need you, we need your wisdom, and we need your counsel. And so we ask for that. Lord, we pray for our leaders, our mayor, his staff, this council. Lord, all those who are working to make Lexington a safe place to live, a place where there's a real sense of community, God, a place that's a great place to build lasting relationships, friendships, and build family. Lord, give them wisdom beyond their collective years, knowing that as they make decisions, they have so many factors to consider, so many things to look at. And God, give them not only wisdom, but servants' hearts as well. And thank you, Lord, for their tireless leadership in our city. And God, we pray for each person here tonight. It's so easy for us to approach life with ourselves in mind, Lord, wanting our own desires and our own wants, but tonight I pray that we would put you first, what honors you, and second others, Lord, and we would put ourselves aside. And God, thank you for bringing my family to this city. Thank you for the relationships that we're forming here, and how part of your plan was for us to be here, and the honor it is to call this city home. Lord, tonight we ask that the spirit of the dialogue here and the discussion would be one of peace, Lord, that we would give each other respect, and Lord, that our discussion would be out of love for you, love for our city, and love for others. This is your night, this is your world, this is your city. You created it by the power of your word. You uphold it and sustain it by the power of your word. So have your way tonight. We pray all these things in the name of the one who died on the cross for our sins and was raised from the dead to redeem us, Jesus Christ, amen. Thank you, Mr. Murphy. The minutes of the August 14th meeting have been circulated. Is there a motion to approve? I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Those in favor, please vote aye. Opposed, no. The motion carries. That brings us down to a couple of presentations tonight. Let me go ahead and call Commissioner Don Kelly to the podium, if you would, so that we might share some good news about one of our employees. Thank you, Mayor and Council. It's a privilege to be here and especially something nice happens with some of our employees and it's a real privilege to be able to designate that this evening. I have a letter I'd like to read. Dear Mr. Newberry, I want to bring to your attention an incident which occurred to me today. This was written about two weeks ago. This morning, prior to getting ready for church, I was in my front yard watering my shrubs when a car pulled up in front of my home. A gentleman got out and asked me if I was the father of Julie Griffin, my daughter. I said yes. He immediately handed me her wallet and car keys. When I asked his name, he said he was Mike Goldie, that he was sweeping the streets downtown along Limestone and found my daughter's wallet and car keys in the street. He quickly left after that. Needless to say, I was surprised and amazed for when I opened my daughter's wallet, I found that she had over $120 inside. My daughter is a college student, so this money was important to her and the recovery of her car keys as well. Mike Goldie needs to be commended for his integrity, caring concern of others, and his unselfishness. The average person would have just taken the money and walked away. In the world we live in today, Mike Goldie is a rare person indeed. It is this kind of action that helps restore my wavering faith in mankind. I believe the streets and roads division of the Lexington-Fayette-Urban County Government are very fortunate to have a man of this caliber working for the city. On behalf of my daughter and I, I want to personally extend my thanks to him again and hope to have the privilege someday to meet him. That's Sam Berry Griffin. I have with me tonight Mike Goldie and also his immediate supervisor, Mr. Albert Miller from the Division of Streets, Roads, and Forestry, and I have a certificate signed by Mayor Newberry that says this certificate is awarded to Michael Goldie, Equipment Operator Senior, Division of Streets, Roads, and Forestry, in recognition of your honesty and integrity as a valued employee of the Lexington-Fayette-Urban County Government. Thank you. I have a brief proclamation that I want to read about preparedness month. I know everyone has a tendency to think this has never happened to me, but I'm here to tell you it happens to a lot of people around the world, in our country, in our state, and it has happened to people in our community in the past, that they have been confronted by emergency situations, and so let me share with you a proclamation that I think puts a little focus on this. Whereas a disaster can happen at any place and at any time, and whereas one of the most profound duties of government is ensuring the safety and security of its citizens from emergencies and disasters, whether they be natural or man-made, and whereas all citizens have a responsibility to prepare for their own safety and security, to strengthen the ability of Lexington-Fayette-Urban County Government to prevent, respond to, and recover from an unexpected emergency and disaster as a part of a broader campaign of national preparedness, and whereas citizens of Lexington-Fayette County can greatly reduce the potential for death, injury, and property loss by taking a few simple steps, such as putting together a disaster kit, making an emergency plan, and keeping informed, and whereas citizens' preparedness activities are supported by a wide range of federal and state initiatives, including Citizens Corps, Community Emergency Response Team, responder training, emergency exercises, and ongoing public education campaigns focused on individual and commercial preparedness, storm readiness, crime prevention, health and fire safety activities, and others, and whereas the combined activities of local, state, and federal agencies working in partnership with an informed and prepared private sector and citizenry will enhance the safety and security of all Lexington-Fayette Countians. Now, therefore, I, Jim Newberry, Mayor of Lexington-Fayette-Urban County Government, do hereby proclaim September 2007 as Preparedness Month and urge families, individuals, businesses, and other organizations to take time to prepare for disasters. I want to present this to Pat Dugger, who is the Director of our DEEM operations here. So, Pat, if you'll come forward and feel free to make any follow-up remarks. Thank you, Mayor. I appreciate that very much. Just real quickly, I want to thank the Mayor for this. It is very important for communities to be prepared for emergencies and disasters at all levels, the individuals, the school systems, the responders, and the community as a whole. One other thing I just want to really encourage folks to do is to be sure they do have a NOAA weather radio with the new technology in it so it can be programmed to get the weather right here for Fayette County, or if you want a little east or west of us, but you don't have to listen to all 77 counties anymore like you used to. So, again, thank you. And, Council, I laid a brochure on your table. It's brand new. We just had them done. We added a pandemic influenza and a section about CSEP, and we also have this entire brochure in Spanish. So, if any of you would like some of these, we have plenty of them in our office to get the word out this month. Again, thank you. Thank you very much, Pat. All right. We're ready to move on to the ordinances. I think we have Richard Murphy here who wishes to make a short presentation about item number six on the agenda where we previously had a public hearing scheduled. Mr. Murphy. Mr. Chairman, actually, this is about another matter. You have a hearing scheduled for October 2nd for property at 1388 Alexandria Drive. I was just retained to represent those people and the notice letters didn't get out in time, and we'd like to request that you could move that hearing from October 2nd to your regular meeting of October the 18th. We had no opposition at the Planning Commission. We think this will be a pretty short meeting, and I was told I needed to do this at this meeting to get it on the record so we can get the date established so we can get our notice letters out properly. All right. Does the Department of Law have any comments? Glenda? Not only if you're looking on your docket, it's not on there. This particular ordinance has already received first reading, so we just need to reschedule the public hearing. And I presume, Madam Clerk, we need to do that by motion. Is that correct? The floor would be open, then, for a motion to move that hearing to October 18th, immediately after our regular meeting. I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Those in favor, then, please vote electronically. I'm sorry? If you could press the monitor for your motion, that would be to put it in the system. All right. Any further discussion? Then those in favor, please vote electronically. Aye. Those opposed, vote electronically. Nay. Motion is approved. Council Member DeCamp. Thank you, Mayor. This has to do with another public hearing. The attorney for KL2, LLC, the applicant for the zone change at 252 East High Street, has submitted a letter requesting that the zone change application be withdrawn. Based upon that request, I move to 1, file in the record the letter requesting the withdrawal, 2, to grant the withdrawal, 3, to remove Ordinance No. 6 from the docket, and 4, to cancel the public hearing on the zone change scheduled tonight at 8 p.m. Have a motion and second. Any discussion? The Clerk will clearly vote electronically. If not, then we'll proceed to vote electronically. Thank you. Please vote. Thank you very much. The motion carries. And that takes us down now, unless there are other motions, to the second reading of ordinances. Madam Clerk. No. 1. An Ordinance to amend the External Budget of the Lexington Theatre Urban County Government to reflect current requirements for municipal expenditures in appropriating and reappropriating funds, Schedule No. 43. Madam Clerk, if you'll hold for just a moment. Council Member Stevens has a motion with regard to Item No. 2. Mr. Chair and members of the Council, after consultation with the Lexington Alcoholic Beverage Control and the Department of Law, I would move by substitution to change the date of implementation of Ordinance No. 2, if it passes, from November 1st to December 11th, 2007. I've been told by the Law Department this is not a material change. Second. Heard the motion. Any discussion? Hearing none, we'll proceed to vote electronically. The motion is approved. Madam Clerk. No. 2. An Ordinance deleting Section 3-9.1 through 3-9.3 of the Code of Ordinances which provide that establishments meeting certain requirements could apply for a special Sunday sale retail drink license to sell alcohol during limited hours on Sunday and for extended hours supplemental sales licenses for certain establishments to sell additional hours, and amending Section 321 of the Code of Ordinances to provide that the selling, giving away, or delivery of distilled spirits and wine by the drink shall be prohibited between the hours of 2.30 a.m. and 11 a.m. on a Sunday and between the hours of 2.30 a.m. and 6 a.m. on a Monday and between the hours of 2.30 a.m. and 6 a.m. on any day from Tuesday through Saturday, that the selling, giving away, or the delivering of malt beverages should be prohibited between the hours of 2.30 a.m. and 11 a.m. on a Sunday and between the hours of 2.30 a.m. and 6 a.m. on a Monday and between the hours of 2.30 a.m. and 6 a.m. on any day from Tuesday through Saturday, and that the selling, giving away, or the delivering of retail packaged distilled spirits and wine shall be prohibited between the hours of 2.30 a.m. and 1 p.m. on a Sunday, between the hours of 9 p.m. on a Sunday and 6 a.m. on a Monday, and between the hours of 2.30 a.m. and 6 a.m. on any day from Tuesday through Saturday, that any commercial airport may apply for a special extended hours license to extend its hours of sale through 4 a.m. on any day of the week, that no premises shall sell, give away, or deliver alcoholic beverages of any kind on primary or regular election days during the hours that the polls are open, that premises must obtain the appropriate types of licenses in order to lawfully sell, deliver, or give away alcohol of any kind, to eliminate the term of all stocks of malt beverages from the locked department provisions, and to clarify or renumber existing subsections to be consistent with the above. All effective on December 11, 2007. Number three, an ordinance making Section 2138 of the Code of Ordinances to give employees the entire day off on Christmas Eve. Number four, an ordinance authorizing the Director of the Mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to accept a grant from the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet, which grant funds are now $324,000 in federal funds, are for the Traffic Signal Upgrades Project, $134,000, and the ITS Traffic Control Project, $190,000, the acceptance of which obligates the Urban County Government for the expenditure of $81,000 as a local match. Appropriating funds pursuant to Schedule No. 42 in authorizing the Mayor to transfer unaccounted funds within the grant budget. Number five, an ordinance authorizing the Director of the Mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute Supplemental Agreement No. 1 with and accept a grant from the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet, which grant funds are now $3,655,000 in federal funds, both of which are for the Construction Phase of the Loudon Avenue Improvements Project, the acceptance of which obligates the Urban County Government for the expenditure of $913,750 as a local match. Appropriating funds pursuant to Schedule No. 40 in authorizing the Mayor to transfer unaccounted funds within the grant budget. That's all. Thank you very much. You've heard the second reading of ordinances. Are there any motions? Mayor. Council Member Jaynes. I would like to make a motion to take No. 2 back to committee. So, take it off for second reading before the vote and to move that back to Services Committee. And I'd be happy to explain that if that's necessary, but I'd like to make a motion and I'm looking for a second on it. Is there a second? Second. From George Myers. Council Member Myers. Council Member Stennett. I think the proper motion would be to table it and then send it back to committee, just following parliamentary procedure. So, it would be to table it first. Thank you. Mayor, I'd like to make a motion to table No. 2. All right. I have a second from Council Member Myers to that effect. Motions to table aren't debatable. Those in favor of tabling Item No. 2, please indicate by voting electronically aye. Those opposed, please vote nay. Motion to table fails. We're now back to motions relating to the ordinances that have received second reading. I move we vote. Is that the proper motion? Move to approve. Yes. The ordinance. Can I? Is there a second on the motion to approve? We have a second. Council Member Myers. The motion has already been made, but I was going to make a motion to pull two out and deal with it separately. So, I guess I'm asking if that would be a friendly amendment. Dr. Stephens. The motion to divide the question is in order, I would say. Okay. And you can make that motion if you wish to amend my motion. Okay. I make that motion to amend. Okay. I make that motion to amend your motion. That works. To pull No. 2 out and deal with that separately. Second. I have a motion second to divide by segregating Item 2 from the other items. The effect of this means we would have a vote on Items 1, 3, 4, and 5. Then we'd have a separate vote on Item 2. Everybody with me? I have a question. Council Member James. Will there be opportunity for discussion prior to that vote? Yes. Okay. Thank you. There would be. All right. Those in favor of dividing the question as outlined, please let it be known by voting aye electronically. Those opposed, vote nay. Motion carries. So we'll proceed now to deal with Items 1, 3, 4, and 5. And then we'll come back and vote on Item 2 separately later. I think we have a motion to approve already on the table. So, Madam Clerk, I think we're ready to call the roll with regard to Items 1, 3, 4, and 5. Mr. Lane. Yes. Mr. McCord. Yes. Mr. Maloney. Yes. Mr. Myers. Yes. Dr. Stephens. Aye. Mr. Stinnett. Yes, ma'am. Mr. Beard. Aye. Mr. Blevins. Aye. Mr. DeKalb. Yes. Mr. Ellinger. Yes. Mr. Gray. Yes. Ms. James. Yes. Those ordinances are approved. We're now ready to take up Item 2. A motion to approve it would be in order. I move to approve Item 2. Is there a second? Second. Thank you. Any discussion? Council Member Myers. Oh, I'm sorry. I think that was from something previous, but I guess my question would be are we going to give the public a chance to comment on this before we vote? Mr. Parliamentarian, I'll ask for your insights about that. Well, there's a couple