# Council Committee of the Whole Work Session - March 21, 2011 > Auto-transcribed civic record · March 21, 2011 - **Permalink**: https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/meeting/1918 - **Source video**: https://lfucg.granicus.com/player/clip/1918?view_id=14&redirect=true - **Date**: 2011-03-21 - **Last revised**: July 17, 2026 - **Length**: 20,691 words > ⚠️ **Auto-generated content.** Audio from the official Granicus video was auto-transcribed with OpenAI's open-source Whisper large-v3-turbo model, run locally by The Lexington Times. Structured facts were extracted with GPT-4o; the narrative summary was written by Anthropic Claude. Verbatim wording may contain errors. See [methodology](https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/about/methodology) or [report a correction](mailto:editor@lexingtonky.news). --- ## Meeting Overview The Urban County Council met on March 15, 2011, at 3:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers on the 2nd Floor of the Government Center, with Vice Mayor Gorton presiding. The council conducted eight votes during the session and heard seven public comments. The meeting included four first readings of ordinances and resolutions addressing traffic studies, transportation funding, emergency management staffing, and professional services for collective bargaining, as well as a second reading of an ordinance concerning community development police overtime support. Three informational presentations were also delivered, covering the Fit City Initiative by Leadership Lexington, an Environmental Quality Committee Report, and a Public Safety Committee Report. ## Attendance The following members were present at the meeting on March 21, 2011: * Vice Mayor Gorton * Council Member Crosby * Council Member Ellinger * Council Member Beard * Council Member Stinnett * Council Member Henson * Council Member Kaye * Council Member Martin * Council Member Ford * Council Member Blues * Council Member Lawless * Council Member McCord * Council Member Farmer * Council Member Myers Council Member Lane was absent from the meeting. No members arrived late. ## Votes and Decisions **Police Disciplinary Hearing Continuance** [timestamp: 00:04:19] Council Member Crosby moved to recommend a continuance of the police disciplinary hearing originally scheduled for 5:00 PM on March 15, 2011. Council Member Beard seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote with no objections. The hearing was rescheduled to April 26, 2011, at 5:00 PM, contingent on the mayor's availability and a quorum of 10 council members. **Police Disciplinary Hearing Date Confirmation** [timestamp: 00:29:34] Council Member Kaye moved to recommend the police disciplinary hearing be held on April 26, 2011, at 5:00 PM. Council Member Blues seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote. The mayor confirmed availability, and 11 council members confirmed their attendance. **Motion to Withdraw Hearing on Motion to Dismiss** [timestamp: 00:33:47] Council Member Ellinger moved to withdraw the motion to hear the motion to dismiss at 5:00 PM on March 15, 2011. Council Member Crosby seconded the motion. The motion was withdrawn after discussion on scheduling and procedural fairness. **Sheriff Witt's Report and Related Updates Referral** [timestamp: 01:18:04] Council Member Crosby moved to recommend referral of updates on Sheriff Witt's report, E911, and jail study to the Public Safety Committee. Council Member Myers seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote with no further discussion or objections. **Alternative Fuel Vehicles Referral** [timestamp: 01:19:41] Council Member Myers moved to refer the issue of alternative fuel vehicles to the General Government Committee. Council Member Lawless seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote with no objections raised. **Medical and Prescription Benefits Review** [timestamp: 01:21:15] Council Member Martin moved to refer the review of medical and prescription benefits and feasibility of a consultant to the General Government Committee. Council Member Crosby seconded the motion. The motion was withdrawn after Council Member Stinnett noted that a consultant had already been hired. **Recycling Incentives Referral** [timestamp: 01:31:08] Council Member Myers moved to refer recycling incentives to the Environmental Quality Committee. Council Member McCord seconded the motion. The motion was withdrawn after Council Member Crosby noted that the existing solid waste and recycling committee was already addressing the issue. **Environmental Quality Committee Special Meeting** [timestamp: 02:04:43] Vice Mayor Gorton moved to schedule a special Environmental Quality Committee meeting on April 19, 2011, at 11:00 AM. Council Member Henson seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote with no objections raised. ## Budget and Financial Actions The meeting addressed three financial actions: **Grant Funding for Traffic Study** Ordinance 0130-26 approved $500,000 in grant funding from the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet for a traffic study on Short and Second Streets. The grant will support traffic modeling and includes potential expansion of the study to 3rd and 4th Streets. **Salary Appropriation** Ordinance 0120-26 authorized the use of SLX funds to shift salaries totaling $150,000 for two transportation planning positions from the general fund to grant funding. This appropriation action was taken by the Urban County Government. **Collective Bargaining Services Contract** Resolution 0073-26 approved a $60,000 contract with Mr. Crane for professional services to negotiate collective bargaining agreements for city departments. ## Public Comment Council members addressed several topics during the public comment period, including a proposed Fit City Initiative, municipal fund transparency, pension funding concerns, and community announcements. **Fit City Initiative** Council Member McCord praised the Leadership Lexington group for their Fit City project [timestamp: 01:47:47], encouraging the council to serve as bridge builders connecting existing health and wellness programs across the city. McCord expressed a vision to make Lexington a national destination for fitness and wellness. Council Member Lawless voiced enthusiasm for the initiative [timestamp: 01:50:36], particularly highlighting the focus on affordable healthy food and small behavioral changes. Lawless shared personal motivation to begin walking daily as part of the effort. Council Member Crosby raised questions about project sustainability [timestamp: 01:54:39], asking whether the initiative included partnerships with the American Heart Association and whether the project would continue beyond the Leadership Lexington class. **Municipal Governance and Finance** Council Member Farmer questioned the policy of removing council member names from the Neighborhood Development Fund list [timestamp: 01:36:24], arguing that the practice undermines transparency and public accountability. Council Member Martin presented financial data regarding the police and fire pension fund [timestamp: 02:15:06], noting a projected shortfall that would require escalating annual contributions ranging from $15.5 million to $34 million over 20 years to avoid insolvency. **Community Announcements** Council Member Blues announced upcoming community events [timestamp: 02:17:32], including the All-You-Can-Eat Pancake Breakfast, the Great American Cleanup, and the Historic Western Suburb Neighborhood Association meeting. Council Member McCord highlighted ongoing construction on Clay's Mill Road and Harrodsburg Road [timestamp: 02:19:06], urging residents to plan accordingly due to expected traffic disruptions. ## Appointments Mr. Crane was appointed as Contractor for Collective Bargaining Agreements. ## Contested Items The March 21, 2011 meeting included three significant areas of disagreement among council members. **Use of SLX Funds for Personnel** Council members engaged in a heated discussion regarding the proposed use of federal road funds (SLX Funds) to cover personnel salaries. The core dispute centered on whether it was appropriate to divert funds designated for road infrastructure toward personnel costs. Some council members questioned both the principle of this funding shift and its transparency, expressing concerns about the propriety of the approach. Administration officials provided justification for the proposal, and the matter involved Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) approval requirements. However, the council remained divided on whether this represented an acceptable use of the designated federal funds. **Neighborhood Development Fund Transparency** A procedural dispute arose over the Neighborhood Development Fund (NDF) policy regarding the removal of council member names from the NDF list. Council members disagreed about whether this practice undermined public accountability and transparency. Those opposing the removal argued that keeping council member names on the list was essential for maintaining public oversight. Others defended the policy, citing compliance with NDF rules and requirements under the ethics act. The debate reflected broader concerns about balancing transparency with regulatory compliance. **Prioritization of Street Conversions** The council split on the sequencing of street conversion projects. The disagreement centered on whether to proceed with Short and Second Streets first, as part of an established phased approach, or to reconsider the priority to include Maine and Vine streets. Some council members advocated for maintaining the existing phased approach, while others argued for reevaluating priorities in light of new streetscape developments. The council was unable to reach consensus on the optimal order for proceeding with these infrastructure projects. ## First Reading of Ordinance: Traffic Study on Short and Second Streets [timestamp: 00:41:20] Council conducted the first reading of an ordinance concerning a traffic study on Short and Second Streets. The discussion centered on a $500,000 grant that would fund traffic modeling and analysis for these corridors, with potential expansion to include 3rd and 4th Streets. **Key Presentations and Debate** Chris King and Irene Gooding presented information on the traffic study proposal. Council members debated the prioritization of which streets should be included in the study. Some council members, including Council Member Lawless, Council Member McCord, and Council Member Blues, advocated for the inclusion of Maine and Vine Streets in the study scope, despite those streets falling under federal jurisdiction. **Concerns and Discussion Points** The council discussion reflected disagreement over street prioritization and the geographic scope of the traffic analysis. The question of whether streets under federal jurisdiction should be included in a locally-funded study was raised as a consideration during the debate. **Process and Transparency** Proponents of the study defended the process as transparent and phased, suggesting that the approach allowed for systematic analysis and potential future expansion based on initial findings. **Outcome** The ordinance advanced to first reading. No final vote or passage was recorded at this stage, as first reading typically represents the initial introduction of proposed legislation for discussion and review before subsequent readings and final action. ## First Reading of Ordinance: Use of SLX Funds for Transportation Personnel [timestamp: 00:57:26] Council reviewed a proposal to reallocate two transportation planning positions from general fund support to SLX grant funding. The shift was projected to generate $150,000 in savings. **Key Speakers and Presentation** Irene Gooding and Keith Horn presented the proposal to council members, including Council Member Stinnett and Council Member Crosby. **Issues Raised** Council members expressed concerns about the principle of using federal road funds designated for transportation purposes to support personnel costs. The discussion highlighted questions about the appropriate use of SLX grant funding and whether diverting these resources to staffing represented a sound fiscal practice. A significant point of emphasis was the need for Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) approval before proceeding with the reallocation. Council members stressed that this approval step was necessary to move forward with the proposal. **Outcome** The ordinance advanced to first reading. ## First Reading of Resolution: Division of Emergency Management Position [timestamp: 01:07:12] Council reviewed a resolution concerning a grant-funded position within the Division of Emergency Management. The position under consideration is temporary in nature and will be eliminated upon expiration of the grant funding that supports it. Council members Martin and Lawless participated in the discussion of this agenda item. During the review, Council confirmed that the position is not classified as civil service and is not expected to be permanent. This clarification was an important point of discussion, as it established the temporary status of the role. The resolution proceeded to first reading, with no indication of significant opposition or concerns raised during the discussion. The outcome of this agenda item was the first reading of the resolution, which is the initial step in the legislative process for consideration of the measure. ## First Reading of Resolution: Professional Services Contract for Collective Bargaining [timestamp: 01:08:47] Council reviewed a professional services contract valued at $60,000 with Mr. Crane to negotiate collective bargaining agreements for city departments. **Presentation and Discussion** Leslie presented the contract proposal to the council. Mr. Crane was present during the discussion to address questions about the engagement. **Concerns Raised** Council members raised several questions regarding Mr. Crane's qualifications and experience: - Questions were posed about Mr. Crane's professional qualifications for the role - Council inquired about his past clients and previous work experience - Questions were raised about the necessity and scope of the contract **Follow-Up Actions** Council Member Beard and Council Member Myers indicated that follow-up contact with Mr. Crane's previous employers would be needed to verify his background and experience before proceeding further. **Outcome** The resolution received its first reading. No final action was taken at this meeting, as additional vetting of the contractor's qualifications was deemed necessary. ## Second Reading of Ordinance: Community Development Police Overtime Support [timestamp: 01:15:53] Council conducted the second reading of an ordinance establishing a grant-funded program to support police overtime expenses through the Community Development Police Overtime Support initiative. **Program Overview** The ordinance addresses police overtime funding through a law enforcement service fee program. The program is