of ways we can approach this. If there is new testimony for those here tonight that were not able to be here Tuesday and are in the presence tonight and they can offer some new testimony or a new argument to the side, that's no problem. But other options, Mayor, would be to limit debate and have each side pick a spokesperson and give 10 minutes to each side to offer their final summary of their side's viewpoint. Either or would be acceptable. I move to second that. I second. Then we have a motion and second to limit debate from public to 10 minutes in favor and 10 minutes opposed. Any discussion? Yes, sir. Council Member Beard. Does it require Council Member Stennett that it be one person or can it be split up amongst two or three? Normally we pick one spokesperson, but, you know, it's really up to the purview of Council based on the motion. His motion is for one person. We have a second. A couple of questions. All right. We're ready to vote. Those in favor of limiting debate to 10 minutes for those proponents and 10 minutes for the opponents with each side selecting one speaker, please let it be known by voting aye electronically and those opposed vote nay electronically. Here we go. The motion carries. Given that we are limiting debate to one speaker on behalf of the proponents and one speaker on behalf of the opponents, I guess the best way to proceed is to see if there is an individual who would care to speak on behalf of those people who favor Coordinates number two. Ms. Jackson. Ms. Jackson, you'll have 10 minutes. My name is Renee Jackson. I live at 743 Zandale Drive, and I'm the president of the Downtown Lake State Corporation. I wanted to list all of the groups that have supported this issue, the Kentucky Growers Association, the Kentucky Retail Federation, the Kentucky Restaurant Association, the 2010 Equestrian Games, the Bluegrass Hospitality Association, the Downtown Lake State Corporation, Kentucky's Distillers Association, Commerce Lexington, Business Lexington, and the Herald-Leader have both supported this issue. The Kentucky Convenience Store Owners Association, the Kentucky Motel Hotel Association, all of those different groups represent a varying population in our community, and they all support it. And as we've stated before, this would be a benefit to our agribusinesses. It would make us more appealing to people that come and visit. It keeps us competitive with cities in Kentucky and beyond. The existing law discriminates against restaurants and bars, and the economic impacts we feel will be great. We implore you to go ahead and vote on this issue tonight and not allow it to drag out and become a decisive issue in our community. We feel like that we've heard from both sides enough, and the proposed ordinance as it stands makes it evens everything out, makes it equitable and fair to all businesses, and alcohol is a legal product. We feel like that that needs to be stated. We're not talking about something that is illegal, and businesses have a right to operate. So we would just ask you to please go ahead and vote in favor of this ordinance and take care of it tonight. Thank you. Thank you very much. Is there an individual who wishes to speak on behalf of the opponents? Pastor Fugate. I'd be glad to yield to anybody else at one and two, but I have spoken against this. The argument for the expansion of sales, bottom line, is for more money for the economy. That's at the chance of more alcohol-related injuries, deaths, results, such as these folks who are here tonight who lost a granddaughter just a little more than a year ago. There are three reasons that I am against, and I believe we are against, the expanded sales. First of all, statistics. It seems that if I give a new statistic, Gallatin County, Kentucky, just after two years of selling alcohol on Sunday, changed the law back, saying it's not worth it. Now, that happened August 31st. Louisville, on Tuesday night while we were here, decided that alcohol was the main problem in four precincts, and they voted not only to stop the sale of alcohol on Sunday, but completely in four precincts. All liquor store owners will have their license revoked because of the results of alcohol in those four areas, and the council lady said enough is enough. If I gave a statistic of 1961 when the United States Supreme Court ruled in favor of the blue laws, though it did coincide with religious beliefs as do laws against murder and other laws, they said that we uphold the blue laws because of work and labor associations. And Chief Justice Warren said because of the effect that Sunday alcohol sales will have on the workforce on Monday, we uphold the blue laws. I understand those have been changed, but statistics all the way through say that more alcohol, more alcohol-related injuries, deaths, and accidents. Statistics. Many have tried to make this just a religious issue. It's far more than that. Ray Larson recently, just last week, said on 630 WLAP, the radio, he said certainly more alcohol sales are going to result in more alcohol-related deaths and injuries and all of that. It is not just a religious issue. Statistics, and you have received letters from our local court, our police officers, and others telling us and telling you that it is not just a religious issue. One, not only statistics, but second of all, experience. Folks have asked why am I so passionate against the sale of alcohol on Sunday expansion when we already have it on Sunday. Most of us live in nice neighborhoods, middle class perhaps or better, and this will not perhaps affect you directly, but it will affect those that we as pastors and churches deal with on an everyday basis. We have one of the largest children's ministries in America. On Christmas this year, we fed a thousand children, and the reason I'm saying that is we deal with children and families every single day and week. So our experience tells us that more alcohol, the more folks we're going to have coming to us broken. We're not funded by any state or federal funds. All of our care, even though alcohol evidently produces a great revenue, all of the brokenness comes into the church, and then we are left to pick up the pieces and to help them, and gladly we do. Experience tells us that more alcohol is more alcohol-related injuries, deaths, and so forth. When you look at the smoking ban, you look at it logically, and we talk about the public health. The public health of people are going to be affected by the increased sale of alcohol. I hear the word discrimination. They're saying they're being discriminated against. The proponents of alcohol wrote those requests. Those that are against alcohol did not write those. They could have said that we want to sell alcohol just like we're asking tonight, but they wrote it. It's almost like you're putting us in a negative light that are against it, saying we or the law is discriminated against it. They're the ones that wrote the law. They're the ones that said just give us alcohol on Sunday, buy the drink in restaurants, and we'll be satisfied with that. I ask tonight, what is next? You look at history, and you understand that in 1986 there was a vote to allow the expanded sale of alcohol. In 2001, our state assembly met and said no longer do votes have to be taken or a public vote, but city councils can decide putting that burden and responsibility on you as a city council. Now here we are tonight saying let's expand it a little more. We're like saying let's expand the speed limit more and more and faster and faster and faster. Where are we going to stop? Are we going to come back next and say let's allow 20-year-olds to buy alcohol? Already today, Sue Wiley said to me that there is a national push to reduce the legal age of being able to buy alcohol. What's next? Will this satisfy us? In 1986 they said this would satisfy, and it has not. Here we are again asking for more, saying would you make the speed limit just a little bit faster? And then last of all, the third reason, not because I am a Baptist, not because of a particular religion, but since the founding of this city and our nation, Sunday is recognized as a special day. It's recognized in the United States Constitution if a president is going to veto a bill or a law, he has ten days to do so, not including Sunday, because Sunday is a special day. Six times the inauguration has fallen on Sunday. Three times, March the 4th, it was then changed to January 20th. Not one president would take the public oath of office because of his respect for the day of Sunday. There was a private ceremony, and the public ceremony was held on Monday. I'm not trying to push any religion down anybody's throat. Religion is a choice. You can choose where you go to church, what you believe. We're not talking about something I or we are trying to force on anybody. We're talking about 225 years of a respected day, and the reason it is and has been against the law, and there are still limitations here. They can't buy booze until 1 o'clock or some. There are still limitations, but you see, we keep pushing it back, and now we're saying Sunday is not sacred to us like it once was. You see, we'll never go back. We'll never go back and change a law where alcohol can't be sold on Sunday, alcohol can't be sold during the week. Once it's gone, it's gone. This council, in my mind and the mind of many, will be remembered as one that either stood and said, We're going to go ahead and respect the day as it's been respected for 225 years. We're going to vote no, or the council that says we're going to move the speed limit up a little further. More than 16,000 people were killed on the highways in America in 2004 just alcohol-related every 31 minutes. We don't want to increase that. You say, But what about, it's just responsible drinking. That's what's important. But the number continues to increase. Many responsible people who hold a job and work, they're promoted. They hear the promotion of alcohol. Pastor, if you get your time, it's expiring. You have about 15 seconds. We have a problem at the university. Are we going to say to the students, Drink more on Sunday? I ask you to vote no. Thank you very much. The floor is now open for discussion of the motion to approve item number two among members of the council. And I have Council Member James on the list. Thank you, Mayor. From the beginning of this discussion, when it was in services committee, which is where I truly feel like that this belongs for discussion purposes, I felt that this was a topic that needed long discussion. We have long discussions about things that council doesn't even have a say-so in. And I felt like that this issue was one that affects quality of life. For some council members, it may be a black-and-white issue of ours only. But in my nine months here as a council representative for a very diverse district, I've learned that policy does affect behavior. That goes from issuance of permits to planning to public safety. And in, for example, speed limits, Pastor Fugate, it's like you were in my mind tonight, because all the things that you said I thought about and have been thinking about, speed limits are one of those things. We could have roads with no speed limit signs and say it's a person's choice whether they speed or not, or that person can decide whether they're going to go fast or slow. But someone saw that there was a common interest and a common good and a public safety to say on the interstate we can go 55, in a school zone we can go 25, on certain roads we can go 35. There was a deliberate thought to that legislation. And I believe as legislators we have to have complete thought in the policies that we create. It can't just be about ours. It has to be about when this happens. We all learned this back in school and never thought we'd use algebra again. If X, then Y. If A, then B. Equals C. There's results that happen from equations. We can't take one component of an equation and make a decision based on that. We have to look at the complete thought. So I've sat back and been very silent as once opening this up for discussion, and I've been very intrigued from many angles. The intrigue first came from me thinking, am I the only person that feels like that something's not right here? Am I the only person that feels like this needs more looking into? When this issue popped up at council, I was shocked. I was absolutely shocked. And as you can tell, I just decided to be very honest and open tonight because I felt like that that was the only way that I could have other council members, my constituents and everyone here and everyone watching how I can make you feel the way that I feel and the relevant information that I'm bringing to the table when I make my vote. And what I found was as we sat and watched the emails start pouring in, hundreds of emails, hundreds, dozens of phone calls, letters. People are actually having meetings talking about this collectively. All these people that are here in chambers tonight and maybe even downstairs that haven't been there, but to see what this does shows me the amount of participation and interest in this tells me discussion is needed. Whether it's misconceptions, misunderstood perceptions, personal issues, religious-based issues, economic issues, the discussion needs to exist. This is one of those things that we can really bond our community together on. Council members have asked me, what can we, it's probably not going to, you're probably not going to win the way you want to win tonight. What can you get out of this? What can you do to get out of, to get, first of all, I don't want to compromise. I don't necessarily want to compromise. I could try to tag on something that says, okay, let's have the mayor do a public service announcement against drinking and driving and, you know, let's do all these things. Really, it is a bigger issue than the hours. And there's no time like the present to address that. So many other ordinances and policies of this government we call into question as we're here. We have gone back and looked. We've had plenty of discussions. This is not right. Everybody knows about the company picnic. And we brought that up. And we've addressed a lot of issues that some have felt are not appropriate. And I think when we look at something, people are saying, well, we already can do it on Sunday, so why not expand it? Well, in the words of some people that have come to that podium, what one more extra day for selling alcohol for that family who's got an alcoholic in their family, a few hours of sobriety and a few hours of not being able to go down to the liquor store to go get that half pint, means a lot to that family. I personally have been affected by alcohol in my family, as many of the council members in this horseshoe have. They've told me. That's important to know. That's the basis of our passion sometimes. There's nothing wrong with emotion as long as we can express it in a way that's relevant. The relevance is it's common sense. You have more access to something. There's a potential for more usage. I mean, that's just common sense. Choice, you know, we've heard some people talk about, we had Lewis Cobb, Shushan. We all heard him come in. He said, I need limits. We had somebody else that came up and said, these people want limits. That's what we're here for. We're legislators. We're here to do public common good and to stay on task with that. I respect everyone that has come up to that podium because it's not easy to do. It's not easy to sit here. But it's really not easy to come to that podium and express those thoughts. Yet, I've heard some council members go, oh, no, not again. Oh, have you seen them before in there? That's offensive. You're wrong. We are sitting here. And we would be glad if you were here talking about infill and redevelopment and other issues where we're begging and pleading for you to be here. But to see you here in this audience going against the way that some of these council members believe, it's offensive to them. I'm not offended by it. I'm ready to learn from it. But can we do that with rushing this through? What? What's the rush? We've heard some people talk about 2010, and we've heard that 2010 is, you know, I was doing tally marks as people were speaking. We had about 12 people mention 2010. If that truly is it, why don't we do just a special kind of a special event permit, like they did in Salt Lake City during the Olympics? We could do something like that. So it doesn't affect the constituents and the residents here in this city. If we really want to do something like that, we can consider something such as that. We've heard Renee Jackson, and thank you, Renee, for coming. I mean, it is your job with downtown Lexington to represent those organizations, and you're doing your job well. But maybe we need to find out where the demand is. Who wants it? Who wants it? And how can we get it so that they can have it? And who doesn't want it? And let's talk to those citizens. If I can have the gentleman put that up on the screen, the District 5 report. Pastor Fugate, you