funded by revenue generated from alcohol patrol tickets, creating a dedicated funding stream for overtime costs specific to law enforcement operations. **Key Characteristics** The program has a limited scope: - Funding is restricted to law enforcement overtime support - The program is not available to other public safety divisions - Revenue is derived from the law enforcement service fee program associated with alcohol patrol tickets **Discussion** Council Member Crosby participated in the review of this ordinance during the second reading. **Outcome** The ordinance advanced through its second reading as scheduled. ## Public Comment: Fit City Initiative by Leadership Lexington Leadership Lexington presented a comprehensive "Fit City" initiative designed to improve community health and wellness in Lexington. [timestamp: 01:41:15] **Presentation Overview** The initiative outlined five core goals to guide the project: - Commit - Connect - Provide - Educate - Enhance - Challenge **Proposed Strategies** Leadership Lexington presented strategies to advance these goals, including: - Improving healthy food access throughout the community - Conducting media outreach to raise awareness - Making infrastructure improvements to support fitness and wellness **Key Speakers and Feedback** Jill Barnett led the presentation on behalf of Leadership Lexington. Council members participated in the discussion, including Council Member McCord, Council Member Lawless, and Council Member Crosby. The council members offered feedback and expressed support for the initiative. **Outcome** This agenda item was informational in nature, with no formal action required. The presentation served to introduce the Fit City Initiative to the council and community, allowing for discussion and feedback on the proposed approach to making Lexington a healthier community. ## Public Comment: Environmental Quality Committee Report Council Member Blues presented a report from the Environmental Quality Committee meeting held on March 8, 2011. [timestamp: 02:02:26] **Topics Covered** The committee report addressed several environmental initiatives and improvements: - Outreach activities and community engagement efforts - Energy initiatives and related projects - Water quality improvements at McConnell Springs **Upcoming Meeting** The Environmental Quality Committee announced a special meeting scheduled for April 19, 2011, to discuss waste management issues. **Outcome** This was an informational presentation to the council. No formal action or debate was recorded on this agenda item. ## Public Comment: Public Safety Committee Report [timestamp: 02:05:49] The Council received a report from the Public Safety Committee regarding matters discussed at their March 8, 2011 meeting. Council Member Lawless presented information covering three main areas of focus. **Topics Covered:** - Paramedic training initiatives - EMS response times and performance - Infrastructure updates on Todd's Road and Oliver Lewis Way **Committee Action:** The Public Safety Committee approved the establishment of a task force to study staffing and response issues within the emergency services department. This task force was created to address concerns related to adequate staffing levels and response time performance. **Outcome:** This agenda item was informational in nature, with the Council receiving the committee's report and the approved task force initiative. --- ## Decisions - **Motion** — passed: Motion to recommend a continuance of the police disciplinary hearing scheduled for 5:00 PM on March 15, 2011 - **Motion** — passed: Motion to recommend the police disciplinary hearing be held on April 26, 2011, at 5:00 PM - **Motion** — withdrawn: Motion to withdraw the motion to hear the motion to dismiss at 5:00 PM on March 15, 2011 - **Motion** — passed: Motion to recommend referral of updates on Sheriff Witt’s report, E911, and jail study to the Public Safety Committee - **Motion** — passed: Motion to refer the issue of alternative fuel vehicles to the General Government Committee - **Motion** — withdrawn: Motion to refer the review of medical and prescription benefits and feasibility of a consultant to the General Government Committee - **Motion** — withdrawn: Motion to refer recycling incentives to the Environmental Quality Committee - **Motion** — passed: Motion to schedule a special Environmental Quality Committee meeting on April 19, 2011, at 11:00 AM --- ## Full transcript The Thank you. And today is March 15, 2011, and so I will go ahead and convene this Committee of the whole work session. And council members, if you will allow, we need to take care of an item of business before we start our normal agenda. I understand there is to be a motion or a request for a motion from Mr. Jacobs. Yes, thank you. Can you introduce yourself and say who you are, please. I'm William Jacobs. I'm an attorney for Sergeant Rayford, who sits at my right. A charge has been brought against Sergeant Rayford. And my purpose is to tell you that maybe you all have seen these. I filed a formal response and a motion to dismiss the charge. Somebody told me they'd gotten a copy of my charges. I've not. I've got a pile of them over here, the dismissal motion. But my motion at this point, because I've been told by Mr. Horn that you're not going to hear the motion on the dismissal that I've made. You're not going to hear that at this point. But my motion is for a continuance. I feel like I'm kind of high in part two here because if they grant my motion, I don't need a continuance. If you don't grant my motion for a dismissal, I'm going to need one. But I haven't had time to prepare to give him a fair representation on that. So my motion is really basically to continue if my motion to dismiss is not granted. And I believe the reason that we can't hear a motion to dismiss is that those kinds of motions have to have the mayor in the meeting. That is my understanding. So you are requesting that the council entertain a motion to grant a continuance of the police disciplinary hearing. Yes. Is that correct? Now, I understand from Mr. Horn that we could hear my motion at 5. Is that proper? The motion here would be to recommend that the council grant a motion to grant a continuance, and then at 5 o'clock we could take care of that motion. And the motion for dismissal as well as my motion for continuance if I need one. Am I making sense? The mayor will be here at 5 o'clock for the 5 o'clock. Okay. Yes. So, Council Members, Mr. Jacobs has requested a motion that, well, as you know, it would be to recommend a motion to grant a continuance, which is essentially a postponement of this hearing, this police disciplinary hearing that's scheduled today at 5 o'clock. Do I hear any motions? Okay. And please log in if you have questions. And Mr. Enloe, David Enloe is here. He is counsel for the council. So he'll shake his head or wave his hands if we're out of bounds, right? So Council Member Crosby. Mr. Enloe, I'm not sure if I heard correctly that he said that he had two things to come before us at 5 o'clock, but we're only taking action on a continuance, correct, right now? I mean, they're not – It's my understanding that Mr. Jacobs is asking to have the hearing postponed because he needs a continuance. He also is asking that at 5 o'clock when he takes up the motion for dismissal, that he won't need a continuance if the case is dismissed. But right now, I believe the only thing that the council can make a ruling on is whether or not the case should be continued or not, since you can't make a ruling on the dismissal motion. Are there other questions or motions? Council Member Ellinger. Thank you. Mr. Inlow, could we at this point go ahead and grant the continuance, or do we have to come back at 5 and do that? I think the council can grant that motion to continue. I don't think it can make a ruling on the dismissal motion, but I think right now you can make a ruling on the motion to continue. And then we would not have to come back at 5 then? I think if you say that the matter is going to be continued, then there needs to be some discussion about a new date for the hearing. And I think the attorneys for the. Yes, at this point we need to have government comment from the government attorneys. Keith Horn. First, as to the question about convening at 5 to consider either officially the continuance or the motion to dismiss, I think you can do that either at 5 or you can wait and do it Thursday night. What you can decide at your work session is, yes, you're going to agree to continue it, or no, you're not going to agree to continue it. If you say no, then when the hearing starts at 5, there will be a motion to dismiss, to which we have filed a response that you will consider before the hearing actually starts. In response to the continuance, just let me say briefly, I told Mr. Jacobs and Mr. Enloe that Glenda and I were not going to agree to the continuance, primarily because the Division of Police would like to get this done. It's better for everybody involved to go ahead and get it behind everybody. Timeframe-wise, all I can tell you, I'm not familiar with Mr. Jacobs' schedule or when he may have actually received everything from his client. But Mr. Rayford was served with the charges on February 26th, so they've had the actual charges for at least two full weeks. He was given a copy of the entire internal affairs investigation about mid-February, so they've had those theoretically for at least three, four weeks. And so I think they should be ready to go. But as I said, I don't know when Mr. Jacobs actually received things, when he was retained, or what his schedule has been like. Okay. Thank you very much. Council Member Beard. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Sure. Keith, if we move and approve a continuance, doesn't that in and of itself indicate that we aren't going to entertain a dismissal? No. I mean, what are we continuing to? If you have a cut, in my opinion, and Mr. Enloe can certainly chime in on this, if you desire to, you can go ahead and take up the motion to dismiss, or you can wait until the next hearing date that you set for the hearing and take it up then. Now, obviously, I believe that you're not going to grant that motion to dismiss, but that goes to arguments about the motion. So you have the option of taking it up at 5 today if you want to. You could do it at your meeting on Thursday if you wanted to, or you simply let it wait until the next hearing date if you grant a continuance and take it up at the beginning of the hearing on that date. Council Member Stennett. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I guess I have a question for Mr. Jacobson. I was going to ask the same questions Mr. Horn asked. When did you get this case and why the need for a continuance at this point? Well, I don't have exactly the day I got it, but I have not had enough time to prepare. This is just a matter of fairness. He needs to have good representation on this. It has to do with his career, of course, and I need to prepare. They've got five, six, seven witnesses. I've got, I'm not going to count them here, but I've got over ten, and I need to prepare. The internal affairs report is pretty thick. They've got statements and statements and statements in there. I need to organize all that. In fact, when I'm asking questions, I'm not reaching all trying to find pieces of paper to try to find out where something is. I need to organize it and prepare so he has a fair hearing. The exact day I got it, I cannot tell you. I didn't get it the day he got it. I know that. I didn't get it. And given the comments made by Mr. Horn about the wishes of the police department to move forward and get this case put to bed, how much longer would you need to prepare? I would like two weeks because there are other things kind of come in, too, in the office. If I give myself just a week, all of a sudden something jumps up and I'm in a trap again. I did not get the impression from Mr. Horne he was going to oppose my motion for continuous. He just said he wasn't going to agree to it. All of a sudden, I'm a little bit surprised he's opposing it. He's got to represent the government like he sees it, and I'm not fussing at him about that, but I'm a little bit surprised that he told me he wasn't going to oppose it. Maybe if he did, I forgot it. Did you tell me that? No. I guess in my mind, that was the same thing, not agreeing to and opposing. I only want to mention one other thing to the council. After this week, you don't have another work session scheduled, I think, until April the 12th because you've got a, I guess it's a spring break. That's right, and that's what I was getting to. That's what I was giving me a final comment. If we don't hear it now, it'll be a month at a minimum. It'll be April 12th at the earliest. I don't oppose having a month, but I thought everybody was in a hurry. I'm listening to your counterparts here, and they probably would, given what they've said in their opening remarks. So I'm just trying to weigh all the information so my colleagues can also understand that probably the next opportunity will be April 12th to be able to hear the case at the earliest. Okay. May I add this? It's kind of, I don't want to say it's unfair, but it's just the coincidence of when the scheduling of the council is, in my view, should not affect how much time I get to prepare the case for him. any other time of year we could have it in two weeks. But all of a sudden now we can't. The police department is going to be there. It isn't going anywhere. It's not going to be heard by when we have this hearing. If I have to have it, if it's going to be a month, I request that. If it can be in two weeks, I request that. Fair enough. I appreciate your remarks. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Council Member Henson. Yes. I would say in all fairness to Mr. Rafer that he should be allowed to have more time for his counsel to prepare his case, so I would be in favor of the continuance. Does anyone else wish to speak or make a motion? There is nothing, there's no motion on the floor, so. Did you want to speak, Mr. Myers? Thank you, Vice Mayor. Could I ask if the gentleman's on paid leave or on unpaid leave? He's still working. He's still working? Okay. Thank you. Council Member Kaye. Thank you. Can you say a little bit more, Keith, about the downside of waiting? What is the negative impact from the police perspective? Probably just the desire. It's always best to get these things resolved and behind everybody so that they can move on from there. That's probably the biggest downside of it. Thank you. Thank you. Does anyone else wish to speak? If you do, please log in or if someone has a motion. Council Member Crosby. I guess just to clarify, we heard you say that four weeks really isn't going to give them adequate time to prepare, but really the only downside to the police is the fact that they can move on and clear up the matter. And he's currently still employed, so it's not affecting. I make a motion that we go ahead and grant. We didn't look at a date, I guess. If I might add something. If you're going to continue it, if you'll also tell us whether you're going to try to find a date this afternoon at 5 briefly, or if you're going to do it Thursday night, that will help us both. Can we find the date now? You'll need to report out as you typically would and arrange a special meeting on that date. So are you going to include the date in your motion? The only problem is, as Mr. Horn knows, that it's very difficult. We scheduled this several weeks ago, and it's difficult to get the body available on the same night where there's enough people for the hearing. So on our first day back, I will be at meeting, but I will not be available that evening for a police disciplinary hearing. So the first day would be the 12th. And then we have meeting on the 14th, which we wouldn't have time. So I don't know. Can we separate out the motions and you make the motion to recommend and we'll deal with that and then we'll find a date? How about that? Well, I was going to say if everybody's agreeable to the 12th, I can make the motion for the 12th, even though. Okay. Okay. I make a motion that we continue this case. So your motion is to recommend to the full council that we grant a continuance of this disciplinary hearing, which is basically a postponement. Do I hear a second? Council Member Beard seconded. Now, is there discussion about the motion? If not, all those in favor, please say aye. Anyone opposed? Okay. Now, can we look right now for a date? And we need to have, Mr. Horn, how many council members need to be here? Eight? A regular quorum or? A regular quorum of a regular meeting, which I think is ten. Ten. Okay. So it will be a special meeting of the council. Okay. Okay. So I am open to suggestions. Council Member Stinnett. I would go ahead, since the 12th is the mayor's budget address, go ahead and recommend April 12th at 5 p.m. So there's a motion April 12th at 5 p.m. I'd like to see a show of hands of how many council members can be here. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8. I'm number 9. So let's look for another date. Well, we have absent. We have Councilman Lane's not here. He can be the 10th. I wouldn't want to commit for him. I don't know. I mean, we all would probably be here for the budget address. I would hope we would be. Yeah. Is there another date when we can get more people? Get 10 or 12 of us? How long do we expect this? Is it two hours, three hours? I know it's hard to predict. I would say three hours. I don't know that Mr. Jacobs is going to agree with that, but that would be my expectation. Okay. Okay. I'll throw out the 19th, the following Tuesday. At 5 o'clock? Yes, ma'am. How many people could come at 5 o'clock on the 19th? Three, six, seven, eight. So let's take a show of hands again. How many could be here on the 19th at 5 o'clock? One, two, three. Nine. Okay, no, I can't be here. Sorry. Put your hands up one more time. Hi. Hi. Ten. I will say right now I can't be here, and I'm presuming some others who didn't say they could won't be here. So we'll have 10. Okay. So there is a motion to recommend 5 o'clock on April the 19th for the police disciplinary hearing. Any more comments? 5 o'clock the 19th. Yes, Chris. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I have a question just in regards to the scheduling. This will be my first time on council. Was the mayor scheduled to preside over the hearing that was scheduled at 5 o'clock? Yes. And thus would he also require to be present at our new hearing? He will preside, but he's not a voting member, correct? Oh, Ms. Massadi is going to go check and see if the mayor is available. That would be a good idea. Yes, ma'am. And I also have a further question on that note, Vice Mayor. Well, Chuck, Mr. Ellinger could chair it if the mayor can't. Yes. Yes. Council members who chair can vote. Vice Mayor, I have a question just in regards to today. While we're doing this exercise, are we still going to be required to convene the meeting at 5 o'clock today to finalize? and report out? Can you answer that again, please? I don't think you have to. You could finalize it Thursday night because everybody here understands that the council has decided that that's going to be continued. So as long as it gets finalized Thursday night, you would be okay. The only reason I mention that, Vice Mayor, is that if we were going to come back at 5 o'clock, regardless anyway, it may offer us more time in the interim. I mean, we're kind of being put on the spot, if you will, in regards to trying to coordinate our scheduling. So either way, I'll go along with what Council wants to do. Okay. Okay, more discussion about the motion. Council Member Crosby. I was curious what committees. I know that I've got down a 1 o'clock meeting on that day. Is there a 3 o'clock meeting? Which committee is that? Social services. There's an environmental quality meeting at 11. There's an economic development meeting at 1. And a social services meeting at 3. So I guess we couldn't meet earlier then. Thank you. Mr. Horne said he wouldn't object to us finding a Monday at 3 o'clock if we wanted to. Are there other comments about the motion? Okay. If not, the motion is to recommend April 19th at 5 p.m. to hold the police disciplinary I'm hearing it will be a special council meeting, and there are 10 people here who have agreed that they can be here. So, okay, let's go ahead and take our vote. All those in favor, please say aye. Anyone opposed? That motion passes. So if we're still here at 5 o'clock for the work session, we then could convene the special hearing and dispense with these motions, correct? I presume the mayor would kind of follow that. Yeah. Do you all have to stay if that's what happens? You do. Ms. Masati has information about April 19th. Yes, and that will not work for the mayor. It does not work for the mayor. He has available 426 or 5-3. So, Council, I would say that's up to us. We can either, you know, change it to April 26th or May the, what was that? 3rd. 3rd. or Council Member Ellinger can chair the hearing on the 19th. So Council Member Stenet has a comment. Did we check any Mondays? No, we didn't, but I'll be glad. I mean, we can do it the day before the 3 o'clock on the 18th, even. I wouldn't be opposed to that. There is design excellence task forces at 3 o'clock on the 18th. Or the 11th of April. What's your pleasure? Council Member Ford, you're on the electronic. Vice Mayor, I think in consideration of the scheduling conflicts, I think it's very important that we choose a date where everybody can plan to be here. And the motion that just passed and was supported, we only tentatively have 10 committed folks. So if two folks had an emergency, we wouldn't end up not having a quorum. And I'm not certain how fair that would be to Sergeant Rayford. So I would encourage us if we could move on with the work session and somehow get back to convene maybe at 5 o'clock just in order to review everybody's schedule to pick an appropriate. Time, the mayor will be here at that time. Let me ask, Mr. Horne, since we didn't officially pass this, we can have another motion to recommend a different date and time if someone wants to propose that. But it's only to recommend. It's not an official council vote. Remember, this is under the new rules. Vice mayor, so we have a couple of additional dates. if this would help. Okay. 418 or 425. At any time? 5 p.m. For April 18th or April 25th? So you have April 18th, April 25th, April 26th, or May 3rd. Okay. Well, in response to Council Member Ford's recommendation. Do we want to consider any of those or shall we move on? April 18th, correct. April 25th. April 26th. May 3rd. Do I hear any motions? Council Member Blue, oh, excuse me, Council Member Kaye is first. Yes, I would move that we also recommend to the council that we meet on Monday, April 18th. I would say earlier in the afternoon. I don't know what the pleasure of the council is. At 1. Do we have a meeting that's 3 o'clock? Okay. Okay. Councilman Blues, before I... Councilmember Blues. If that's the date that works for most members of the council, I'd be happy to work another date for the Design Excellence Task Force, which is now scheduled to meet at 3 o'clock on the 18th. Vice Mayor, we can do the 18th at 3 p.m. Okay, that's excellent of you to offer that. I'll make that as the motion then. Monday, April 18th at 3 o'clock. This Council Member K. has moved to recommend that the police disciplinary hearing be moved to 3 o'clock on April the 18th. And did I hear a second? Council Member Blues seconded. and Council Member Blues is willing to move the Design Excellence Task Force. And so how many folks could attend on that day? We know the mayor can attend. Raise your hands, please. We have one maybe. We have eight definite and one maybe. So that doesn't appear to work. Okay. And have we tried the 26th? The 25th? I want to make a motion. See how that flies. We'll have Council Member Kale see how this motion flies. We are agreeable on the 25th and 26th. Okay. Well, before we have a motion, let's just see. How many people could meet on the 25th at 3 o'clock for this? There are five of us. That won't work. How many people could meet the 26th at 5 p.m.? Please. Okay, everybody. One, two, three, and 11. Bingo. Okay. Do I hear a motion to change, to recommend that we change the police disciplinary hearing to 5 o'clock on April 26th? So move. Council Member K, move. Blue's seconded. Any further discussion? Yes, Council Member Martin. Vice Mayor, given the difficulty we're having with scheduling, we might consider just holding May 3rd as well, because of the mayor's schedule as a backup date, if that's possible. Is that needed at all? I would defer to the mayor's staff. That will work. It will work. Okay, so 5 o'clock on the 26th will work for the mayor, and we have 11 council members who are here who have said that it works for them. So if there's no further discussion, can we, where's my legal eagles? Can we just move to change, recommend to change the date, and that will dismiss the first motion we made for the first date? Okay. All right. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? So the police disciplinary hearing will be at 5 o'clock. This will be reported out on Thursday night or today at 5 o'clock if we're still sitting in these seats. April the 26th. Thank you very much. Does that suit you, Mr. Enloe? I should have asked you. No, that's fine with me. Do you have a conflict? No, I'm fine. I want to make sure that everybody understands that the motion to dismiss will be heard at the beginning of the hearing on the 26th of April and not today at 5. Is that? Thank you. Yes, but I was thinking if we're still here at 5 o'clock, we could, Mr. Horn, should we, if we're still here in work session at 5 o'clock, should we go ahead and take care of these motions or shall we just roll them to Thursday night, which would be easier to report them out? I'm not sure it makes that much difference, although if you're here at 5 and want to rule on the motion to dismiss, it would at least either, one, let Mr. Jacobs know that you're not granting it, or two, let me know that you are granting it. Okay, well, let's see how our meeting goes. How about that? Okay, did we take care of everything we need to take care of from? Yes, yes, thank you. Point of view. All right, thank you very much. Yes, Council Member Crosby. I'm sorry, if we decide to do it at 5, then wouldn't they want to be here if we take it up? So shouldn't we decide that? I mean, personally I think it's kind of rude that we don't know, that we can't give them any direction at 3.30 and make them sit through an hour and a half of our meeting where we don't know. So I either say we are going to hear it at 5 and give them the courtesy of letting them know that now or saying we are not going to take it up at 5. I know we have a long meeting. A motion? I just. So does everyone here agree that they will stay for the 5 o'clock meeting? Yeah. Okay. So we can take it up at 5 o'clock. Thank you, Council Member Crosby. Will the mayor be here? Okay. Does that answer all the questions? House member Ellinger has a question. I thought that was the whole point of this, is we don't have to stay at 5 o'clock, because both councils understand that the meeting is going to be on the date that we've determined, and we're going to take this up on Thursday. So I don't think we have to do this at 5 o'clock. Right. Do you have a motion? Do I need to make a motion for that particular thing? Well. I make a motion that we're not going to take up the motion dismissed at 5 o'clock today. And do I hear a second? Second. And does that motion then, that motion includes canceling the meeting, I presume, which was advertised. Well, that's easy enough. Okay. So there's a motion on the floor. Council Member Ford. I guess my question is for the attorney, if he would help us here. And I guess what we're considering is whether or not we want to address the issue of the motion to dismiss, because if we don't do so today, it invariably could be presented to us at our rescheduled date on April 26th. So we have the opportunity to address that issue, and that would then provide counsel with the instruction to go ahead and prepare for that hearing. Is that correct? I think that's right. You could hear it today at 5 or continue it until the beginning of the hearing on the 26th. I believe if you hear it today, it will give both sides assurance one way or another that you're going to go forward or not. Vice Mayor, you could hear the motion to dismiss at your council meeting on Thursday if you didn't want to do it today at 5. You could do it Thursday at the beginning of the meeting. Right. You could review the motion and the government's response and then you could hear our arguments on Thursday and rule then. So does that take place, the arguments would take place at the beginning of the council meeting? It would be our preference to do it at the beginning of the meeting. So could I amend it then and say not to hear the motion dismissed today, but to do it on Thursday at the beginning of the council meeting? Yes. So moved. And so how long do your arguments take? How long do you expect that to be, an hour, hour and a half? half hour just for people's knowledge or you don't know. I don't think it would take that long. Okay. And whether or not you all would have any questions. So Council Member Ellinger has substituted a motion to say that we will take up the question of Motion to dismiss Thursday night. Council Member Crosby. I'm sorry. I just think this is really silly that we have our officer here with council. Now, we had scheduled the time regardless to do this before we knew that they were going to ask us to continue it. And I don't see why we're going to push it. Thursday night, we're still going to have the same issue. We have a council meeting where we're taking official action and voting and a presentation, and we're scheduled to be here at 5 today. I just think this is really silly, and silly for the fact that he's going to have to. His attorney, I'm assuming, is being paid to be here today, and I think that just incurs a lot of additional kind of silly costs because we just don't want to stay here, or I shouldn't say that, that we're scheduled to be here, And either way, we're going to be here a long time, whether it's today or whether it's Thursday. Council Member Martin. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I, too, echo Council Member Crosby's comments. I was a little surprised to see everything set up, and particularly when we have a meeting scheduled today at 5. I think that to have something heard before a council meeting, We don't know how long we're going to need to debate and to discuss this in closed session in order to resolve a motion to dismiss, which could be a very complicated issue. So I am not going to favor hearing that before the Irving County Council. We're likely to have a lot of folks here who themselves have jobs and who have taken time out of their day to come down and hear us. So if that's to be heard, I would prefer, and I will vote for it to be heard either today or at the time we scheduled in late April. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Council Member Kay. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I'll agree with both previous speakers. I think we're scheduled to have a hearing this afternoon at 5. Attorneys are present. They were supposed to be prepared to present their cases pro and con. I think we ought to hear it this afternoon. Thank you. Council Member Ellinger. I think at this rate it will be 5 o'clock before we get this decided. So I'll just go ahead and withdraw my motion because I say 5 will be here very shortly. Thank you. And you can ask to second. Second withdraw. You've seconded. Okay. The motion's been withdrawn. And so the process goes on. So thank you very much. And so we will just go ahead and be meeting at 5 o'clock, and the mayor will be here, I presume, to handle this. Yes, okay. Thank you. Now, does this take care of everything? May I learn what's going to happen at 5 o'clock? Well, it's my understanding that you were going to make a motion to dismiss. Is that correct? Is that everybody's understanding? That had gone away, and I guess it's back now, right? It's back, yes. This is how it goes with counsel sometimes. Thank you for your patience. Okay. If there's nothing else on that item, thank you very much. Thank you. And we'll see you at 5 o'clock. And we'll go ahead and go back to our agenda for the Committee of the Whole Work session. And first on our agenda is public comment regarding issues on the agenda. Is there anyone who wishes to speak? If not, on pages 1 through 4, we have the summary of the March 1st Committee of the Whole Work Session. Is there? Thank you. We've had a motion to approve, second by Council Member Myers. Who made the motion? Council Member Martin made the motion. Any questions? All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? All right. Let's go ahead and work through our docket. On pages 5 through 14, we have first readings of ordinances, and I would ask council members to log in or to sign in. If you have things you want to remove from the docket, get information, or refer to a council committee. Council Member Crosby. I had a couple questions on number 13. Okay. Is anyone here to, this is a grant. Chris King and Irene Gooding. Thank you. What's your question? My question is, is this looking at one-way versus two-way streets? Is that what this study is for? Yes. Okay, it wasn't real clear in the letter. And then what would be, it just says the downtown area. What are the, which streets does this encompass, or what is it considered? Which cross streets? Does it go across several districts? Can you just expand on what area? Thank you. The study that's envisioned as a part of the use of this grant fund would look at a number of things. It would primarily follow up on council directive of last year to proceed with primarily second and short street. And in continuing that effort, in the public meetings that we were held, there were a couple of problem areas identified that we wanted to see if we could get some further study. And additionally, when we met with the transportation cabinet, They said before they would agree to where it crosses their streets, such as Broadway, Newtown Pike. They wanted some extensive traffic modeling that we need to hire a consultant to do. And that would be our estimate of $140,000 out of this grant, total grant. So is there a match required with the grant? Okay. Thank you. Council Member Lawless. Does this, Mr. King? I was looking at that also. Does that include looking at Maine and Vine also? No. So only short? Short second, and we are also hoping to have the consultant, there is enough money out of that budget to look at the possibility of 3rd and 4th Street as well and what it might take to be able to do that. And is there any reason that Main and Vine wouldn't be included in that? in that. To include Maine and Vine, again, the Council did not direct that the government proceed with those. You took a motion for a phased approach. And again, to do that, to look at Maine and Vine or any of the other one-way pairs, in my estimation, just standing here would take a lot more money than what has been talked about here. Okay. I'll reserve my questions for later, but I do know that Short and Second had lots of problem areas for a variety of reasons, Part of that being narrow streets and residential parking where Main and Vine are very wide streets with lots of pedestrian travel and foot travel. So I don't know if there's any way as a council we can see about looking at that instead of relooking at short and second. I've seen that little camera go down. It always makes me see sick. So I'd like to talk more about that at some point soon before we go any further. Would that be a possibility? I certainly believe it could for the council to consider that. Okay, thank you. I would remind you that Maine and Vine are state and federal routes, so that raises a whole other level of issues discussing Maine and Vine. But when we were talking about short and second and third, at that time we didn't have support, administrative support for Main and Vine or planning support. and I think things have changed and with the new streetscape and the parking and the bike lanes that this might be a time to take that up again. So I would like some discussion on that at some point. I'm not trying to table this, but I don't think we're ready to – I think there needs to be more exploration. Is there a time necessity on spending this money? Does anybody know? I think Irene could speak. The funds that we are trying to tap in here are an old earmark that has been around for some time. Right. I think the issue is we want to get this under contract because right now Congress is trying to rescind all unnailed down funds. So there is a time issue. We feel that we need to name exactly what streets we're going to reexamine or examine. Well, you may be able to change that later, but it's important that we go ahead and make the application for funds, because even though it's an earmark, we still have to send the scope of work in, and we have to get a contract from Kentucky Transportation Cabinet. And it's really important we do that as soon as we can. Okay. Thank you very much. Chris, can you just clarify for me? This piece is what the council asked for a year or so ago, correct? Right. You asked that it be taken up in a phased approach. Okay. And former Commissioner Webb tasked planning with arranging the public meetings. We had a series of public meetings with businesses, institutions, and residences where we took and discussed and broke it down and identified problem areas. We came back to a touchstone group that included some council members involved and reported back to that. And we also met with the Transportation Cabinet and got theirs. So when all that was said and done, there was a need to have a study, and there were no local funds budgeted for it. So we discovered this earmark and thought that the way to proceed would be to try to use some of this money to make that happen. Okay. That's what has led us here over a course of time. Now, there are several council members on the board here. Are you wanting to speak to this number? Yes. Okay. So, Council Member Stenet, you're on another one. So, Council Member Beard, you're on this one. Thank you, Vice Mayor. In a situation like this, obviously we wouldn't know. I don't know how Council Member Lawless knew what the activity was, but it would be nice to have that embedded in this so that we all could know that we're talking about Short and Second Street. This has been a very contentious issue for several years, and it smacks a little bit of trying to slide something past us. Well? I respectfully disagree with Council Member Beard is all I can say. I didn't say you did. It's just a matter of informing us when we have something that's contentious to inform us of what we're talking about. Because, you know, it's government money. We can spend it great, great, great and not know what we're spending it for. and I just think when we have an issue like that, to go ahead and just put a little addendum to that item and information purposes, and that's all. Council Member Blues, are you speaking to this item? Thank you, Vice Mayor. This has a history longer than some council members have been on the council. When we first started this discussion, when the whole Council endorsed the idea of pairing streets for two-way conversions, the whole Council agreed with the step approach, and the first step being short and second, and possibly a section of third. As you recapitulated a moment ago, Chris, there were meetings of council members and transportation planners, Division of Transportation Engineering, District 7. There have been public meetings. There's been a good deal of open discussion. I would very much oppose any attempt to change the sequence around, unless there's some rational reason for not following the process that we've been working on. And also, I certainly don't agree that this has not been transparent. Admittedly, there have been time gaps between one stage in this process and another, but when we realized that there were problems with intersections, with parking, with various other issues, that we would need a serious study. In order to begin to move this forward, we began to search for the funding. So it seems to me that this process is open, and that it makes sense, and that we need to put it on the docket and move forward with it. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Now, Council Member Ford, did you want to speak to this item? Okay. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I don't have the extensive history in understanding the planning behind the process, but I do take Councilman Blues at his word that Council has long deliberated upon the needs and how to prioritize which steps we take to make these transportation improvements. I will speak to the fact, though, however, that I think it's an opportunity for us to applaud the administration and particularly the divisions that touch this each and every day, such as planning and community development, to be able to bring back these resources, $500,000 to address a need that we definitely have. And I think we ought not balk at that opportunity in these very tight budget times. To that end, also, I would also think that these funds allow us to be responsive, if you will, because I am very excited about the opportunity for the funds to be used to also explore options on 4th and 3rd Streets. They're very important as we work over at the Eastern State Hospital campus. Buildings are coming down, making way for Bluegrass Community and Technical College. So I'm going to support this ordinance, and I want to encourage fellow council members to do so as well. Thank you, Chris. Okay. Councilmember McCord hasn't weighed in, and I think he wants to speak to this item. Just as the council member that brought forward the process of how we would do two-way streets, I do think it has been more than transparent. It's about two years old. There were pairings that were prioritized for a reason. The reason why we went with this pairing went first was because of our control of these streets, second and short. Maine and Vine were the last to go for a number of reasons, but primarily because the Federal Transportation Department and the State Transportation Department both had said they're the last to go. And so it's not a matter of there are a number of factors at work here besides just picking two out of the air and so forth. But one of the things that we found, and the reason why we're here with this is, is that as we did second and short and as we looked through that, as Council Member Lawless said through the camera that drove that, that there were certain intersections, there were certain places that posed unique problems that we weren't aware of, and that while they were the most, while this was the easiest of the pairings, there were some difficulties that we needed to work through. So, one, I applaud you to find some resource to get through this. And two, if you're ever going to get through this process and start moving, you've got to move. And that's what we're doing here. Rather than jumping around and saying this is more important than that and why don't we look at this and why don't we look at that, I applaud the effort of let's get on this and get this one done and find what works so that we can move to the next pair. So I appreciate you, Chris, bringing this forward. Thank you. Okay. Council Member Lawless, did you want to finish your questions? Yes, thank you. I'm all for moving forward on it. And the reason somebody made some statement that somehow I had some kind of inside information, I was on the committee that looked at that and knew what was going on, and I just asked, are Maine and Vine included? And he said no, so that's how I knew it's not in the paper. I just asked the question a few minutes ago. And the reason I brought up Maine and Vine is, and I understand the state and federal issues, is that with the new streetscape, there was a change on which side of the street the parking was on, the bike lanes, et cetera, which opened up a whole new set of issues. and it just seemed like that's why I ask, is Maine and Vine included in this study? So I didn't have any kind of CIA document. I just was asking and was told. So to clarify that, I'm very excited about the money to move forward, and I agree with you, Council Member McCord, the only way we can move is to move, and so let's move. Council Member Stennett. Can we switch issues now? Yes. Thank you, Mr. King. You may want to stay here. Don't leave the room. You may want to stay on this one. Number 12, Vice Mayor, just had questions on can Council get a list of the nine positions? This is funny because we're using SLX dollars as the fund personnel as well as professional development office supplies of our