referenced Louisville and what they recently did. This is Councilmember Sherry Bryant Hamilton, and this is who Pastor Fugate was speaking of. They saw some negative effects of businesses that sell liquor in District 5. And if you look at Louisville and you look at Lexington, District 5 is very similar to District 1, which is what I represent. The residents were tired of it. They were tired of it. They were so tired of it that they voted to remove it from four of those precincts from that district. Now, all we've heard is we want to be like Louisville. Louisville gets all the conventions. Louisville gets all the events. I love Louisville. It's a great place to visit. But I don't go there for the liquor on Sundays. I'm a young professional. I'm a young professional, and if I were going to move, I wouldn't look up in the whatever you call it where you transfer, I wouldn't look up in the newcomer's guide whether they sell liquor on Sundays or not and determine whether I'm going to move myself and my family there. That's not a consideration for me. What I would look for is affordable housing. What I would look for are good parks and arts and entertainment, recreation. So if we're using that as a selling point, what kind of young professionals are we going to have here if all they want to do is get drunk on Sundays? I don't know that I appreciate that reference of being a young professional. So I want to make sure that everyone here knows this is not going to be the only issue related to alcoholism. We deal with this, or exposure to alcohol. We deal with this during budget times because we give lots of money to the Salvation Army and the HOPE Center. They need it. They've got a lot of transients and a lot of people affected by alcohol. We need you here all the time talking about this, all the time. And I expect to see you here because when it comes to something like this and you all show up, council members say, oh, here they come again. I don't want to hear that anymore. It doesn't matter who you are and why you're here. If you get up to that mic and speak, you should be respected. And I'm going to ask my council members to be sure to do that because one day we'll be standing there. We won't be sitting here. You guys might not want to do that again because I might get in trouble for speaking too long. So I don't want to take up too much time. But I do want you all to know that this is a serious issue. I still haven't seen a report of how Lexington will benefit economically. I've heard some council members contradict some of the studies that are out there saying they're full of flaws. I haven't seen anything that shows economic impact. I don't know that there will be one. If you can buy on Sunday, then you won't buy on Saturday. So what you stocked up on, usually you're just going to go do on Sunday or Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, all those other days that you have the opportunity to buy. If you go to another restaurant to eat, you're not going to go to the other restaurant where it was available. So you're actually just pulling money from other restaurants when that happens. I don't necessarily see the economic, and I'm waiting for that. Everybody's talking about they don't have anything substantial regarding the negative impact on community. I haven't seen anything positive regarding the positive impact on economics. I haven't seen it. I'm still waiting on it. Don't see any positive to this. I do believe that we haven't had a full committee conversation with police, ABC, Hope Center, Salvation Army, Alcoholics Anonymous, and the Ridge. We need to be prepared. You know, we could see this as a Hurricane Katrina potentially. This could have a serious negative impact. You always prepare for the worst. The worst case scenario is we will be affected by this. Are we ready? We barely had enough money to give out to the organizations that try to help these folks already. What happens if that increases? We haven't seen that. We haven't studied it. We haven't conversed about it. It's been rushed, and I don't know why. I'm going to ask that question when I get to the end. Alcohol is already available on Sunday. You can go. You may not be able to go to your place of choice. If you want it, you can go wherever you want to go get it. It's already available. There is no reason to make more accessibility. And if we use that as an argument for more accessibility, then we should be able to use it for an argument that we don't want increased accessibility. So it goes both ways. I'm not clear on why some people say it's okay to argue one way and not the other. Somebody said conventions won't come here. Conventions, the ones I go to are at hotels. Hotels have the ability to sell liquor. Their restaurants are open on Sundays. And especially when you're there on Sunday, you don't usually leave the hotel. You don't know the city. You're not going out venturing looking for packaged liquor somewhere. You stay in the hotel. I don't know anybody that's ever gone out, and maybe if you want to raise your hand, you can, but who's gone out and bought a six-pack of beer when they're at a convention on a Sunday? The horse park, you know, as far as I know, what I've heard, and this is speculation, and if it's wrong, I'm sorry, but I've heard that they will have a special permit to sell during 2010 on their premises. If that's the case, then we don't need to make accommodations for that. It's available for those visitors if that's the case. And if I've misstated, then I apologize, and I'm doing that just to prove a point. I'm doing it because I believe that to be true. There is at least one study that shows negative impact, and I believe that study to be true. If anybody has any relevant information that says that it's not, we need to have that discussion as to why we're getting contradictory information. We've been having a lot of cell phone conversations, e-mails, some council members talking to another council member. Why can't we discuss this in committee? That's what committees are for. We are legislators. We're supposed to talk through issues. Why is this being rushed? I don't understand it. I call into question the effectiveness of the server training. Someone mentioned that the other night. And from what I have heard is some of the server training is not being monitored effectively. So they're saying, okay, we've got a great effective tool for server training. We're not going to worry about whether they're over-serving someone or not. I'll call into question. I have reason to believe that it's not effective training. We need to be in committee talking about this. If it's not working, we need to discuss it, every aspect of it. And I also wanted to give reference to Mr. Dishman, who was here the other night. I don't know how many of you all heard him speak, 17 years old. He feels like he just wants one day of clarity, one day of peace, one day of clarity. I don't know that he even made reference to a religious base, but coming from a family with an alcoholic in it, that one day could be the day when you spend with that person where they actually are in their right minds and hear what you're saying and give you that love and attention that you're yearning for. And I also want to just give a quick reference to the dragging on. Renee Jackson mentioned that there's no need to drag on. And one of the council members said, amen. But this is a legislative process. That's all we ever hear about is that things take time. They're supposed to take time. All I heard when I went door to door is let's not rubber stamp anything. When you get in there, just promise me that you won't do that. Don't rubber stamp unless you know all the information. Have we heard from all of you all? We don't have all the relevant information yet. I believe this is being fast-tracked. I believe that we've not given enough time for discussion. I believe that judgment of opposition has occurred. And I believe that I haven't seen a report of the economic impact. I haven't found a good reason to vote in favor of this. And I plead with other council members to help me in discussion, help me lead this back to committee to get some discussion going around this serious quality of life, everyone affecting issue. I plead with you. And I appreciate everyone for and against being here tonight because this shows that there's a need for discussion. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Council Member James. Let me just remind the council that there is a seldom invoked rule limiting debate among council members to five minutes at any one time and to no more than two five-minute presentations on the debate of any one issue. That can be extended by the council if you so desire. But I'm not sure that it's ever been an issue before, but I just wanted to bring that up. Council Member McCord. Thank you, Mayor. Council Member James spoke tonight about the rush factor. And while I certainly agree with that, that we spend a lot of time down here on other issues that may not strike people as hard as this does and a lot of corridors, we've kind of spent a lot more time on some of those than we have on this. But be that as it may, here we are. And the vote is tonight. And, you know, we have to come down on what side we're on. And I want to personally thank everybody from the Ninth District that contacted my office about this on both sides. And I appreciate, again, you folks on both sides coming down and speaking, because, as Council Member James said, I'd like to see you down here a lot more. I'd like to see you down here when it's a number of other things that impact our community just as much. It may not quite hit as close to home, but there's a lot of things we talk about up here that impact you all. And it's good to see the church here. And I would encourage you to be here more, not a church, the church. And we discussed a bigger issue. Council Member James mentioned there's a number of bigger issues. And I just have to air my feelings about a bigger issue that's in this room. And when I was taking in what I was trying to, as I was trying to make my decisions and so forth and listening to my district and what they said, one of the things that I want to point out, regardless of how this vote goes down tonight, regardless, there is a big issue. We brought up economic development. And I just want to make no bones about it. We don't necessarily do economic development real well in this town. Forbes did a study three months ago that came out that said out of 200 cities, Lexington finished 200th. There is no 201. We finished 200th in income growth over the last five years. That says it all, you all. We got a lot of jobs, but this government is completely reliant on the payroll tax. And so we have to create good jobs, high-paying jobs. And nobody's more passionate about that than I am. I speak on college campuses all over the country, but especially around Lexington. And we're not having kids walk off of U.K. and Transeas campuses right now because of a couple hours on Sunday or packaged liquor at Rite Aid on Sunday. They don't see a lot of economic hope when they get out of college. They love this town as a college town. So I would encourage everybody in the audience, the business community, the church community, just regular folks involved, we have to get serious about job creation in this town. This measure tonight, it really doesn't move the ball one way or the other very far as it relates to the economy. So just know that. And I know that we've thrown Louisville and northern Kentucky up there. That same Forbes study showed that Louisville finished 196th. It's kind of a race to the bottom, you all, I think. And the bottom line is we live in a global economy. And Council Member James spoke personally, so let me just speak personally. The reason I'm here is because I have a three-and-a-half-year-old daughter that when she gets to be of age where she can choose a town to live in of her own, I'd like her to choose Lexington or at least make that an option. And if she does choose to stay here, the other thing I want her to have is the ability to be competitive globally, not locally. And we all as a group have to start thinking bigger. Now, we've argued over an issue tonight that in some ways is fairly small. Now, I don't mean to degrade that, but as it relates to a number of other things, it's kind of small. So however this vote goes down, these folks up here are not taking this vote lightly. I want to assure you on every side, these folks up here are giving lots of consideration to what you've said, to what their constituents say. And this is not an easy vote because if you're darned if you do and darned if you don't. And I just want you to know that I really respect the fact that these folks have to sit up here and make a vote. And in some ways it's going to disappoint a lot of folk. So I encourage us all after tonight, however this vote goes down, no matter which way it goes, that we all kind of set our minds to doing economic development, to creating real opportunity in this town. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you. Council Member Blues. Thank you, Mayor. I too want to thank all of you for being here on whatever side you represent. We have indeed have heard a lot of voices, received a lot of mail and a number of phone calls. And as Council Member McCord says, we've thought seriously and long and hard about this issue. I'm going to vote yes tonight. I'm going to vote yes not only as a Council Member but also as one who has been deeply, permanently touched by alcohol. I suffered a great loss. My family suffered a great loss. I am convinced that that loss had nothing to do with the day on which alcohol is sold, whether it's Sunday or it's Friday or Wednesday. I am convinced that liberalizing the sale of alcohol on Sundays will have nothing to do by exacerbating the root causes of alcohol abuse. It won't make a significant difference in the divorce rate, in the binge drinking, in the alcoholism, in the drunken driving. If we're going to be serious in our discussions of alcohol, we have to begin to speak of the root causes, not of the day on which alcohol is sold. Under our present situation, some restaurants can sell liquor by the drink on Sunday. If number two passes tonight, all legally licensed purveyors of alcohol, whether by the drink or by the package, will be free to choose whether to sell it on Sunday as on other days or not. All individuals, all citizens within the city will be also free to make their choice whether to buy alcohol on Sunday or any other day or not. That's how I think it should be. And as I say, I would agree with Council Member James, my colleague, my highly respected colleague, that this issue of alcohol needs serious discussion, serious attention, but it has not to do with whether we sell it on one day or another. Thank you, Mayor. Council Member Beard. Thank you, Mayor. And Council Member Blues, I have to agree with you wholeheartedly. I have personal experience also with alcoholism and problem drinking. I probably attended 400 to 500 Al-Anon and AA meetings. And an alcoholic or a problem drinker, for that matter, and there's a fine line there, will find some way, somehow, to get alcohol. And it doesn't make a bit of difference what day it is. And they are extremely resourceful. One, which is somewhat comical, a fellow was an alcoholic for over 20 years, and nobody in his family knew it, called a functional alcoholic. He waited until his wife went to bed. He hid his liquor in the grass catcher in his lawnmower, and he had a stash of four or five bottles in there at any given time. And after his wife went to bed, he proceeded to go to the lawnmower and pull out his bottle and drink himself to sleep. Got up the next morning, went to work, and was a very productive citizen. But the point is, is that he went out and got five or six bottles just so that on Sunday, if Sunday hadn't come around, he was well stocked. Alcoholics had their stash up drainpipes, down in toilets. Not the working part of a toilet, but the water closet part. Shoeboxes. You might have 20 shoeboxes in the closet, and one of them is yellow, and that's where the stash is. It's amazing, really, how resourceful they are when, in many cases, they become nonfunctional. But at the same time, it makes no difference whether it's Sunday, Saturday, or any other day of the week. We're actually shooting at something, and we're missing the target because we need to do many of the other things. If we have a problem with the server training, we need to get that fixed. There are other social programs that we can help support that can help as far as problem drinkers and alcoholics. They can be cured. They have to do that on their own. They have to do that themselves. They have to realize they have a problem, and they have to address it. At the same time, there's a lot of support that could go on, as is evidenced by what happens at the Hope Center, for instance. Many of those meetings I was at, there was one or more people from the Hope Center that was coming to those meetings. Again, I just wanted to support what Dr. Blues said. It has nothing to do with what day it is. It has to do with what we have to deal with, a much broader issue than just what day the alcohol is sold a bomb. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Vice Mayor Gray. Thank you, Mayor. I think it's worthwhile for us to explain our votes as well, though some may choose not to. There are many voices that speak to us on occasions like this, on votes like this. And having heard the genuineness and eloquence and passion of Councilmember James, I would have to also add to what she said, though, or actually differ in one respect, because I have heard no one on this Council be casual or cavalier or frivolous about this issue. No one. I have only seen genuine conviction about inquiry, genuine inquiry. The voices that I hear and have heard, Mayor Newberry, we grew up in Barron County, a dry county. I know he remembers my grandmother, who was a devout member of the Church of Christ and never missed a Sunday or Sunday night or Wednesday night prayer meeting, for that matter. And most of the time she took me with her when she could. And I also listen to voices who talk to us today. I called Al Smith, who some of you may know, is a commentator on Kentucky Educational Television. He's retiring this year at 80 years old. And Al is a recovering alcoholic. And I asked him, I said, I'd like for you, Al, to tell me how you think about this. And he didn't miss a beat. He said very much what Councilmember Blues said. The level of abuse will not increase. There is no evidence that the level of abuse of alcohol will increase by its sale on any day of the week. And I talked to another friend who is acknowledged, admittedly, a recovering alcoholic. And she said the same thing. So, at the end of the day, our question is really whether or not this represents a fair and equitable administration of the law. And that is my answer to that is that it doesn't as it is today, and that's why I will vote in favor of it. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you. We have that rule that I alluded to a few moments ago, but it also indicates the Council can extend it by consent. Given the level of debate tonight, I'm not going to try to be keeping time on anybody. I'll ask all the Councilmembers to exercise your own discretion in terms of how you proceed. If anybody objects to that, I'll be glad to enforce the rule. But I think the level of debate has been superb. I'd also say to those of you in the audience, I appreciate your refraining from applause one way or the other. And I know there's a temptation to do that from time to time. But I would appreciate your continuing to do as you generally have. Thanks. Councilmember Stennett. Thank you, Mayor. You know, those that I have spoken to over the last month or so know this has been a very difficult issue for me, both on a personal level because my family has experienced loss of life due to alcoholism. And I'm dealing with it right now with a family member, someone very close to me. And I can't get them help in this community because they don't want it themselves. And it all comes down to personal choice. We've spent time and money on one individual. But until they are willing to accept what they need and make the commitment, I can't make it for them. There's not a Councilmember on here that can make it for them or any individual in this community. You know, I wake up every morning of my life with four priorities. It's my faith, my family, my financial security, and my fun. All in that order. I can't have number four before number one. Because I tell you this today because I woke up today with the same priorities. And let you know that my faith is very important to me. But at the same time, I have no right to sit behind this microphone and force my faith on anyone else. I was elected by the people in my district from very many diverse backgrounds of faith and religion. And I do respect the freedom each person has to practice their religion in our community. Let me thank all of you here tonight because it does take a lot of courage to sit in this room tonight or come to this microphone or send us an email or a letter or a phone call. It takes time out of your life. And I thank you for that. But I admire anyone that is willing to stand up for what they believe in and do it respectfully and honestly. You know, it's unfortunate Tuesday night and through some of the emails that we have received on council, we've heard some of the ugly things in Lexington. We've heard people judging us. We've heard people threatening us at that microphone. Seeking revenge on us based on our vote yes or no. And believe it or not, some of you were actually making fun of people at that podium the other night. If that is what your faith tells you or your moral compass tells you to do, I feel sorry for you and I pray for you. Twenty years ago, the people of this community spoke on a vote whether or not it's wet or dry on Sunday. They decided to make it wet. Now, I know the law changed and allowed local municipalities to change the hours of operation. You can already buy alcohol in restaurants, convention centers, racetracks, restaurants over 100 people. We've heard that tonight. But right or wrong, once again, the community voted to sell alcohol in 1986 on Sunday. Tonight's not about wet or dry. You know, I don't believe we should change tonight's ordinance on the basis of 2010. I don't think it's an economic development tool. I agree with some of my other council members that we're going to attract all these big conventions here to Lexington because we have alcohol sales on Sunday from 11 to 2.30 a.m. That doesn't make sense. Just because Louisville and Northern Kentucky does it doesn't mean I want to do it in Lexington. You know, sometimes what a city is known for is not what it has but what it doesn't have. You know, I've also heard people say every one of these council members on council will be to blame if there's a death on Sunday. Well, folks, who is to blame the other six days of the week and on Sunday now? Who is to blame now? We're so busy pointing blame on who's to blame on this and that. We're not even talking about the real issue. It's not about the when and where. It's about the why. It's about the cause of prevention. It's about the punitive punishments we can put on people who break the law. Because believe me, we lowered the speed limit in neighborhoods to 25 miles an hour. We have more speeding than ever. We changed gun control laws so now people can carry their own gun through concealed weapon permits. And there wasn't killings at Kroger and all the things we thought was going to happen. But does that mean if we pass tonight there won't be more deaths? I can't guarantee that. That's something I can't live with. I can't guarantee that we're not keeping one person away from drinking and driving on one night. I can't guarantee that one person won't go home or go to a bar instead of going home to their family. You know, I think it's kind of ironic. We all go to many charity events here in the community, and we all went to one tonight. And they all serve alcohol, and yet some of those charities benefit alcoholism. Where's the irony in that? Does it make alcohol bad? Am I sitting here tonight speaking against alcohol? No. No, I drink alcohol. But I do it responsibly. I don't hurt other people, and I definitely don't get behind the wheel of a car. And if that's my choice, that is my choice and not anyone else's. You know, I've heard a lot about being unfair to small businesses, and it is. It is unfair to small business owners. But you know what? I'm a small business owner, too, and there's a lot of things unfair to my business. But I have to adapt and have to change. That's what keeps my business going. You know, we heard earlier talk about server training. Two years ago this council did pass server training. We didn't see one person in this council chambers or one e-mail or one phone call from anyone saying thank you. Because that was a step in the right direction, believe it or not. That was a step of legislative policy that said, hey, we do care. We do care how many drinks you serve somebody. You know, that's evident. If you read the Fox News article about the reporter here in Lexington, it was cut off on a Sunday night because he couldn't buy four drinks at once. It is working. And to say it's not is ignoring it. It is working. Is any law we pass 110% effective? No. There are people who are going to break the law whether we say yes or no tonight. But let me get back to the real issue here. It's about the when and where tonight. It's about the when and where, but it should be about the why. We can sit up here and talk and give great speeches and motivating speeches, but when are we going to see action? When are we going to see action? For 20 years the community has been the way it is. For 20 years. It's time that if this is a problem, then we need to start living up to the duty and responsibility we have to protect people. I mean, if alcohol is that horrible, we'd ban it every day of the week, but that's been tried for centuries in the government, for centuries of prohibition. What it comes down to for me in summation, you know, there's a lot of people I've spoke to about this issue from the kids I work with. People know my passion with children, my pastor, police officers, firefighters, you name it. I've asked the person. I even spoke to my mailman today about it. I've spoken to anybody I could about this issue. And it is a difficult issue for me, but it comes down to two reasons. One, about the kids. What do I tell the kids I work with my rationale for the need to change this tonight? I don't have an answer. I've asked everybody the same question. Give me some advice, and no one has an answer for me. The second issue is it is about the need. Where is this great demand? You know, my district, there are a few people that are for this. There are a few people that are against it. But many of the people, the majority that we all live and die by on the vote every election, doesn't care one way or another, to be quite honest with you. Good or bad, that's the honest truth. They have adapted to the current law and are satisfied. Would they like to see the convenience? Sure, everybody would. I mean, let's be honest. Sure, people would like to see the convenience of it. Tonight, as difficult as this decision has been for me and my family, I'm going to vote no on it because I don't like the way this ordinance has been written. I don't agree with the hours. I don't agree with the way it's been brought to this council. And contrary to what the Herald-Letter has reported, this will be the first vote on this issue and the last vote on this issue. But don't let tonight be the end of this issue because it was 20 years ago. It was. It was the end for many people in this community. That was the end of alcoholism. But it's very real. It affects us every day. You know, we were at a fundraiser tonight for the Hope Center. Great charity. Five or six council members showed up. We need everyone showing up. We need everybody coming to those kind of things to support that organization. That's our only treatment facility in Lexington besides the Swartz Center. It only has 100 beds, and believe me, they're already full. So those are the things we've got to start working on as a council and as a body. Let's start identifying those areas where we can put our funding, our time. You know, we have a alcohol task force here in government. We haven't convened it on my watch in two and a half years. It's time we wake up. It really is. It's time we wake up in this community. Thank you, Mayor. Council Member Myers. Thank you, Mayor. I'm here tonight with yet another tough issue the community is looking at. And when this issue got started, I was concerned that, one, it was brought to the council too quickly, it was brought ahead to a vote too quickly, wanted to make the motion to put it back in the committee, wanted more input and all those things, and here we are tonight. We've gotten some of that input on Tuesday, and we've got a little bit more tonight. But I want to talk about the two different sides of the issue. And one is the economic impact. I, too, have seen absolutely nothing that suggests, even from the people who want this, they've even said there's not going to be an economic impact, that people will merely buy some of their alcohol on Sunday rather than Saturday. There's not going to be an increase in sales and economic impact for our city. I also look at the FBI World Games, and to think that this is the first time that the games are coming off the continent of Europe and coming here to America, and it's my understanding, correct me if I'm wrong, but at no time during that whole deliberation of where the games would land in America, did the folks that put on those games ever bring up this issue of whether or not the city which is going to host it sells alcohol on Sunday or the availability of alcohol on Sunday or any other day of the week for that matter. So I want to move now to speak to Tuesday and some of the comments that were made here at the microphone. And I'll tell you, and some of the emails that I've received. I received an email from one person, and I'll be giving her a call tomorrow. I didn't have a chance to get back with her. She sent me an email and said basically that, you know, I claim to be a Christian. I go to Bethel Harvest Church, and basically I'm a disgrace to my church because I voted on a Tuesday to put this on the docket so we could discuss it here tonight. Let me give you a little background about myself. A lot of people here have talked about the personal impact of alcohol on their lives and their families and the personal loss and different things that have happened. And I just want to tell you that I am a Christian. I serve a risen savior, and I can say that proudly because he has changed my life. Okay. There's a time if you go back into my history and look, I've got two DUIs. Okay. So I was one of those people that a lot of you have talked about are going to be out there and be a menace to society. And I don't say that proudly. What I say that for is this. I think the church has missed a golden opportunity here. And the reason I say that is because what changes people's lives? I accepted Christ on October 31, 1989. I have not had a drink, a drop of alcohol, since that date and time. Okay. And the reason for that is because when I prayed to receive Christ, I also asked him to deliver me of my alcoholism. That was done. He did that, not me. The reason I say the church has missed an opportunity is because the purpose of legislators is not to legislate morality. I don't believe. Okay. The church is the one that has the power. And I don't want to – whatever faith you are, your faith is what has the power to change your heart and your life and your mind. And so when people came in here Tuesday, and one pastor actually stood up at that microphone and basically, what I would say, tried to curse us as a council. And he said that he talked about the alcoholism, the DUI fatalities, the spousal abuse, the child abuse, all those different things and said that anybody here that votes for this ordinance and it passes, all those things are going to be visited in our families. I don't understand that. Another pastor got up, and I had my daughter in my lap during part of that public hearing. I got a call from the daycare and had to go pick her up because she had a fever. And while my daughter was sitting in my lap, another pastor got up at that microphone and said, talked about the DUI fatalities and basically said that if we pass this legislation, that my daughter was going to die at the hands of a drunk driver. Don't understand it. Don't understand it. Having been on the other side of that coin and understanding that Christ is who changed my life and understanding that, you know, and I haven't asked my pastor what he thinks about whether or not we should pass this or not. Here's what I'd like to believe that he would say. And I don't know, haven't spoke to him, so I'm not putting any words in his mouth so people who go to church there don't say that I did and don't talk to him about it. But I would hope that he would say that just what I've said, the power to change hearts and lives and minds is in the power of Christ and people's faith in him. And the church should be focused on that and not, I'm not saying that they shouldn't get involved in politics. I'm not saying Christians don't have a place in politics or any other person of faith. What I'm saying is that the power, another pastor talked about they sell alcohol six days a week. Give us that one day reprieve to help people. What I would say is open your church six days a week or seven days a week and always be helping people. And I know many churches do, so I'm not saying, I'm not playing with a broad brush. But for me at the end of the day, this comes down to a couple of things. And