transportation folks. Can you give me an idea of who they are? Sure. It's basically our transportation section in the Division of Planning. So every position? Not every position is currently funded under that. And we have some, as you know, the federal money comes down in different pots. Some come out of the PL. Some come out of others. We are trying, given our budget crunch, to get two members of that group, which are currently not funded with transportation, to use SLX funding for that. Of course, that will take approval of the MPO Policy Committee, but we are moving those gears as well. But I would be glad to provide you a list of all our staff in the transportation and which of those pots of money funds their salaries for the most part. So this is not adding new people to what we've done in the past, but you would like to, obviously. It adds no new staff. what it does is shift funding of some of our folks. Of course, this is the whole transportation package. The difference between this year and last year is that this year we are trying to get a couple more of our positions that are currently funded under the general fund be funded with at least part of their salaries through the transportation grants. Well, and that's my concern is we're matching these grants with SLX dollars, correct? We are matching. Well, actually, we are proposing that some of it be SLX. SLX, the grant match, Irene could help me with that, whether that comes from general fund or other sources. It's kind of a mixture of things. But I'm still not following you. The SLX piece, how much of that is coming from SLX dollars? And I think, you know, for some of the new council members and the viewing public, our SLX dollars are federal road money funds. And I'm a little concerned about, I understand we need personnel, But any time someone wants to transfer general fund expenses to grant, either grant-funded or using federal dollars, I think we need to really take a closer look at that. Are we looking for the positions now? Is that what we're doing? We do have some that are funded under SLX, but I don't know if we have here today which, I mean, I know which of our folks are funded, partially grant-funded, but which pot of money pays for what percent of their salaries. I would say I'd be glad to get that for you, but I don't think I can get that. Well, the way this is worded, it says all of it's SLX. And that's why I'm not clear on number 12. It's not all SLX. We have four SLX projects funded in planning. The bike ped planning is the new one. Congestion management is a new one, both coming out of SLX. 80% federal funding, 20% general fund. Air quality planning we have funded for several years out of SLX. It's also 80-20. The mobility office we funded for several years out of SLX, and its match comes from the documentation of public service announcements. The other funds in the transportation planning section, FHWA planning, planning, which is the bulk of the funds, and that's not SLX, that's FHWA planning funds, then we also fund most of one position out of the Federal Transit Administration, Section 5303. Okay, so where are the two new positions at? Are they in here? Yes, it's the congestion management and the bike pad planning. And that will save us approximately $150,000 from the general fund this next fiscal year? And what's the rationale? Are you afraid you'd lose them if we kept them in the general fund? Is that the rationale here? Certainly. We have been challenged to find every way to offset or make savings in the general fund. And when we were trying to do that to meet various budget scenarios, this opportunity became apparent to us. We checked with the transportation cabinet people and found that they would generally agree with that, so we proceeded right away to try to do that. So what are we giving up by using $150,000 on personnel that we used to use that money on in terms of SLX dollars? Because most of that goes to our projects, our road projects. Some go to road projects. Some go to other programs, traffic engineering and others. But at this point, we don't really think we're giving up anything because, as you know, Those projects, those highway projects, the budgets are so huge, and also the phasing of them changes so often, depending on what's encountered in the field, we feel that this could be handled. But, again, that will take action by the MPO as well. I'm not going to dispute with you that $150,000 in a several million dollar budget is a huge item, but it's the principle of it. I mean, these dollars should be going on our roads and road projects, bike projects, pedestrian projects. And I understand the need for personnel to run those programs. I'm not going to argue there with that personnel, but any time we're transferring general fund dollars and taking away, something has to lose and picking up the $150,000. And if this becomes a habit, because, you know, government is good at starting a program and getting addicted to it and then keep pouring more money away from what really should be going towards that program. So you have checked with the Transfer Station Cabinet. They're saying there's no issue with the SLX being used for additional personnel. That is correct. And can the council get a copy of the SLX budget for next year? Do we have a copy of it? I mean, I know we have colleagues on the NPO, but we break that up. I don't think the whole council really realizes where our SLX dollars are being distributed throughout government. You're talking about the Unified Work Program? I'm talking about all the SLX dollars that we're getting. We can get you that. Yes, our draft Unified Work Program was submitted last month, and it's under review right now. and, of course, has to be approved by the Transportation Cabinet and the FHWA. We can get you our proposal from that. Okay, very good. Thank you. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Council Member Crosby. I have a follow-up on this. Just to clarify, did I hear correctly that even if we approve this, it still has to go through the MPO? Yes. So this isn't the final body of approval for these funds? It just seems a little backwards that it would have gone through that. I don't recall hearing this in our last NPO meeting. That was. I believe we talked generally about it, but we did not have everything together for the action. It does take council action, and it will also take action of the policy committee as well. So what happens if the policy committee doesn't, are they the final authority, or is the council the final authority on these budget dollars? Well, as far as the urban county government accepting the grant, I believe the council. It really becomes two separate actions. The policy committee would approve the use of these funds, but this is to push forward the contract with the state. And we put all the transportation programs in one memo so that you'll know, you'll be cognizant of all of the sources of funds that are used for these programs. I understand what this program's for and what you're trying to accomplish through this, but my question was if the NPO committee, which myself, Council Member McCord, there's several of us up here on that committee, if this hasn't formally gone through that committee but we're the final body, It seems like we're doing this a little backwards. We probably should have had a – because that committee is made up with people from different counties and different people within the community, different elected officials, and it seems – I mean, this may not be their priority. If they didn't approve – I guess if you approve this and they didn't approve – If the MPO did not approve the use of the funds for this purpose, we would be coming back to you to amend the budget. And the reverse would be true if the MPO approved something that the council did not agree. So it's really both bodies are needed. Ultimately, this is the, when it comes to budget dollars, this is with the grants, this is the ultimate approving body, correct? Yes, well, the transportation cabinet. Well, yeah, I mean, to move it forward to them as far as what we're going to spend the money on. All right, thanks. Thank you. If there are no other questions, we'll move on to page seven at the bottom. First reading of resolutions. Are there any questions or motions to remove or to refer to committee at the bottom of page 7? Does anyone have any questions? Will you log in, please, if you do? Council Member Martin. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I had a question about item 19, Division of Emergency Management. And it said that are these, Commissioner, I don't know whether you're able to comment on these, whether these are coming from non-recurring revenues. Is this being funded by a grant? It's for the same issue we were. It's on page 8. It's the bottom of page 7, item 19. It's grant funded. So will this person be a, Jeanette, it's 19 under ordinances. So what happens when the grant runs out, is this person being hired under civil service? No. So the position will be eliminated when the grant's run out? Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Thank you. Are there other questions about first reading of resolutions or motions? So we're at the bottom of page 7, first reading of resolutions. Are there any more questions? Council Member Lawless? I'm sorry, I had the same question that Council Member Martin had on number 19. I should have withdrawn. That's okay. Okay. Did you have a question? No. Council Member Crosby. I have a question on number 27. This is coming out of the budget of human resources. Is this part of their budget, like professional service budget, or? Come on ahead. Yes. And has, based on the experience of this person, is that, or whatever analysis you've done, do we believe it will be under that amount or it's not to exceed $60,000? I think we negotiated with Mr. Crane back and forth about what we thought it would take to do all three contracts, and we think $60,000, it's capped at $60,000, the contract is, that we've entered into. So if he is not successful at doing all three, that will you have to renegotiate to? The way we've written it is that the $60,000, if the contract's good for a year or whenever the contracts are negotiated, whichever is longer. Now, it does provide for a 30-day cancellation on either side, but I think we've written it with the idea that he will conclude the business. for the $60,000. Okay. So if he doesn't, then what happens? Well, we will have to renegotiate a new one. But I think we, I think the hours, I think with that point we'd have to look to see how the negotiations are going with each unit, see if there's an impasse or something like that. And is there then more money in your professional development fund to be, or professional services to be able to handle? Very little. Okay. That answers my question. Thank you. Council Member Stenet. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I too had a question on this same issue. How many proposals did we receive? We received two that I saw on the RFP, but Leslie was involved. Three. One wasn't available. Okay. They interviewed two. I wasn't in on the RFP process. And I assume he was the low bid or the low, or you didn't go by cost. You didn't ask him at all. We just went on qualifications. And how are we going to disperse the $60,000 across the three divisions? Are we going to say each get equal share during negotiations? Are we going to, is he going to bill us for time and we're just going to cap it at $60,000? He's going to bill us for time, yeah. And we've done an estimate about, based on her past negotiations at this point, about how many hours she thinks each one is going to take. Is that a fair statement? And he can sever that at any opportunity. Is he going to be paid monthly, I assume? Uh-huh. He's going to bill us monthly and then we'll pay monthly. Okay. And it's good for a year? A year or until the contracts are negotiated, whichever is longer. Very good. And when's the first contract that he'll be helping us on? Corrections. It's ongoing right now. And I assume fire at the end of this month he'll begin working on since it expires? Yeah. Okay. Very good. Thank you. Council Member Beard. Thank you, Vice Mayor. At the time we suggested strongly that we get outside help. I guess I had pictured in my mind somebody with a briefcase that's more than 50 miles from Lexington. did we put anything out there that would entice somebody from Cincinnati or Louisville or someplace that is maybe a little more union-oriented? Well, I think I've sat down with Mr. Crane once now and talked to him extensively on the telephone, And I think he's got union family members, so he kind of grew up in a union family and then went on to go to law school. And really this is his specialty. He's negotiated over 100 contracts for cities. He currently does Cincinnati. He's done work for Dayton and some other cities too. So I feel pretty good about his expertise in this area. Well, I'm happy to hear that. I wasn't real sure about when you said that he had family that was in unions but conflict of interest. Well, I say that I don't think they're currently living. I think he understands both sides, but he's very aware, and we've put in the contract about our fiscal situation here. So I think he'll be a good negotiator. Okay. Thank you. Council Member Myers. Thank you, Madam Vice Chair. Vice Mayor. Commissioner, you named several cities that he's negotiated contracts for. Did you contact any of those cities? No. I mean, I haven't talked to individuals. I think one of the people that he's worked with before is Milton Tohoney, was one of the ones that I think recommended his name or told him about the RFP because I think he's currently the city manager in Cincinnati. So did he negotiate Cincinnati's contract? I think he's been negotiating for Cincinnati for about the past 12 or 15 years, I think. And their law is a little different, I think, on their act, their state act is a little different than ours, too. So he hasn't started working yet, right? No. He's signed the contract. He's sent it to us for presentation to you all. When do you anticipate he start if we pass this? So we've already sent him copies of all collective bargaining agreements, so frankly he kind of already started a little bit, but he's not going to bill us until you all okay. What happens if we don't pass it? Then he's wasted some time. I just want to get that on the record. Can you take some time to contact some of the previous employers that he's done contracts with? Sure. before we get this two-second reading and kind of give us a little bit of, you can just send an email out with some information if you want to. Okay, that would be fine. I would be glad to do that. Thank you. Okay. It looks like there are no other questions about first reading of resolutions, so we'll move to page 10, at the bottom of page 10. And we have second reading of ordinances. Is there any question or desire to refer to committee or remove from the docket? Council Member Crosby. I'm sorry. I have a question on number four. Page 11. Yes, ma'am. Community Development Police. We're keeping her busy today. Yes, ma'am. I was just curious. I know this is to support police overtime. Is this something that we have, is this a grant that we've received in the past? Yes, for as long as I've been here, we've received this. Do you know if we receive this for other divisions within public safety? Not necessarily, but grants similar to this for other divisions within public safety. The law enforcement service fee program, it would only be available to law enforcement for alcohol patrol. This comes from the ticket. So my question is, are there other grants available within other divisions of public safety? I guess you're saying no, that this is just one specific to? Okay, that's my question. Thank you. Okay. We'll move on to page 12, second reading of resolutions. Council members, do you have any questions or motions to remove or refer? If not, we'll move on to page 13 in the packet, review of the budget amendments. Those are on pages 16 through 19. Are there any questions? We don't. We don't. These are for review, not for... Are there any questions? If not, we will move on to item five on our agenda. Do council members have any issues to refer to committee or to ask to be placed on the docket? Council Member Crosby. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I was just curious if we could refer to the Public Safety Committee matters as they relate to, or updates, I guess, as they relate to E911 in the jail and also the study that was done by Sheriff Witt. I don't even know where that stands right now. Somebody in the audience might. But if we could get those referred to public safety and get updates on all three, that would be great. Okay. So there's a move to recommend referring to the public safety standing committee updates on Sheriff Witt's report, fire. Whoops. What was the third one? I'm sorry. I believe that the mayor has assigned two people from his administration to look at corrections in E911. I'm sorry. Okay. And if we could get an update from those individuals. Okay. Do I hear a second? Is there any discussion? Mr. Myers, did you want to discuss the motion? I second. Okay. If not, all those in favor of recommending this, please say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? Okay. Are there other items? Council Member Myers went away, and so I'll call on him first. He's back. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I was actually on to put something in the committee rather than to speak on that issue. And what I'd like to put in there is, I guess it would go into general government. As we continue to buy vehicles, and I know it might be a while before we do so, I want to begin that discussion about alternative fuels in our vehicles as we go forward. So I would like to put that issue into committee. So Council Member Myers moves to refer to General Services Committee, General Government Committee, the issue of alternative fuel. Vehicles. Alternative vehicles. Do I hear a second? Second. Council Member Lawless seconds. Any discussion? All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? All right. Are there other motions? I do have a question. Oh, I'm sorry. I've lost the... Council Member Martin, excuse me. I'm sorry. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I'd like to have the Council refer to the General Government Committee, the review of medical and prescription benefits provided by LFUCG and the feasibility of retaining a consultant to advise LFUCG on health care expense management and prescription drug efficiencies. Do you have a copy of that motion? I just sort of wrote it out. Your motion is to refer to general government a review of medical and prescription benefits, and then what was the second part, please? And the feasibility of retaining a consultant to advise LFUCG on our health care and prescription drug expense management. Okay. Questions? Did I have a second? Do I hear a second? Council Member Crosby seconded. Okay, Council Member Stennett. Council Member Martin, we just hired the consultant to do that very thing, so I'm not sure where you're leading to with that. Are you referring that item to a committee because you want to have their report out in that committee or because we already hired somebody about a month ago. They're on board. They're already working on those issues. Well, they haven't come to talk to us about it. But they just started. I mean, we just approved the money. Well, the city is spending millions more than it needs to be spending on both prescription drugs and the management of its health care. So, I mean, I guess what is their time frame for reporting out on it? Well, their contract is a year, so they'll be reporting on it as necessary, but they just hit the ground. So I think it's a little premature to put that item into a committee yet without any information, give them an opportunity to do what we hired them to do is to advise us. And as those reports, I'm sure Leslie, who's working with them, Jarvis and Human Resources, can bring us a report out of whether I'm progressing. But I'm not sure if it needs to be put into committee right now. Well, given that the health benefits and Medicare is becoming an overwhelming issue for state government And for local government, I guess I look forward to hearing maybe progress reports from them because I think that there are things like prescription drug groups of cities across the country who can pool their resources to minimize their prescription drug costs. And I look forward to sort of understanding whether we are going to participate in those types of things as well. Well, there's a couple steps. One, we have to put out the bid for next fiscal year, so they'll be helping us write the RFP, as well as in this budget process we'll have to budget an amount for health insurance costs. So they'll be assisting us there. And I think those are the first two opportunities you'll hear about that. I look forward to it. I will draw my motion. Okay. Council Member Lawless, did you want to withdraw your second or Council Member Crosby? I knew it was over there. Okay. So that motion is withdrawn. Are there other items? I would like to ask Commissioner Graham and Commissioner Mason as a follow-up. Last Committee of the Whole Work Session, the Council requested an update on the fire investigation, and I wondered you were to meet with the investigators that Friday, And I wondered if you could, do you want to give that now or give us a time when you'll be bringing that to us? There's some items I think I can say in open session and others that I probably can't. But we met with the investigator. There were some additional interviews that we believe needed to be conducted. So he's currently in the process of scheduling those. And there was some other additional information that he wanted to get relating to schedules and log entries from the fire department, various stations. So we've gathered most of those for him and provided that to him. And probably anything else I probably wouldn't want to get into in an open session. Okay. But we're working on it. Council Member, does that suit as an update for now? Council Member Myers. Mine's not on this issue, so. Okay. Council Member Stenet. So at this point, is Council not purview to see the rough draft? Well, I think we'd like to get those other two interviews done, and I think we're getting close to giving you a final product. So right now, I think without kind of closing the loop on that, I don't think we'd probably want to finish it yet. But I think we're getting very close to finishing it, to give it to you. And the other person that we're going to talk to this week is kind of integrally involved in the report, too, and we're scheduled to talk to that person Thursday. So, again, your response would be to the rough draft, not the final product. We cannot say the rough draft. I think if I were to disseminate that to you all, I would have to disseminate that to other parties, and I think that would affect the investigator's ability to do things at the fire station that he needs to do. Very good. Thank you. Okay. Council Member Myers. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Could you ask a lot about that? Because I thought the understanding was that if you gave it to us in closed session and you took it back up, then you don't have to distribute it. I don't know that we've ever distributed that. I don't think we've distributed this in closed session that I'm aware of. I know you haven't, but what I'm saying is you just said that if you gave it to us, that you'd have to give it to other people. But I thought it was if you gave it to us in closed session and you took it back up, then that wasn't the case. I was thinking giving it to you and not taking it back up. I would think that we would look at a draft in closed session rather than get a copy of a draft and have it out there. I think, well, and I'll say this and I'll let Glenda chime in. I think with the person conducting this investigation, I don't think I'm overstating to say I think his preference is to complete those interviews before even a rough draft is given out. I think that's kind of his protocol, and I think that's the way he wants to do it. And I think on the ones that he's going to conduct, I think that's probably wise at this point. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Are there other items to be referred by council members? Thank you for that update, Commissioner. Commissioner. If not, for information purposes only. Okay. Council Member Myers. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I'd like to refer into general government the issue of recycling. What specifically? We have a motion to refer recycling. Specifically what? I want to keep it broad, but the end that we're going to try to look at is a pay-as-you-throw or a – I mean, there's all kinds of different names for it, whether it's – go ahead. So is there guidance in the motion to tell general – to tell general government or – I guess – okay, I'll do it this way. What do you want them to do? One thing we want to do is look at what other cities are doing in terms of recycling incentives. I'll put it that way. Do I hear a second? And which committee did you put that in? General Gove. So there's a motion to refer to general government the issue of recycling incentives. Now, those of you who just logged in, are you to speak to the motion? Council Member Stenet. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I just want to also make my colleagues aware that this same issue is in two other committees. One, it's in budget and finance to look at our entire solid waste operation and the funding aspects of it, whether it be flat fee, keep it on property tax, pay as you go, and look at all those options, as well as it's in Council Member Blues' committee, and I'll refer to him about how we're working on it there. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Thank you. Council Member Blues. That's correct, Vice Mayor. There will be a special meeting of the Environmental Quality Committee on April 19th, and there will be a report from Waste Management Director Steve Feast on it will involve more than recycling. It will involve waste management operations, but will include recycling issues, the recycling center, and so forth. So I'm not sure I see the purpose of this motion or to put it in the General Government Committee. I'd be happy to take up, ask Mr. Feast to take up Council Member Myers' concerns in environmental quality on the day that we're going to devote our attention exclusively to that topic. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Do you want to have your motion on the table? I do. I think this issue has more to do with general government in terms of recycling than it does environmental. I understand that's an aspect of environmental quality, but I want to look at incentives for recycling rather than the environmental impact of recycling. So although recycling is technically in the Environmental Quality Department, you want to move this issue to another committee? Is that what you're – I'm just trying to sort through. We're trying to keep the issues in the – I guess we can keep it in that committee, but it's a separate – What I want to do is look at recycling incentives. So when Mr. Feast comes in and talks about recycling, that's not the same thing. So I guess we can keep it in the same committee, but I'm looking at some different approach than him coming back, talking about the recycling center and those kinds of things. So your motion, would you prefer to change your motion to say to environmental quality? Sure. We can leave it in there, but it's a separate issue than what they already have in there. Okay, to refer to the Environmental Quality Committee recycling incentives. And does the seconder agree with that? Who was the seconder? Council Member McCord. Okay. I'll be, I'm sorry, Vice Mayor, I'd be happy to ask Director Feast to include that particular aspect of recycling in his presentation. And that's fine, but I'm not that interested in hearing the director's perspective on recycling. What I want is to look at what other cities around the country are doing with respect to incentives to recycling and then see what we want to do as a community. So his presentation is not going to do – I want to research what other cities are doing and then look at what we want to do rather than have him give a presentation on recycling. So I want the committee to do the work and talk about in the committee what we can do in our community based on what other people are doing. So he can come and present whatever you want him to present on recycling, but I still want the committee to work on recycling incentives for our community. And that's the Environmental Quality Committee or General Government? If you want to leave it in environmental in your committee, that's fine. I've already agreed with that. But I'm just saying it's a separate issue than what you're asking Mr. Feast to report on. He happened to do that. Okay, thank you. Okay, I've got Council Member Crosby and then Commissioner Taylor. I was just going to say I should have chimed in before it got to this point, but we also have, and I talked to Dr. Blues about this, we do have a solid waste and recycling committee that has been meeting. We discussed this briefly because the beautiful thing about the committee, too, is that we also are looking at private haulers and what kind of incentives they can offer with their recycling and how we can work together. And Mr. Feast is on that committee as well as the private people. So this is something we already have a committee set up, so maybe we could just, rather than creating another separate committee, we could just continue to look at it within the committee that's already structured, if you're okay with that. So you have a subcommittee that's already looking at it inside there? Yes. Okay. Thank you. Do you want to withdraw your motion or ask Council Member Crosby's committee to take this up? I'd ask