one is, you know, who's asked for the change? We're not here tonight because a groundswell of citizens came forward and said we need to change this ordinance. We need to make alcohol more accessible on Sunday. You can buy the drink on Sunday. You can also, and I didn't realize this until this week, you can actually go into a bar on Sunday and carry out a 12-pack and take it home. I didn't realize that. But the question for me, one, is are we here because a groundswell of citizens came forth and said we want this change. Our community needs this for whatever reasons the citizens say they need it. And the answer to that question is no. That's not why we're here tonight. There's a very small group of people who wanted this, and I don't have a problem with that. They have that right also. But they didn't come and ask for it on the basis of the community and the community need. They came and asked for it on the basis of an economic need. But the fact is the economic need or threshold hasn't been presented. The second thing that I look at is If we make this change, what is the result down the road? And, you know, people, before I answer that question, though, people said on Tuesday, what are you going to say to your children if you pass this ordinance? And what I would say if I voted to pass this ordinance to my children, to my child, I just have one right now, is, first of all, I would model a life that I would want her to live out when she gets old enough. My wife and I don't drink. We don't have any alcohol in the home. And I realize that all children don't have that in their homes. But I think it starts with us as individuals modeling the way that we ought to act and relate to different people and how we ought to carry out our lives. And so, but when I think about changing this ordinance and what will this do for our city, I don't see, you know, people have talked both sides about it will make this big impact, we'll have more DUIs, we'll have more accidents, we'll have more alcoholism, we'll have more spousal abuse and child abuse. And others say we won't have any of those things. And so, for me, it really comes down to the citizens haven't come forth and said we really want this and need this. And the best that I can tell, there's not going to be an impact either way. And so I'm sort of falling on the side of if it ain't broke, don't fix it. So I'm going to vote tonight not to pass this ordinance. And I just wanted to share those reasons why. Thank you. Council Member Maloney. Thank you, Mayor. I know this has been a very controversial issue. I've been on here for 20 years. I've seen a lot of important issues that come across. This issue came to me about a month ago when it first came about. I was sitting over in Country Creek with my wife. And a gentleman came over to me and sat down and says, I've never had a drink in my life. And my brother, and that's the story that got me was, everybody's talking about where people got killed. He said my brother got killed on a Sunday afternoon where a gentleman went to a bar and drank all day long watching a football game. And when he got out of the football game, I mean out of the bar, he went home and he killed my brother. None of our family has ever drank. And I'm going to tell you right now, he said, I hate drinking, I'm against it, but I think you should support this under one reason. And I know it just might have saved my brother's life, but I don't know if it would have. Maybe this guy could have gone to get a beer somewhere and sat home and drank all day and their life would have been saved. I can't say if it would or wouldn't. But I think you could save some people's lives if they stayed home and not go to these bars. And to me, I've thought about that and I've heard all these stories up here. But what was odd, it was on a Sunday afternoon. And I'm not one person. I mean, I've listened to stories. They've told me where they died and they died, where they got killed at night. But I never heard somebody specifically say a Sunday afternoon like this guy did. And I've always held that for the last month and a half. And this guy here, who's totally against alcohol, he goes to church and I really respect his opinion, but he did say, please vote for it. I know I hate to say it, but I think it will maybe save a life and could save my brother's. But I do look from other counselors, I don't think it's going to be an economic improvement. But I think it needs to be fair. And for the last 20 years, and I brought this question up last week, Tuesday, and I asked the law department over there, have we been doing this right? And he kind of mumbled around and said no. So I asked him, if we vote this down, can someone who we do not, does not have, who has a license, and can he go to court now and fight this and win? He said, I think we may have a tough battle because realistically for the last 20 years, we have not been doing this right. And you heard the law department, you heard what he said. So I think I want to be sure it's fair to everybody and I will support this under those two reasons. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Maloney. Does any other council member wish to address the issue? I think we're ready to vote. Mr. Clerk, if you'll prepare the system and please vote electronically. I need to do a roll call also on this. Mr. Lane? Yes. Mr. McCord? No. Mr. Maloney? Yes. Mr. Myers? No. Dr. Stephens? Aye. Mr. Stinnett? Aye. Mr. Beard? Aye. Mr. Blevins? Yes. Mr. Blues? Yes. Ms. Crosby? Yes. Mr. DeCamp? Yes. Mr. Ellinger? Yes. Mr. Gray? Yes. Ms. James? No. And the ordinance is approved. Well, before we proceed, I know there are a lot of people who have expressed an awful lot of interest about this. I appreciate the level of involvement from everybody in the community. I appreciate the nature of the involvement from everybody in the community. I think it's been the kind of civic debate that we need more of in our community. And I just want to add my personal thanks for all of you who have been here this evening. With that said, Madam Clerk, I think we're ready to move on to the first reading of ordinances. Number seven. An ordinance changes the zone from agricultural to urban AU zone to highway service business B3 zone. 1.405 net, 1.469 gross acres of property. Located at 2509 and 2497 Georgetown Road. Subject to certain use restrictions imposed as conditions of granting the zone change. Dennis R. Anderson. Number eight. An ordinance authorizing the Director of the Mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to accept a donation from Gray Construction in the amount of $100 for use at the Safety City Program and appropriating funds for students. Gauge is number 45. Number nine. An ordinance amending Section 21-5, the Code of Ordinances, creating two positions of customer service specialist, grade 110-N, in the Division of Government Communications. Number ten. An ordinance amending Section 21-5, the Code of Ordinances, abolishing one position of clerical assistant, grade 104-N, and creating one position of mailroom clerk, grade 108-N, and reclassifying income in the Department of General Services. Income effective retroactive to July 9, 2007, and appropriating funds for students. Gauge is number 48. Number 11. An ordinance amending Section 22-5, the Code of Ordinances, creating one temporary position of staff assistant senior, grade 108-N, in the Department of Environmental Quality, and appropriating funds for students. Gauge is number 46. Number 12. An ordinance amending Section 22-5, the Code of Ordinances, abolishing one position of security officer, grade 106-N, and amending Section 21-5, the Code of Ordinances, creating one position of security officer, grade 106-N, in the Department of General Services, and appropriating funds for students. Gauge is number 47. Number 13. An ordinance amending the budget of the Lexington State Urban County Government to reflect current requirements for municipal expenditures and appropriating and reappropriating funds. Gauge is number 44. Number 14. An ordinance amending Section 21-5, the Code of Ordinances, creating one position of deputy director, grade 120-E, in the Division of Internal Audit to become effective January 7, 2008. Number 15. An ordinance amending Section 21-5, the Code of Ordinances, creating one position of network security engineer, grade 119-E, in the Division of Computer Services. Number 16. An ordinance amending Section 21-5, the Code of Ordinances, transferring one position of resource analyst, grade 115-E, and its incumbent and one position of administrative specialist, grade 110-N, and its incumbent from the Division of Human Resources to the Division of Accounting and changing the position title and the title of the incumbent from human resource analyst to payroll analyst in the Division of Accounting and appropriating funds pursuant to Schedule No. 49. Number 17. An ordinance amending Ordinance No. 161-2007 to correct a typographical error in the line number of revenue processing supervisor to become effective retroactive to July 5, 2007. Number 18. An ordinance authorizing the Director of the Mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute and submit a grant application to the Kentucky Environmental and Public Protection Cabinet to provide any additional information, requests, and connections for this grant application. And to accept this grant, the application is approved, which grant funds are in the amount of $144,556, Commonwealth of Kentucky funds, are for continuation of the litter control program, the acceptance of which does not obligate the Urban County Government to the expenditure of funds. Program funds pursuant to Schedule No. 53 and authorize the Mayor to transfer unencumbered funds within the grant budget. Number 19. An ordinance authorizing the Director of the Mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute and submit a grant application to the Kentucky Justice Cabinet to provide any additional information, requests, and connections for this grant application. And to accept this grant, the application is approved, which grant funds are in the amount of $55,000, Federal funds under the Violence Against Women Act program, are for continuation of the sexual assault nurse examiner program, the acceptance of which obligates the Urban County Government to the expenditure of $26,340 as a local match. Program funds pursuant to Schedule No. 54 and authorize the Mayor to transfer unencumbered funds within the grant budget. Number 20. An ordinance ratifying and adopting the 2006 Division of Community Corrections Policy and Procedural Manual, ratified and adopted by Ordinance No. 276-2006, which provides procedures for general management, public information, inmate information system, and inmate records, budgeting and accounting, inmate accounts, commissary, staffing, disciplinary actions, sworn status, appearance, code of ethics, court proceedings, personnel records, physical fitness, training requirements, off-duty employment, drug-free workplace policy, employee assistance program, tobacco-free, no smoking designation, admissions, commitment authority, inmate records, inmate searches, inmate property, orientation, transfer and release, objective classification, security assessments, custody assessments, disciplinary segregation, administrative segregation, inmate supervision, security procedures, inspection, searches, transportation of inmates, use of restraints, use of force, weapons, use of firearms, emergency procedures and operations, inmate health care, food service procedures, equipment maintenance, control, use of dangerous materials, sanitation, hygiene, inmate services unit, statement of inmate rights, disciplinary offenses, hearing procedures, inmate grievance procedures, probation services unit, community alternative program goals, drug testing unit, and community service unit as the 2007 Policy and Procedure Manual. And No. 21, an Ordinance authorizing the Director of the Mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute Supplemental Agreement No. 1 with the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet to provide highways for up to $7,063,231 in reimbursable funding for resurfacing of roads. And a program plan pursuant to FY2008 Schedule No. 55. Thank you very much. Are there any motions with regard to the ordinances that have received their first reading? Vice Mayor Gray. I think I need to recuse myself on one related to gray construction. Did I hear that? No. 8. Okay. All right. Council Member Blevins. Thank you, Mayor. I have a request from the Administration to suspend the rules and allow second reading of No. 15 and No. 17. So moved. Second. Are there any others to be included? Yes. I'm on the screen here. Council Member Myers. I'd like to suspend the rules for No. 9 and give second reading. Let me check with the Department of Law. Commissioner, I ask you on No. 21, Are we in a position to advance that one for a second reading as well? No, sir, I don't believe so. When we've had a budget scheduled item like that, it involves finance, appropriation, revenue under the rules. All right. Then the motion, as I understand it, is to place items 9, 15, 17 on for second reading by suspending the rules. Those in favor, please vote yes electronically. Those opposed, vote nay. Motion carries. Madam Clerk. Item No. 9. An Ordinance Amending Section 21-5, the Code of Ordinances, Creating Two Positions of Customer Service Specialist, Grade 110-N, in the Division of Government Communications. No. 15. An Ordinance Amending Section 21-5, the Code of Ordinances, Creating One Position of Network Security Engineer, Grade 119-E, in the Division of Computer Services. No. 17. An Ordinance Amending Ordinance No. 161-2007, To Correct a Typographical Error in the Line Number of Revenue Processing Supervisor, to Become Effective Retroactive to July 5, 2007. The floor is open for motion to approve items 9, 15, and 17. So moved. I have motion second. There's no discussion. Madam Clerk, if you will call the roll, and members, please vote electronically. Mr. Lane. Yes. Mr. McCord. Yes. Mr. Maloney. Yes. Mr. Myers. Yes. Dr. Simmons. Aye. Mr. Sinnott. Aye. Mr. Beard. Aye. Mr. Blevins. Yes. Mr. Blues. Yes. Ms. Crosby. Yes. Mr. DeKalb. Yes. Mr. Ellinger. Thank you. Thank you very much. Those ordinances are now approved. Madam Clerk, if you'll give second reading to the one resolution. Mayor, I have a motion on that, please. Okay. Council Member Blues. Thank you. I move that item number one on the docket under second reading, resolutions regarding a lease with Sprint.com for a cell tower at Cold Screen Park be removed and placed on the September 27, 2007, docket under second reading resolutions. So moved. Second. I have a motion and second. Any discussion? Those in favor, please vote aye electronically. Those opposed, vote nay. Thank you. The motion carries. Item one under the resolutions for second reading will be moved to the September 27 docket. Madam Clerk, if you'll proceed with the resolutions for first reading. Number two, a resolution says a bid of the Allen Company Inc. in the amount of $168,383 for the Wellington Bike and Pedestrian Facility Project. Number three, a resolution says a bid of SBR Machinery Removers LLC in the amount of $29,500 for facility structural upgrade. Number four, a resolution says a bid of KBS Chemco Building Supply establishing a price contract for lumber and plywood. Number five, a resolution says a bid of Guarantee Pest Control Inc. establishing a price contract for pest control services. Number six, a resolution says a bid of Blackhawk Enterprises and Pathmaster Inc. establishing a price contract for video surveillance equipment for the Division of Revenue. Number seven, a resolution authorizing the Director of the Mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to accept a donation from Home Depot and Kentucky Utilities of Building Materials for use at the Storage Building at the Police Firearms Training Facility, 4300 Airport Road at no cost to the Urban County Government. Number eight, a resolution authorizing the Director of the Mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute and submit a grant application to the March of Dimes and to provide any additional information requests in connection with this grant application. Which grant funds are in the amount of $23,500 and offer the support of a project that will assess and treat perinatal and postpartum mood disorders to be conducted in conjunction with the Home Network Hands Program at Family Care Center. Number nine, a resolution authorizing the Director of the Mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute a support services agreement with Northrop Grumman Commercial Information Services, Inc. for the provision of maintenance support to the members of the Urban County Government. Number ten, a resolution authorizing the Director of the Mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute a mental health services agreement with Blue Grass Regional Mental Health Mental Rehabilitation Board, Inc. for court-ordered