that committee to take it up. Okay. Second. We already have it. We're already looking at it. Okay. So they already have it on their radar. So do you want to withdraw these motions, the motion to put it in environmental quality? Sure. It's already, yeah. Councilmember Crosby has agreed that it's already part of the discussion. Yes, that's fine. And what we were doing and what I talked to Dr. Blues about was that we would be providing it to his committee once we finish up our work. It wasn't anything urgent that he needed right away. So that will give us maybe a few months to go ahead. Obviously, people within private industry, give them a chance to be able to get together. Setting calendar is difficult for everybody. So that will give us a few months, and then we'll report to Dr. Blues, and he can do a full report to the council. Okay, and you're looking at what other cities are doing? Yes. As part of that? Yes, they already have that information. Okay. Thank you. Okay. So did you withdraw your second, Council Member Ellinger? Okay. Everything on that is withdrawn. Let's see. Commissioner Taylor. I just wanted to make sure your questions were answered. We do have two reports coming up. One is for Budget and Finance Committee to answer Councilmember Senet's question as best we can with the data that we have. And then second, we are going to be at the Environmental Quality Special Session in April, and we're going to talk more holistically about what's going on in waste. But your question is very timely because some of the work that's going on currently that you authorized over a year ago, the new MRF equipment, the new eddy current separator, the new routes, those kinds of things have positioned us to really make a huge gain. One of the reasons you may recall that we haven't pushed recycling harder in the community is because if we did, we wouldn't have anywhere to put the material. But now that those systems are coming up online, it's very important that we incent people to want to recycle more, particularly including the business groups. So we're happy to try to help with that. And I know Council Member Crosby's group has already touched on that. So just we hear you, and we'll make sure you get that. Okay, thank you. Council Member Ford. You're all right? Okay. Council Members, if there's nothing else on this item, if you'll turn to page 49, this is our Neighborhood Development Fund list for information. And I did ask Jeanette Williams to make a change because our council rules state or the Neighborhood Development Fund rules state that council names cannot be associated with amounts given. So this gets published publicly, and I asked her to remove the names. So that's the main difference there. So it will be coming without names attached. And then if there's nothing about that, I am really, excuse me, I'm sorry, Council Member Farmer, excuse me. No, that's all right, because it goes to what you were just talking about. I mean, I guess I'll review the rule for myself, but I find it a point of disinformation rather than information. It makes it harder for someone to know what's going on here by removing those names from that piece of paper, but I'll review that another time. Well, the difference is that we did not publish in the packet the list of Neighborhood Development Fund contributors in the past. And with the change in structure, we've put Neighborhood Development Fund list into the agenda. So to avoid, I mean, it's very easy for council members to receive in their box a list that includes the names, if you would like that again. but we don't want to publish that. Well, then I would ask that that happens, because I think it's a point of information for those of us here, as well as potentially for the public, in my mind. But as long as it's somewhere available, I think it should be made so to us first. Well, the Neighborhood Development Fund rules state that we are not allowed to give out the names. For example, which Councilmember gave which amount of money. So we're just trying to comply with that rule. So, Jeanette, I think if you can provide council members with a copy in their box. That would be sufficient. And then with the names. Thank you. And then keep it like this in the packet, which goes online. That would be good. Did you have a comment? No. Okay. Council Member Crosby. I was just going to say that we were told that if we give neighborhood development funds that it has to be from LFECG, not individual, that that's the actual rule. I don't, there's lots of lawyers here, but it would be nice to know, I just, for Council, if we could get a list of individuals, because oftentimes we get up and move during the meetings and just so we can go hit someone up or something if we need to. I think that's very doable, and Jeanette can provide that. Council Member Stennett. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I just want to ask Linda while she's here, with respect to not giving credit to individual Council members, but to the council as a whole, if we did publish a list and put it in everyone's mailbox as to who gave what, would that not be a public document that could be given out to anyone in the public as well? Yes, it would be. But in the past, we have done the pass around that says which council member is allocating funds to a particular project. But then once the document is presented to the council for approval, it doesn't have any names. and what we send to the organization doesn't say which council members made a contribution. Well, I know in the past, personally speaking, organizations have received that list and have commented to council members in a derogatory manner that did not contribute. So I'm a little bit leery of putting it in council members' mailboxes if the purpose of it is not to give credit to individual council members. So, I mean, either we're going to put it in the docket and make it public for everyone to see or we're not. I mean, to me, it's a public document if we put it in council members' mailboxes, And there are council members that do hand those out. So I've seen it here. So we may want to rethink that. And also keep in mind it's a part of the Ethics Act and not just an NDF policy that states that individual council members are not supposed to get credit for making an NDF allocation. So it's more than just your internal NDF policy. Right. But, again, that list, once it's produced, it can be disseminated through many methods. Correct. So perhaps if the council member is interested in finding out they could, Jeanette, are you keeping the comprehensive list, they could ask Jeanette. That would take care of that whole problem. Okay. Now, it is with great pleasure that I welcome our friends from Leadership Lexington. And you folks have been so patient. All of you, I believe, are working professionals who have spent your afternoon here with us. And I want to welcome you. I met with you, and we had a really wonderful session about Fit City. And so Jill Barnett is going to give your presentation, and I just want to say welcome. Thank you, Vice Mayor and members of the Council. We appreciate your time today and letting us come to present with you what we've been doing over the past couple of months. As the Vice Mayor said, we are members of this year's Leadership Lexington class. In the interest of time, I will not introduce all of my team members, but they're here with me today. Thank you. You do want their introductions? We have time. All right. Kathy Bugley from UK Federal Credit Union. Brandi Barnett from the Downtown Development Authority. Eric Case, an attorney, and for fear that I will mispronounce the name of his firm, I'm not going to say it. Hannah Huggins from the W. Rogers Company. Trig Mitchell, an attorney with Densmore & Scholl. Joey Police from the Greer Companies. Angie Smith from Lexmark International. Those folks are here. We do have a few members that are absent. Mason McCauley, Becky Owens, and Patrick Singleton. So our group has taken on a project to encourage and inspire the members of Lexington community to hopefully live healthy, and today we'd like to inform you of that work. We did some research in the beginning of our project, and it was at that time that we learned that the American Heart Association had something that they called a fit-friendly workplace. We took that idea and made it a little more broad and have formulated a concept that we hope can become a fit city. We would love for Lexington to become a fit city and serve as a model for other communities in our state and across our nation. We have five goals for our project, which you hopefully have as part of your packet, and it would help if I would scroll on the screen. I apologize. First, we want to draft criteria to designate Lexington as a fit city, which we have done. develop strategies for Lexington to reach a Fit City status, incorporate the launch of our campaign with a new or existing community event, present the project to a third party, which we're doing here today, and hopefully accomplish at least two of our outlined strategies for Lexington. Overall, we've designed these guidelines for a Fit City in the hopes that Lexington can become a model for others. Our initiative has six guidelines, commit, connect, provide, educate, enhance, and challenge. So how do we do those things? We can commit by providing a promotional campaign for our community, which makes a commitment to support and encourage residents to be more physically active and improve the health of our community. We hope that eventually this statement will receive endorsement, perhaps by the mayor, city council, or individual members. Our second guideline is Connect, and we hope that through this we can encourage local media outlets to feature more health and fitness information as a way to connect our community to a healthy lifestyle. We've looked at several publications and media outlets that hope to reach a broad audience. Some of those are Prep Magazine, Topson Lex, the Key News Journal, the BG Magazine, and Local TV. Our third guideline is to provide. How do we do that? We want to provide an awareness to all members of our community about healthy eating and how they might access safe, affordable, and nutritious food. One way we can do this is to create satellite farmer's markets and provide residents with more opportunities for neighborhood gardens to improve their ease of access to healthy food. We also want to educate the members of our community, not just the students in K-12. So we've developed several strategies that we hope can do that and create programming that's available across varying age groups and ability levels. One group in our community, the Bluegrass Tomorrow Young Professionals Council, is working on a million-pound weight loss challenge for the state. which I didn't want to take you through everything, but that was one of our original ideas. So we hope to work with them and also educate families about how to prepare a healthy meal on a limited budget. And we've also begun some preliminary conversations with the University of Kentucky about the possibility of instituting an event like Second Sunday among their campus groups. Lastly, enhancing our community means developing necessary infrastructure to create opportunities for safe engagement in physical activity. We're well on our way with our progress on the Legacy Trail. But we'd also hope to do something like institute a bike rental program or provide businesses with an incentive to provide bike racks at their location. And finally, we must challenge our individual communities and places of employment to keep fitness at the forefront, create more open community organizations like biking or walking clubs, institute a citywide health and fitness challenge, and encourage companies to become smoke-free or adopt wellness programs. In our research with the American Heart Association, we learned about the START program, which is an employee-based wellness program. And after meeting with us, Vice Mayor Gorton has also had a meeting with the Heart Association about instituting the START program here at LFUCG. So hopefully we will see that take off. This year on April 23rd at Commonwealth Stadium, the American Heart Association will have their annual Heart Walk. We plan to unveil our initiative at that time to the public. And in addition to asking for you to support us at that event, we'd love to invite you to walk with our team. But more than that, we'd love to know your initial thoughts and feedback and suggestions on our proposed idea. And with that, we would like to take some questions. Thank you very much, Jill. And I don't know if you said you work at LexTran, correct? Yes, ma'am. So, Council Member McCord. Well, first off, I want to thank you all for your work. And, you know, when you all came in the fall of last year and saying that our group wanted to do something with health, wellness, and fitness, And there was probably a million different ideas on the table that day. And that's the problem that we have with this issue is that there's a lot of rabbits to chase. And there's a lot of things that are going on. And a lot of folks don't realize what they already have in their community. This is a real start towards pulling that together. So first I want to applaud you all. And I want to applaud you, Linda Stant from Commerce Lexington, who does a phenomenal job with Leadership Lexington every year. But what I think the council and the community needs to realize is that here are some of your best and brightest that have said, this is what we see as important for Lexington. This is the project we want to see as our legacy, and going forward, this is what we want for our community. And you mentioned things like Second Sunday and Legacy Trail and the START program and so forth. And what needs to happen is that folks like yourselves need to start being those bridge builders and connecting people who are doing these various things and bringing them together. We have a real opportunity in this town, probably like no other, in that you have a tremendous infrastructure of health from the treatment side, the hospital side and so forth. But what you also have is you have a phenomenal place to recreate, to be out in. You have soil that doesn't exist anywhere else in the world. You have horse farms that are world class. And the bigger vision that I wanted to put to you all, because the next step is really to make Lexington a destination for fitness, wellness, and physical activity. We can be Napa Valley and Boulder, Colorado, all rolled into one with the bourbon industry, with the vineyards, and with health and wellness and so forth. And what you all are doing is starting that. And what I would encourage you and welcome you to do is to work with us, as Council Member Martin said earlier, with regard to the health insurance issues of this city, the 3,000 employees roughly that run this city for folks, it's not a healthy population of workers. And it's one of those things where it's a population that probably wants to be healthier and wants to be healthier for their kids and grandkids, and the taxpayers are the ones that pay for that health. And so the thing that I see coming out of this is for you all to take what you've started and to start working with this government and to work with the folks that you've mentioned and start bridging these gaps, and let's look for the opportunity to make Lexington this destination of health, wellness, and physical activity. So, again, I applaud you all, and it's great to watch where you all started from and where you are, but also where you're going because this isn't an end product. This is really just the beginning of something great. Thanks. Council Member Lawless. Thank you very much. And I really appreciate all the work and energy you all have put into this. I think there are several aspects of it that are very exciting to me, and that's one of which is affordable, healthy food in all our neighborhoods. And we certainly do not have that in many parts of our city and ways to figure out how to do that. I like, so I'm really excited about what you're doing. I think it would be great if we had a GTV3 aerobics program. I like to watch those. Just kidding. Yeah. I think also before I was on council, I was really fit and healthy. And it takes so much. Sometimes we get so caught up in the big picture that we forget the little breakdowns. And I know Councilmember Crosby at one point went to, I believe it was HR, about putting up signs about, you know, how many calories you burn by climbing one set of steps or, you know, giving out those little pedometers and people signing up for, you know, whatever whatever prizes if they do X number of steps. So I think there are a lot of ways we can do it, not only within LFUCG employees, but our city as a whole. And there have been so many cities around the country that have made a challenge to, you know, the mayor or the, you know, somebody, city official or someone such as yourself, made a challenge that, you know, we'll get in groups of 10 and weigh all together at the postal service and see how much we as a group can change our diet and our exercise. And knowing that, you know, 10 minutes twice a day isn't that much unless you get stuck in a rut. So these kinds of things that really break it down into small pieces. So I really admire what you all have done. I think it's a great thing for the city. I, for a long time, have wanted to take 10 kids who are obese and, you know, 20 kids that are obese, give 10 of them and who are on, you know, Medicaid or such, and by 10 of them, one of those video games that you have to ride the bike to make it go, because most of them are going to stay inside. They maybe don't have places to go out and play, but they'll play that video game. And my guess is at the end of the year, you will see a marked difference in their $200 or $300. So I really appreciate this, and I love thinking about these things, and I used to do them, and maybe this will inspire me to quit thinking and start doing. So I'm going to walk for 10 minutes tomorrow, and I'm going to write it down, and I'll send you an email. Thank you for your encouragement. Council Member Crosby. Thank you. Thank you, Jill, for putting this together. We appreciate you coming and presenting your project to us. Also, I want to say I appreciate you all looking at the model that the American Heart Association already has in place as a former board member. It's nice to know that people actually do look at those programs. And I'm curious, are you all partnering with them in any way besides the Heart Walk? Are you all looking into any type of funding opportunities through the American Heart Association or more maybe national-type grant opportunities with this? Through our research, we've learned that a Fit City designation is something that they have talked about internally and an idea that they hope to bring to life. So they aren't able to necessarily take our idea and fund it completely. But hopefully, you know, I think maybe we're just a little bit ahead of them as far as action goes, but they've already been working behind the scenes. So I don't know that that's an opportunity we can take advantage of, but hopefully maybe as we progress a little bit and they're ready to unveil some of those initiatives, it might be something that we can work together to achieve. So I may have missed this. The American Heart Association designates Fit Cities. When you mentioned that you all had already gone through the designation for Fit Cities, is that who actually does it? They don't do it at this time. That's something that they're working on. They designate workplaces as fit-friendly, a fit-friendly workplace. So that's kind of how our idea was born. They're working on a fit city designation. So right now, our designation is one we've created. I actually misread it. It's a draft criteria. I apologize. It's all right. Well, I was down in Pulaski County, I think is where I saw a school, was actually doing what Council Member Lawless had mentioned with their kids, where they had signs up, if you walk from point A to point B, you burn this many calories. And sometimes I think people don't realize it just takes very small steps to change a behavior in somebody. And clearly, as Council Member McCord mentioned, there is a cost savings, whether it's to you all who are in private business or to us as a government with health care costs, and we see how it affects a lot of different things. So I guess I would like to, well, I have one question first. Are you all going to be following up with this? Because I know Lexington, the leadership classes are only, you know, you are a class, then a new class comes in. Do you all make some kind of commitment with each other as a class to see a project through? Like, I mean, is this just something you're doing and then next year it kind of fades away because you're done with your class? Or is this something that you all have committed to trying to see through until we can get, until you can meet some of these goals? I think we've all had a little bit of an unspoken commitment to continue working together to make some progress, but our ultimate hope is that either another group will take it over from within Leadership Lexington or we can get someone such as yourselves or an organization within the city or even the state to take this program over and take it to a more broad level. In some of our research, we recently learned that Cleveland, Ohio, is doing pretty much the exact same thing, but they're working with their city government and their local hospitals to create a program called Healthy Cleveland. We thought we had a wonderful idea and found out that someone else already had the exact same one. So we haven't quite ironed out exactly how this project is going to continue, but it is not our plan to let this go. Well, and I would say, too, I think we've seen as council, which you all, and it sounds like Council Member McCord may have met with you all, but he's had a passion. I would say he's probably been our leader on this issue, trying to bring it to the forefront and how it affects us as a government. And maybe you all, through Council Member McCord, could come up with some kind of challenge for this council and see if we're up for it. And also, I would strongly, I would be in favor, I think you had down here, for us to somehow endorse you all's program or whatever. And I think that would be a wonderful idea as a body if we could somehow endorse what you all are doing. So thank you very much. Thank you. We could perhaps have a resolution of support, and then maybe on the day of the walk the mayor would read a proclamation to get it started. I don't know. Those are a couple things. Yes, your group likes that idea. Can you tell us the date of the Heart Walk again? I believe it's April 23rd. Okay, thank you. It's the day of the U.K. Blue-White Scrimmage, and I think it's the day before Easter. The 23rd, and do you know what time? 10 a.m. at Commonwealth Stadium. Okay. Councilmember Farmer. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Largely, those are going to be my comments. In your presentation was an invitation for us to join you. Yes. On April 23rd. At Commonwealth Stadium. At what time again? 10 a.m. At 10 a.m. for the Heart Walk. And Vice Mayor, did you receive a resolution request then, or did you just try to make one? I was going to make one, a request for a resolution and a proclamation at the walk. Proclamation at the walk and a resolution that the council could pass ahead of time. Should I do that for you since you're chairing the meeting? If you would like. I would so move. Any discussion about the motion? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Anybody opposed? So I'll report that out on Thursday. Thank you. I just wanted to thank you all for spending your time with us here this afternoon because you got to see so much sausage being made today. And I was just thinking that so many people could have taken 10 minutes away from this program and gone and done something healthy and come back and maybe not have missed anything. Who knows? But thank you all very much for spending your time this afternoon with us. Thank you. Council Member Lawless. I'm sorry. I just wanted to make one really quick comment. There are several community organizations, Seedleaf, a lot of community garden folks, sustainability, Jim Embry, Brokes Folk, Bikes, which is a great program. So maybe this could be something that a lot of people are already working on, bits and pieces could really join in and have a day of sharing assets and ideas. Thank you. And thank you, Vice Mayor. Thank you. So if there are no other comments, Jill, thank you very much. And I also say thanks to Linda Stamph and all of you who took time to be here and for your creative thinking. And really what you're wanting is to make Lexington a better place. And I really thank you for that. And we'll work on the resolution and the proclamation for that morning. Okay. Thanks so much to all of you. Now, I've been advised by law that we can go ahead and finish our meeting, so we have an environmental quality. And, excuse me, the Commonwealth Economics Report is on for Thursday night, not today. The Environmental Quality Committee has a report, and it's on page 67. Thank you, Vice Mayor. The Environmental Committee met at 1 p.m. on March 8th. It featured three presentations. First of all, Mark York from Environmental Policy Outreach and Education summarized the outreach and education work within the division and addressed several questions from council members. And second report from environmental policy, James Bush, the environmental policy energy manager, highlighted efforts and initiatives within urban county government and took questions from council members. And finally, Water Quality Director Charlie Martin and Dr. David Price, who was the Division of Water Quality Laboratory Manager, summarized efforts to very successful efforts, I might add, to improve the water quality at McConnell Springs. There were no motions that came out of these presentations. Director Martin also updated the Council on the first stage of the remedial measures plan, which concentrates on Area 1, the West and East Hickman, and Wolf Run watersheds. He provided an update and announced the three public meetings associated with the development of that plan, which we have to submit to the Environmental Protection Agency by October. Proprietary fund financials were included for information purposes and Council Member Lane has requested a more complete financial report with revenue and expense projections for a future meeting. Finally, on a motion by Vice Mayor Gorton and seconded by Council Member Henson, the committee agreed to schedule a special Environmental Quality Committee meeting for 11 a.m. on April 19th. The agenda is, as I mentioned earlier in another discussion, a presentation by Division of Waste Management Director Steve Fease on a variety of matters related to the Division's functions. Thank you, Vice Mayor. That's my report. So the motion is to schedule a special environmental quality meeting on April 19th at 11 a.m. Do I hear a second? Second. Any discussion? That will roll to my report Thursday night. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? Okay, thank you very much, Council Member Blues. Now, Council Member Lawless has the Public Safety, Public Works Committee, and it was distributed separately. Thank you, Vice Mayor. We met on March 8, 2011. The committee members, Ellinger, Lawless, Farmer, Crosby, McCord, Martin, and Henson were present. Also present was Vice Mayor Linda Gorton and Council Member Myers. Council Member Lawless, that would be me, chaired the meeting. We had a presentation which was extremely helpful, and I hope that people who are interested in EMS and these matters will go on the website and view it. It was about paramedic training, and Dr. Stephen Stack, representing the Emergency Medical Advisory Board, gave a presentation regarding paramedic and EMT training. The EMAB requested the committee to consider FY 2011 budgeting of a new class of paramedic recruits and adding an additional ambulance. Assistant Fire Chief Gribbon, Mr. Clay Mason, Commissioner of Public Safety and Public Works, and Dr. Joseph Richardson were available to answer questions from the committee. Council Member Crosby commented on the purchase of an additional EC unit and believed EC unit number 10 had been included in the FY06 budget. This will be researched and reported back to the committee, and I do believe we've gotten an answer on that. Committee members discussed having qualified paramedics, EMS response time, diversity of workforce, and three versus two responders on EC units, level and structure of staffing for division of fire department, recruiting practices, and training classes. Council Member Crosby introduced the concept of appointing a task force to study this issue, and Council held discussion regarding the area of focus for the task force. A motion was made by Council Member Farmer to keep this first page of presentation in the committee during this budget time, seconded by Council Member McCord, and the motion passed unanimously. A motion by Council Member Crosby and seconded by Council Member Ellinger to request Vice Mayor Gordon to appoint a task force to study the response times, preference point times, women and minority recruiting, paramedic level of staffing, and other staffing issues. The motion passed unanimously. The second report was brief regarding Todd's Road widening phase update. Mr. Andrew Runwall, Division of Engineering, updated Council regarding the widening of Todd's Road. Council Member Crosby conveyed to him several neighborhood pedestrian traffic concerns regarding the tunnel and asked if this was going to be part of the change order to be reviewed by engineers for the project. Mr. Grunwald explained it was too late to have this discussed for the change order, but that he would look into the tunnel and report back to the committee. On street parking during street cleaning, I had asked