mental health evaluations of clients referred to the Division of Youth Services at a cost not to exceed $3,000. Number eleven, a resolution authorizing the Director of the Mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute an affiliation agreement with Baptist Health Care, Inc. doing business at Central Baptist Hospital for practical experience with mental health services. Number twelve, a resolution authorizing the Director of the Mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute a personal services agreement with Lexington Heritage Classic, Inc. for the sixth annual historical black college football classic at a cost not to exceed $10,000. Number thirteen, a resolution authorizing the Director of the Mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute an agreement with St. Paul African Methodist Episcopal Church, Inc. at a cost not to exceed $500. And Bryan Station Band Association, Inc., $350 for the office of the Urban County Council at a cost not to exceed the sum stated. Number fourteen, a resolution authorizing the Director of the Department of Law to institute condemnation proceedings in Fayette Circuit Court to obtain temporary construction easements and permanent sanitary sewer easements for the property located at 537 Wilderness Road for the Wilderness Road-Woodward Lane Sanitary Sewer Project. Number fifteen, a resolution ratifying the probation and civil service appointments of Lincoln Mackey, Engineering Technician, Sr., Grade 113E, $1,411.60 by weekly in the Division of Engineering, effective September 3, 2007. Wallace Barker, Human Resources Manager, Grade 119E, $2,730.70 by weekly in the Division of Human Resources, effective September 3, 2007. Brian Reynolds, Laboratory Technician, Grade 109N, $11.708 hourly in the Division of Water and Air Quality, effective September 3, 2007. Robert Post, GIS Specialist, Grade 114N, $19.704 hourly in the Division of Enhanced 9-1-1, effective October 1, 2007. Timothy Clark, Parks and Recreation Superintendent, Grade 119E, $3,031.60 by weekly in the Division of Parks and Recreation, effective September 3, 2007. Robert Riney, Revenue Compliance Auditor Supervisor, Grade 116E, $2,230.70 by weekly in the Division of Revenue, effective September 17, 2007. Linda Lannard, Administrative Specialist, Senior, Grade 112N, $19.712 hourly in the Division of Revenue, effective September 17, 2007. Susan Bowie, Revenue Compliance Auditor Senior, Grade 115E, $1,846.15 by weekly in the Division of Parks and Recreation, effective September 3, 2007. Tamara Ofterhar, Staff Assistant Senior, Grade 108N, $15.747 hourly in the Division of Police, effective September 17, 2007. Laura Harris, Revenue Processing Supervisor, Grade 114E, $1,884.62 by weekly in the Division of Revenue, effective September 17, 2007. Judy Higgins, Revenue Compliance Auditor, Grade 114E, $1,747.92 by weekly in the Division of Revenue, effective September 17, 2007. Kathleen O'Neill, Administrative Specialist, Grade 110N, $19.544 hourly in the Division of Historic Preservation, effective September 17, 2007. Mary Pfister-Tucker, Director of Accounting, Grade 121E, $3,403.84 by weekly in the Division of Accounting, effective October 1, 2007. Gratifying the Permanent Civil Service Appointments of Jason Thompson, Computer Analyst, Grade 115E in the Division of Computer Services, effective August 5, 2007. Kevin Lyne, Engineering A, Grade 111N, the Division of Water and Air Quality, effective September 19, 2007. Horace Miles, Public Service Worker Senior, Grade 107N, the Division of Water and Air Quality, effective September 19, 2007. Jeff Baumgardner, Engineering Technician, Grade 111N, the Division of Water and Air Quality, effective September 19, 2007. T.J. Taylor, Project Manager, Grade 114E in the Division of Water and Air Quality, effective September 19, 2007. James Taylor, Engineering Technician, Grade 111N, the Division of Engineering, effective September 5, 2007. Gratifying the Permanent Sworn Appointments of Harold Oney, Fire Captain, Grade 316N, the Division of Fire and Emergency Services, effective August 16, 2007. Carl Tackett, Jr., Fire Lieutenant, Grade 315N, the Division of Fire and Emergency Services, effective August 16, 2007. Approving the Leave of Absence for Lori Vanover-Seger, Probation Officer Senior, Grade 112N, the Division of Youth Services. Request a 20-day Council Approval of Leave Without Pay from September 20, 2007 to October 9, 2007. Approving the Unclassified Civil Service Appointment of Renee Chappell, Administrative Specialist Senior, Grade 112N, 20.024 hourly in the Office of the Mayor, effective September 3, 2007. James Webb, Administrative Officer, Grade 119E, $2,692.31 biweekly in the Department of General Services, effective September 3, 2007. Resolution Specifying the Intention of the Urban County Council to Expand and Extend Partial Urban Services, District No. 3, to Provide Garbage and Refuge Collection. Finding a Need for this Service in the Area Included. Finding the Ability of the Urban County Government to Provide this Service in this Area, which Areas define a Certain Properties on the Following Streets, Mill Creek, Gapian Crossing Way, Jones Trail, and Longleaf Place, South Division, Longleaf Place. Resolution Specifying the Intention of the Urban County Council to Expand and Extend Partial Urban Services, District No. 5, to Provide Street Lighting and Garbage and Refuge Collection. Finding a Need for this Service in the Area Included. Finding the Ability of the Urban County Government to Provide this Service in this Area, which Areas define a Certain Properties on the Following Streets, South Mill Common, Section 3, Lawrence Street, Cravens Property, Lawson 991, McClanahan Lane, Todd's Road, and Beaumont Center, Virginia. Resolution Specifying the Intention of the Urban County Council to Expand and Extend Partial Urban Services, District No. 5, to Provide Street Lighting and Garbage and Refuge Collection. Finding a Need for this Service in the Area Included. Finding a Need for this Service in the Area Included. Finding a Need for this Service in the Area Included. Finding a Need for this Service in the Area Included. Finding a Need for this Service in the Area Included. Finding a Need for this Service in the Area Included. Finding a Need for this Service in the Area Included. Finding a Need for this Service in the Area Included. Finding a Need for this Service in the Area Included. Finding a Need for this Service in the Area Included. Approving the Issuance of Tax-Exempt Industrial Revenue Bonds by the City of Stamping Ground, Kentucky, to Finance an Industrial Building Project of the Central Christian Church within Fayette County. Resolution of the Lexington State Urban County Government requesting that the Kentucky Economic Development Finance Authority adopt a resolution providing for the issuance of revenue bonds in an amount not to exceed $18 million, the proceeds of which will be loaned to Christian Care Communities, Inc., a Kentucky non-profit organization with facilities located within the boundaries of Fayette County, to refinance the acquisition, construction, and equipping of the projects. Resolution of the Lexington State Urban County Government requesting that the Kentucky Economic Development Finance Authority adopt a resolution providing for the issuance of revenue bonds in an amount not to exceed $18 million, the proceeds of which will be loaned to Christian Care Communities, Inc., a Kentucky non-profit organization with facilities located within the boundaries of Fayette County, to refinance the acquisition, construction, and equipping the projects. Resolution of the Lexington State Urban County Government requesting that the Kentucky Economic Development Finance Authority adopt a resolution providing for the issuance of revenue bonds in an amount not to exceed $18 million, the proceeds of which will be loaned to Christian Care Communities, Inc., a Kentucky non-profit organization with facilities located within the boundaries of Fayette County, to refinance the acquisition, construction, and equipping the projects. Resolution of the Lexington State Urban County Government requesting that the Kentucky Economic Development Finance Authority adopt a resolution providing for the issuance of revenue bonds in an amount not to exceed $18 million, the proceeds of which will be loaned to Christian Care Communities, Inc., a Kentucky non-profit organization with facilities located within the boundaries of Fayette County, to refinance the acquisition, construction, and equipping the projects. Resolution of the Lexington State Urban County Government requesting that the Kentucky Economic Development Finance Authority adopt a resolution providing for the issuance of revenue bonds in an amount not to exceed $18 million, the proceeds of which will be loaned to Christian Care Communities, Inc., a Kentucky non-profit organization with facilities located within the boundaries of Fayette County, to refinance the acquisition, construction, and equipping the projects. Resolution of the Lexington State Urban County Government requesting that the Kentucky Economic Development Finance Authority adopt a resolution providing for the issuance of revenue bonds in an amount not to exceed $18 million, the proceeds of which will be loaned to Christian Care Communities, Inc., a Kentucky non-profit organization with facilities located within the boundaries of Fayette County, to refinance the acquisition, construction, and equipping the projects. Resolution of the Lexington State Urban County Government requesting that the Kentucky Economic Development Finance Authority adopt a resolution providing for the issuance of revenue bonds in an amount not to exceed $18 million, the proceeds of which will be loaned to Christian Care Communities, Inc., a Kentucky non-profit organization with facilities located within the boundaries of Fayette County, to refinance the acquisition, construction, and equipping the projects. Resolution of the Lexington State Urban County Government requesting that the Kentucky Economic Development Finance Authority adopt a resolution providing for the issuance of revenue bonds in an amount not to exceed $18 million, the proceeds of which will be loaned to Christian Care Communities, Inc., a Kentucky non-profit organization with facilities located within the boundaries of Fayette County, to refinance the acquisition, construction, and equipping the projects. Resolution of the Lexington State Urban County Government requesting that the Kentucky Economic Development Finance Authority adopt a resolution providing for the issuance of revenue bonds in an amount not to exceed $18 million, the proceeds of which will be loaned to Christian Care Communities, Inc., a Kentucky non-profit organization with facilities located within the boundaries of Fayette County, to refinance the acquisition, construction, and equipping the projects. Resolution of the Lexington State Urban County Government requesting that the Kentucky Economic Development Finance Authority adopt a resolution providing for the issuance of revenue bonds in an amount not to exceed $18 million, the proceeds of which will be loaned to Christian Care Communities, Inc., a Kentucky non-profit organization with facilities located within the boundaries of Fayette County, to refinance the acquisition, construction, and equipping the projects. Resolution of the Lexington State Urban County Government requesting that the Kentucky Economic Development Finance Authority adopt a resolution providing for the issuance of revenue bonds in an amount not to exceed $18 million, the proceeds of which will be loaned to Christian Care Communities, Inc., a Kentucky non-profit organization with facilities located within the boundaries of Fayette County, to refinance the acquisition, construction, and equipping the projects. Resolution of the Lexington State Urban County Government requesting that the Kentucky Economic Development Finance Authority adopt a resolution providing for the issuance of revenue bonds in an amount not to exceed $18 million, the proceeds of which will be loaned to Christian Care Communities, Inc., a Kentucky non-profit organization with facilities located within the boundaries of Fayette County, to refinance the acquisition, construction, and equipping the projects. Resolution of the Lexington State Urban County Government requesting that the Kentucky Economic Development Finance Authority adopt a resolution providing for the issuance of revenue bonds in an amount not to exceed $18 million, the proceeds of which will be loaned to Christian Care Communities, Inc., a Kentucky non-profit organization with facilities located within the boundaries of Fayette County, to refinance the acquisition, construction, and equipping the projects. Resolution of the Lexington State Urban County Government requesting that the Kentucky Economic Development Finance Authority adopt a resolution providing for the issuance of revenue bonds in an amount not to exceed $18 million, the proceeds of which will be loaned to Christian Care Communities, Inc., a Kentucky non-profit organization with facilities located within the boundaries of Fayette County, to refinance the acquisition, construction, and equipping the projects. Resolution of the Lexington State Urban County Government requesting that the Kentucky Economic Development Finance Authority adopt a resolution providing for the issuance of revenue bonds in an amount not to exceed $18 million, the proceeds of which will be loaned to Christian Care Communities, Inc., a Kentucky non-profit organization with facilities located within the boundaries of Fayette County, to refinance the acquisition, construction, and equipping the projects. Resolution of the Lexington State Urban County Government requesting that the Kentucky Economic Development Finance Authority adopt a resolution providing for the issuance of revenue bonds in an amount not to exceed $18 million, the proceeds of which will be loaned to Christian Care Communities, Inc., a Kentucky non-profit organization with facilities located within the boundaries of Fayette County, to refinance the acquisition, construction, and equipping the projects. Resolution of the Lexington State Urban County Government requesting that the Kentucky Economic Development Finance Authority adopt a resolution providing for the issuance of revenue bonds in an amount not to exceed $18 million, the proceeds of which will be loaned to Christian Care Communities, Inc., a Kentucky non-profit organization with facilities located within the boundaries of Fayette County, to refinance the acquisition, construction, and equipping the projects. Resolution of the Lexington State Urban County Government requesting that the Kentucky Economic Development Finance Authority adopt a resolution providing for the issuance of revenue bonds in an amount not to exceed $18 million, the proceeds of which will be loaned to Christian Care Communities, Inc., a Kentucky non-profit organization with facilities located within the boundaries of Fayette County, to refinance the acquisition, construction, and equipping the projects. Amendment to Frequency of Reconfiguration Agreement with Nextel West Corporation for $13,598 in additional services to be paid by Nextel West Corporation to the vendor Lexington Call Mobile at no cost to the Urban County Government. Number 43, a resolution authorizing the Director of the Mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute a facility usage contract with Fayette County Public Schools for the ESP and REAL programs at no cost to the government. And number 44, a resolution authorizing the Director of the Mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute change order number one to the contract with Lenco Excavation Company, Inc., for 7th Street at Old Railroad Crossing Improvements. Increase in the contract price by the sum of $10,412.32 from $238,718.65 to $249,130.97. That concludes the reading, first reading of the resolutions. Are there any motions? I have a walk-on. I've got a walk-on. We've got an order here. Let's take care of the walk-ons first, and then we'll talk about ones for potential second reading. Council Member Stephens. A resolution ratifying the Department of Law's execution on behalf of the Urban County Government of a settlement agreement, stipulation and recommendation, and any other necessary settlement documents in Kentucky Public Service Commission Case Number 2007-00143. I move this be placed on the docket. Second. I have a motion and a second to add the settlement agreement to the docket, the resolution approving the settlement agreement. Is there any discussion? Those in favor, please vote yes electronically. Those opposed, vote no. Motion carries. Are there other items to be added to the docket? All right. Madam Clerk, if you'll give first reading. Number 45, a resolution ratifying the Department of Law's execution on behalf of the Urban County Government of a settlement agreement, stipulation and recommendation, and any other necessary settlement documents in Kentucky Public Service Commission Case Number 2000-00143. Thank you very much. Council Member Myers. Thank you, ma'am. I want to suspend the rules and give second reading to 12, 16, 32, 33, 35, 39, and 40. I hate to do this, but if you could go through the list again a little more slowly. Okay. Number 12, 16, 32, 33, 35, 39, and 40. Excuse me. Number 16 cannot receive two readings. It relates to the Urban Services District. Just for our edification, could you repeat for us the reason why that one's not eligible for second reading? Could you give me just one moment, please? Certainly. That's okay, ma'am. I'll withdraw number 16. All right. We'll save the edification for later then and just move on. Are there others? Council Member Lane. Thank you, Mayor. I'd like to suspend the rules, get a second read, a walk-on resolution, number 45. Thank you very much. Council Member Blevins. Thank you, Mayor. The administration has requested a second reading on number 15 for some specific individuals. And just to make it simple, I'm just going to recommend we do 15. Thank you very much. Council Member McCord. Thank you, Mayor. Just would like to request a second reading on resolution number 2, please. Council Member Maloney. Thank you, Mayor. I'd like to make a second reading on number 20, please. All right. Unless there are others, I understand the motion is to suspend the rules to grant second reading to resolutions numbers 2, 12, 15, 20, 32, 33, 35, 39, 40, and 45. And those in favor of suspending the rules for those items, please indicate by voting electronically. Aye. And if you're opposed, vote nay electronically. I think there may be one more that the law department needs suspended. We also need second reading on number 42. Mayor, in deference to the law department, I move we have a second reading on number 42. Since her motion is out of order, I appreciate everybody's accommodation. All right. We'll add 42 to the list. And it appears as though the motion carries. Madam Clerk, if you'll give second reading to those resolutions. Number 2. A resolution to set the bid of the Allen Company in the amount of $168,383 for the Wellington Bike and Pedestrian Facility Project. Number 12. A resolution authorizing the Director of the Mayor, on behalf of the Urban County Government, to execute a purchase service agreement with Licensed and Heritage Classic, Inc. for the 6th Annual Historical Black College Football Classic at a cost not to exceed $10,000. Number 15. A resolution ratifying the probationary civil service appointments of Lincoln Mack Engineering Technician Senior, Grade 113E, $1,040.11 biweekly in the Division of Engineering, effective September 3, 2007. Wallace Parker, Human Resources Manager, Grade 119E, $2,730.77 biweekly in the Division of Human Resources, effective September 3, 2007. Brian Reynolds, Laboratory Technician, Grade 109N, $11.708 hourly in the Division of Water and Air Quality, effective September 3, 2007. Robert Poge, GIS Specialist, Grade 114N, $19.704 hourly in the Division of Enhanced 9-1-1, effective October 1, 2007. Timothy Clark, Parks and Recreation Superintendent, Grade 119E, $3,031.60 biweekly in the Division of Parks and Recreation, effective September 3, 2007. Robert Reine, Revenue Compliance Auditor Supervisor, Grade 116E, $2,230.77 biweekly in the Division of Revenue, effective September 17, 2007. Linda Lannert, Administrative Specialist Senior, Grade 112N, $19.712 hourly in the Division of Revenue, effective September 17, 2007. Susan Bowie, Revenue Compliance Auditor Senior, Grade 115E, $1,846.15 biweekly in the Division of Revenue, effective September 17, 2007. Tamara Offdahl, Staff Assistant Senior, Grade 108N, $15.747 hourly in the Division of Police, effective September 17, 2007. Laura Harris, Revenue Processing Supervisor, Grade 114E, $1,884.62 biweekly in the Division of Revenue, effective September 17, 2007. Judy Higgins, Revenue Compliance Auditor, Grade 114E, $1,747.92 biweekly in the Division of Revenue, effective September 17, 2007. Kathleen O'Neill, Administrative Specialist, Grade 110N, $19.544 hourly in the Division of Historic Preservation, effective September 17, 2007. Mary Pfister Tucker, Director of Accounting, Grade 121E, $3,403.84 biweekly in the Division of Accounting, effective October 1, 2007. Ratifying the Permanent Civil Service Appointments of Jason Thompson, Computer Analyst, Grade 115E in the Division of Computer Services, effective August 5, 2007. Kevin Lyon, Engineering Aide, Grade 111N, the Division of Water and Air Quality, effective September 19, 2007. Horace Miles, Public Service Worker Senior, Grade 107N, the Division of Water and Air Quality, effective September 19, 2007. Jeff Baumgartner, Engineering Technician, Grade 111N, the Division of Water and Air Quality, effective September 19, 2007. T.J. Taylor, Project Manager, Grade 114E in the Division of Water and Air Quality, effective August 22, 2007. James Taylor, Engineering Technician, Grade 111N in the Division of Engineering, effective September 5, 2007. Ratifying the Permanent Sworn Appointments of Harold Oney, Fire Captain, Grade 316N in the Division of Fire and Emergency Services, effective August 16, 2007. Carl Tackett, Jr., Fire Lieutenant, Grade 315N in the Division of Fire and Emergency Services, effective August 16, 2007. Approving Leave of Absence for Lori Vandiver-Segar, Probation Officer Senior, Grade 112N in the Division of Youth Services. Request a 20-day counsel approved leave without pay from September 20, 2007 to October 9, 2007. Approving the Unclassified Civil Service Appointment of Renee Chappell, Administrative Specialist Senior, Grade 112N. 20.024 Arlene, Officer of the Mayor, effective September 3, 2007. James Webb, Administrative Officer, Grade 119E, $2,692.31 biweekly in the Department of General Services, effective September 17, 2007. Number 20. A resolution of the Lexington-Fayette County Government requesting that the Kentucky Economic Development Finance Authority adopt a resolution providing for the issuance of revenue bonds in an amount not to exceed $18 million, the proceeds of which will be loaned to Christian Care Communities, Inc., a Kentucky non-profit organization with facilities located within the boundaries of Fayette County, to refinance the acquisition, construction, and equipping of certain facilities consisting of health care and health-related facilities, and waiving certain requirements of the Urban County Government Industrial Revenue Housing Bond Policies and Guidelines. Number 32. A resolution authorizing and directing the Mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute a purchase service agreement with Baby Health Services, $16,000. Bluegrass Area Development District, $98,000. Bluegrass Community Action Agency, $20,000. Bluegrass Domestic Violence Program, Inc., $70,000. Bluegrass Rape Crisis Center, $70,000. Bluegrass Technology Center, Inc., $2,370. Center for Women, Children, and Families, $35,100. Chrysalis Housing, Inc., $40,000. Bluegrass Comprehensive Care Center, $234,750. Community Action Council, $170,000. Emmaus Road Village, Inc., $55,000. Family Counseling Service, Inc., $32,500. Hope Center, Inc., $718,770. National Services of Bluegrass, Inc., $152,000. Nursing Home Ombudsman Agency of Bluegrass, Inc., $45,000. Operation Raid, Inc., $27,550. Salvation Army, $160,000. School Fees Licensing, Inc., $40,000. To provide services to the public at a cost not to exceed $1,187,040. Number 33, a resolution authorizing the Director of the Mayor on behalf of Everett County Government to execute an agreement with Gail Hayden for clerical support for the needs assessment project for the Department of Social Services at a cost not to exceed $15,000. Number 35, a resolution authorizing the Director of the Mayor on behalf of Everett County Government to execute an agreement with Girl Scouts Wilderness Road Council, Inc., $1,025. Appalachia Science and the Public Interest, Inc., $775. Joyland Neighborhood Association, Inc., $600. Honorary Childhood Association, Inc., $675.92. Deep Springs Elementary, PTA, $500. Russell Cave Church of Christ, Inc., $500. Gaines Way Community Empowerment Center, Inc., $750. For the office of the Urban County Council at a cost not to exceed the sum stated. Number 39, a resolution authorizing the Director of the Mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute the Dell Techno Program Agreement with Dell Marketing, LP, and Fay County Public Schools for Dell Techno Tubby's Clubhouse Program at no cost to the government. Number 40, a resolution authorizing the Director of the Mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute a purchase of service agreement with Bluegrass State Games, Inc., for the Bluegrass State Games at a cost not to exceed $22,500. Number 42, a resolution authorizing the Director of the Mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute the First Amendment to Frequency Reconfiguration Agreement with Nextel West Corporation for $13,598 in additional services to be paid by Nextel West Corporation to the vendor, Lexington Call Mobile, at no cost to the Urban County Government. And number 45, a resolution ratifying the Department of Law's execution on behalf of the Urban County Government of a settlement agreement, stipulation and recommendation, and any other necessary settlement documents in Kentucky Public Service Commission Case Number 2007-00143. Thank you, Madam Clerk. The floor is open for a motion to approve the items that just received second reading. The motion is second. Then if there's no further discussion, I'd like for the members to vote electronically and for the clerk to call the roll. Mr. Lane? Yes. Mr. McCord? Yes. Mr. Maloney? Yes. Mr. Myers? Yes. Dr. Stephens? Aye. Mr. Sinnott? Aye. Mr. Beard? Aye. Mr. Blevins? Yes. Mr. Bluth? Yes. Ms. Crosby? Yes. Mr. DeKalb? Yes. Mr. Ellinger? Yes. Mr. Gray? Yes. Ms. James? Yes. Thank you very much. Council Member Lane. Thank you, Mayor. I'd like the Council to go back to page 4 of tonight's docket to Ordinance Number 21, and at the request of the Law Department, I'm going to move to amend that item on the docket. I move to amend Item Number 21 on the docket under the first reading ordinance to authorize the Mayor to execute Supplemental Agreement Number 1 with the Kentucky Department of Transportation Cabinet. Let me reread that. The Kentucky Transportation Cabinet Department of Highways for Reimbursable Funding for Road Resurfacing. And then secondly, I would like to add Item Number 22. Do you want to vote on those individually, Mayor? What's Item 22? I'm sorry? I'm sorry. What is Item Number 22 related or separate or? Let's make that a separate item. Okay. All right. So the motion is, if I understood correctly, to bring Item Number 22 20, excuse me, 21 up for a first reading, and it would authorize execution of the contract. Is that correct? Yes, sir. That's correct. All right. This was requested by the Law Department to expedite the paperwork. It might be appropriate for Commissioner Haskew to shed a little light on this situation, which is a little extraordinary. Thank you, Mayor. You'll recall when you all had the first reading on this previously, the question was posed, were we able to suspend the rules and do a second reading? And the answer was no, because there was a budget amendment as part of the Item Number 21. Commissioner Kelly advises that there's some reason to go ahead and try to expedite the execution of this agreement, as the State is most interested in getting this agreement back, and I understand that there's some paving that needs to be done pretty quickly. For that reason, I think what we can do procedurally is go ahead and authorize tonight the execution of the contract, and then Item Number 22, you would be authorized to suspend the rules on that, which would allow us to enter into the contract, which would allow for the receipt of the funds from the State. And then Item 22 would be the second part, which would actually set up a budget amendment to receive those funds and expend them. So what that does is you have two separate issues now, whereas before it was all combined into one item. The first issue, which you would be able to conclude tonight, would be the execution of the agreement with the State, which provides for up to $7 million coming from the State for the resurfacing of roads. And then the second part of it would be the budget amendment, which you would not be able to do second reading tonight, and you would just do a first reading. So you're taking one item that has two parts and separating it into two items. And let me elaborate just a little bit further. We received some indication from the State Transportation Cabinet that they had somewhere between 3 and 3.5 million, 3.6, something like that, available for us. And I'm advised that there is some urgency about this because of changing weather conditions that would change the milling processes and all, and they're interested in trying to go ahead and start the work first part of the week. So that's what that's all about. Those any further discussion? Those in favor, then, of placing item number 21. Mending 21. To authorize the execution of the contract and place that on for second reading. Is that correct? That's correct. First reading. It just amends number 21. Right. I think you'd have a first reading, and then you'd move to suspend. All right. Thank you for clarifying that. Those in favor, please vote aye electronically. And those opposed, vote nay. The motion carries. Okay, Mayor, can I go for item number 22? Yes. Thank you. As I move to place on the docket under first reading ordinances, an ordinance amending certain of the budgets of the Lexington-Fayette County Government to reflect current requirements for municipal expenditures related to supplemental agreement number one with the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet, Department of Highways and Appropriations, and appropriated funds presented to Schedule 55. So moved. I have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Council Member Maloney. I just want to get this clear. We're splitting the first one up to say that we support this and send it back to Frankfurt. And the second one is a budget amendment. And when it passes, we can start doing the what will be two weeks from now. We'll be able to draw the money down. Is that right? Yes. Why can't we just do the original motion and just wait two weeks? Well, because the procedures require that you cannot suspend the rules on a matter involving appropriations or revenue. I mean, I'm not trying to be. But why are we being so quick to send this regulation up here without approval of the funding yet? We accept the money. Why can't we do it both at the same time? Well, we need the contract, and it needs to get back to Frankfurt. Commissioner Kelly may be better able to answer that. I'm not familiar with the ‑‑I know what the contract says, but I'm not familiar with the urgency associated with it. And what we're expecting to do is to look into this between now and two weeks from now to see whether there's a way that we might receive the funds. All of the funds pursuant to this contract are coming from Frankfurt for repaving of specific road projects. Even though it says seven million, I believe, as the mayor said, there's three or three and a half million currently available. If we go ahead and start spending that, then we might be able to get, because of weather conditions, go ahead and get this paving started. There's some other money that may come later. But our hope is that if you take this action tonight, we can sign the contract and then figure out how we might be able to receive these funds before the second reading so the work can get underway. But there's no money to be expended out of the general fund or road fund. Mr. Kelly, I guess you've been in Frankfurt and you've dealt with these. Is there a crisis to have it sent back this quick? The crisis is there's three paving crews working in the Lexington and Fayette County area right now. If they have to shut down one of them and ship them back to Middlesbrough where they're from, we're going to lose $3 million this year is what it boils down to. So they want to keep those crews working. Thank you, Mr. Kelly. All right. Let's see. Council Member Lang. All right, I think we're ready to vote on this ordinance now, Mayor. Let's see. I'm lost, I'll have to admit. Okay, I'm sorry. Council Member Beard. I'm sorry. I'm a little troubled about this process, I guess. Not that I don't want the $3 million, $3.5 million, and I don't want the paving to happen. I can't believe this. Surely we had more lead time than what was given to us, that we couldn't have gotten this done earlier. Are we going to, when it's convenient, split other issues up into two parts so that we can circumvent the rules? Well, we're not going to be spending any money until after the 27th. So if it causes that degree of heartburn with folks, it's not that big a deal as far as I'm concerned. But this is money that we have access to now. We have paving crews in place. And because of the extraordinary set of circumstances, I think it makes sense to roll ahead. I received a letter Thursday. Well, we can go today. I'll go along with it, but I just don't want to see this be replicated multiple times in the future. I would just assume we'd not be replicating it this time. I understand. The other thing we can do is, if it causes too much heartburn, is have a special meeting. That's true. So whichever way you want to proceed. As far as I'm concerned, we can go ahead, but I'm just concerned about the precedent setting in relationship to this whole, you know, we've got rules for some reason, and I don't necessarily always agree with the rules, but they are the rules. So, you know, as far as I'm concerned, I will go along with that. But I'll be the first to squeal if it happens again. Let's put it that way. All right. I'm a little lost on where we are procedurally. Do we have a motion on the floor to suspend the rules and give Item 22 a first reading? This is to place it on the docket, to place Ordinance Number 22 on the docket. All right. Any further discussion? Mayor. All right. Council Member Gray. Vice Mayor Gray. Just procedurally, we are voting now to accept the funding from the state or actually to engage the contracts. Maybe Commissioner Kelly could. Maybe you already said that, and if you did, I apologize, because I'm thinking about the contracting procedure and the purchasing procedure, and I think you know probably where I can't help but go on a little bit of this. This is agreement to accept the money so that they can put it in process in Frankfort. We have to wait two weeks until they put it in process, and we lose almost a month. All right. I'm not going to ñ I mean, neither am I going to object to this, but I do think that with the amount of money or the funding and the amount of investment that we are making, and you and I have had these conversations, but I think it needs to be more of a conversation with the full council. The amount of investment that we're making with single bid or no bid contracts or unit cost-based contracts, now somehow or another I think that needs to be considered, and I'm saying at some point in time that we need to look into that. There's now ñ well, we're at north of 15 or $20 million. Of course, the state and other counties are much higher than that. But how we go about it, I'll allow you to give us some suggestions. I'd like to see if we could do that, suggest it. I'm not making a motion to that effect. Thank you, Mayor. All right. Council Member McCord. We can't ñ I can't not talk when we're talking about blacktop. And the bottom line is that, as I understand it, we had $3 million worth of paving that was approved earlier in the year, and the need came up in the last week. The governor decided to add a couple extra million to that, and hence we are here tonight. Let's not get lost on one thing here, as it relates to blacktop and other things like that. Because of certain procedures and because of certain ways that we have to do things, we miss out tremendously because you only have so long to pave, you only have so long to get certain things done, and you lose a season and things go up. In one instance, two years ago, waiting four months added 15 percent to about $3 million worth of paving money we got to the state. So that just means less roads and so forth. In this case, I understand, Council Member Beard, where you're coming from, and we don't want to set dangerous precedences with other things, but this group does need to be nimble in certain places where we've got an opportunity and we certainly need to seize them. So I'm very appreciative of the extra $3 million, and I'd love to see it down before we close the plants in November. Okay. A question on the floor is to suspend the rules, to add items. I'm sorry, to place it on the docket. Number 22, since it's not on the docket, he's brought that up for consideration. This just places it on the docket. And when that's approved, I'll give both 21 and 22 first reading. And then we can then I think there's a motion needed for 21 to be suspended. You've heard the motion. Those in favor, please vote aye electronically. Those opposed, vote no. Thank you very much. Motion carries. Now I think we're prepared to give 21 and 22 first reading. Sorry. I make a motion that we give second reading to number 21. I need to get a first reading. It's just number 22. They just need a moment to put it together, the wording, if you could just pause for just a few seconds. Thank you. We have it now. Ordinance number 21. An ordinance authorizing the Director of the Mayor, on behalf of the Urban County Government, to execute supplemental agreement number one with the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet, Department of Highways, for resurfacing of roads in Fayette County. And number two. An ordinance submitting certain of the budgets of the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government to reflect current requirements for municipal expenditures related to supplemental agreement number one with the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet, Department of Highways, and appropriating and reappropriating funds pursuant to Schedule Number 55. Now I make a motion to suspend the rules and ask for a second reading on number 21. Second. Any discussion? Those in favor of suspending the rules to give second reading to number 21, please indicate by voting aye electronically. Those opposed, vote no. And we're missing some folks. If you have not yet voted, please do so. Council Member Myers and Maloney, we're ready to vote. Thank you very much. The motion carries. All right. Number 21. An ordinance authorizing the Director of the Mayor, on behalf of the Urban County Government, to execute supplemental agreement number one with the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet, Department of Highways, for resurfacing of roads in Fayette County. Thank you very much. Is there a motion to approve? Move approval. Second. Second. Thank you very much. Any further discussion? Then those in favor, please vote aye electronically. Those opposed, vote nay electronically. And the clerk will call the roll. Mr. Lane? Yes. Mr. McCord? Yes. Mr. Maloney? Yes. Mr. Myers? Yes. Dr. Stevens? Aye. Mr. Sinnott? Aye. Mr. Beard? Aye. Mr. Blevins? Yes, ma'am. Mr. Blues? Yes. Ms. Crosby? Aye. Mr. DeKamp? Yes. Mr. Ellinger? Yes. Mr. Gray? Yes. Ms. James? All right. Thank you very much. The motion carries. And the ordinance is adopted. I believe that brings us down now to the mayor's report. The only other item that I'm aware of that's not on this list is in light of the Mr. Perry's presentation tonight earlier. Was that a special meeting of the council at which his appointment was approved? Is that correct? All right. It will be on for the next council meeting under communications from the mayor, since they did approve it at the special meeting of the council committee, the whole that was held at 645. Okay. That being the case, we'll move forward with communications from the mayor. Motion to approve? Move it. Second. Thank you. Any discussion? All those in favor, please vote aye electronically. Those opposed, vote nay electronically. Thank you. The motion carries. There are a number of communications for information purposes only. Are there any announcements from the council? Let's see. I do. I have three names up here. I'm not sure they're current any longer. Council Member Ellinger. Mayor, I just want to bring the attention of the council again. I'm just looking at the communication from the mayor, and there's 13 resignations, and six of them come from the community corrections. So that's almost half again. We might want to have the director come in here and let us know what's going on over there. Because last time we had this, we had quite a few resignations, and it seems to be continuing. All right. Mr. Green, if you'd ask Director Bishop to come and appear at a work session in the near future, I would appreciate it. Anything else? I'm sorry. I have an agreement of conformity from the Division of Police. Disciplinary action I need to read in the record. Please. Agreement of conformity. The allegation has been made that Officer Benjamin L. Blank, Lemp, I'm sorry, Benjamin L. Lemp has committed the offense of processing property in violation of Lexington Division of Police General Order 73-2H, Section 1.17, in that on the 3rd of April, 07, he committed the allegation of processing of property. The recommended disciplinary action is a letter of reprimand. Agreement of conformity has been signed by Commissioner Bennett, Chief Beatty, and by Officer Lemp. Is there a motion to approve? So moved. Any discussion? Those in favor, please vote aye electronically. Those opposed, vote nay. Thank you. The motion carries. Any further announcements? That brings us down to the public comment section of the meeting. I have two individuals who have registered to speak. Mr. Jorgensen, J. Paul Jorgensen, you would come ahead. And next on the list is Mr. Graves. You're nearby, so you'll all have three minutes. And then Mr. Dalton will put you on after Mr. Graves. Thank you, Mr. Jorgensen. City Council, thank you for the opportunity to be here. I sent some e-mails in the last few days. I don't know how many of them you actually read or not. Maybe some of them were too scathing. If so, I apologize to you. I was impassioned to get involved in this because of barely four reasons. Two of them I was very passionate about. One, keeping the Lord's Day. I was passionate about that. Two, the negative impact of liquor. I'm very passionate about that, and I won't change. Three and four, though, negative impacts on economy. And four, better ways to attract tourism and economy. Mr. Myers, you hit the nail on the head. I agree with you wholeheartedly. Caesar Augustus Octavian said, as Rome was falling apart and deteriorating, he tried issuing laws to mandate morals upon the people of his community. He was afraid that the culture had so changed and become so corrupt that they needed laws in order to keep people Roman. He tried issuing laws. It was a failure. He stated on his deathbed, laws are in vain when hearts are unchanged. You're right. We're trying to help change the hearts of men. We're trying to perform a grassroots effort to do that one by one. There are other churches involved doing that. I'm against what you did tonight, but it's done. Let me challenge you to lead the way. Let me challenge you as a city of Lexington to lead the way and do something that apparently nobody else has done. Let's make a study. I don't know how to do this. This is what you would figure out how to do. Maybe somebody at UK needs to get involved. Let's make a study on alcohol consumption and its effects. Did alcohol consumption go up or down, or did it stay the same? Did crime rate go up or down, or did it stay the same? Apparently, nobody else has done this because nobody could find the documentation on it. Let's lead the way for other communities. Why not pave the road? Why not show people the real data and the real statistics? Let's build something to draw tourists here. Let's build a giant convention center that will rival anything in Ohio, Kentucky, or Tennessee. I'm proud of this city. I like telling folks I'm from here. It's a clean city. It's a good city. I enjoy being here in Lexington. But let's build some great museums. Let's build a world-class museum that will draw people from several different states. Let's build something that will grow tourism. Right now, we have one industry mainly that's bringing tourists. That's the horses. It's doing a great job. Mr. Jorgensen, you have about 25 seconds. We voted to expand alcohol sales. Let us also then vote to expand social services. Let us also then vote to expand responsibility initiatives. Let us also vote to expand anti-addiction programs. Let us vote to expand government's ability to prevent the ills of alcohol. We all know alcohol brings with it some ills. Let us vote for a government to improve its ability to prevent those ills in our community. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Jorgensen. Mr. Graves, if you'll come forward and give us your home address, you'll have three minutes. My name is Joe Graves. My address is 1306 Fincastle Road. I know it's late, and I want to be very concise. Mr. Mayor and Vice Mayor and Council, I think we need to have some public hearings so taxpayers can receive some information, financial information, and discuss the $6 million Lyric Theater proposal. I think also I think that Lexingtonians are entitled to know how much their taxes are going to be increased because of the litigation that I know we're trying to settle as a community before this expenditure of $6 million is approved. I think if we have these public hearings about the Lyric Theater proposal, we may be able to come up with some far less costly yet even more appropriate way to commemorate the significant historic role that theater played. The thing that kind of caught my attention is that originally the proposal to improve the theater and to remodel it and to restore it was for a 13,000-square-foot building, which is the original size of the theater. Now we're talking about a $29,000, 29,000-square-foot development, which also includes a museum. And I think the rhetorical question we ought to think about is, does Lexington really need another downtown theater and downtown museum? What will be the annual costs of maintaining that theater, staffing that museum, maintaining the museum? I think these are questions that need to be addressed. I also, Mayor and Vice Mayor, respectfully suggest that you consider getting a fiscal impact statement prepared by an independent group about this proposal, because it's not only a high cost originally, but the cost annually years and years in the future to maintain these properties and to staff a top-notch museum and theater is excessive. And I'd like to say in closing that I'm very grateful to the citizens and the architects who have worked to develop the proposal. Now it is time to evaluate that proposal's financial feasibility and for us to have some public hearings to discuss it. Thank you, Mr. Graves. Your time has expired. Thank you. Good night. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Dalton, if you'd come forward, please. Yes, Robert Dalton, 520 Douglas Avenue. First, I want to say I appreciate all the comments that were said tonight during this very heated discussion. I especially appreciate the comments of Mr. Stennett and have to agree with him about the comments that were made on Tuesday, the threats, and the other things that had been said. And you guys do a really good job. You work hard. You spend a lot of time representing this community, and you don't deserve it, and it's rather un-Christian-like. And I want to say thank you at least for the time that you spend up here representing this community. Secondly, since we have already passed this resolution or this ordinance, I've also got to mirror the comments made by my council member, Ms. James, in hoping that in the coming weeks and months that this council will look towards the problems of this alcoholism. We need to be able to discuss and see what we can do to help these people. We should not govern morality, but we also have a responsibility to see what we can do to help everybody. And I agree, though, with Mr. Myers that the church should make more of a stand, step up more towards it, because I firmly believe that anything can be done through Jesus Christ, and the church needs to help out on this and work with the people in this issue. But thank you again for your time. Thank you, Mr. Dalton. Is there anyone else who wishes to speak? Yes, ma'am. Come forward and give us your name and address. You'll have three minutes. My name is Norma Reynolds. I live at 137 Rose Street, Apartment 414. I, too, was opposed to the alcohol sales, expanded sales. I am disappointed. I am disappointed because I believe that there are alternatives to economic development. We didn't need the expanded alcohol sales. Lexington is rich in historical resources. We have the Ashland Home, Henry Clay Estate. We have the Mary Todd Lincoln Home. We have the John Hunt Morgan Home. We have the beautiful Lexington Cemetery. Why couldn't we instead, instead of selling alcohol, just invest a little bit of money? Look at Williamsburg. We have the Lexington Convention Center right across from Christ Church Apartments. People could have parked their cars. We could have sold passes like Williamsburg does, run a trolley to Ashland, run a trolley through downtown to the Mary Todd Lincoln Home. There were alternatives to a better economic development. If we would have just been willing to invest a little bit more money, cared about people a little bit more. Thank you, Ms. Reynolds. Unless someone else wishes to participate in public comment, we'll entertain a motion to adjourn. So moved. Second. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries.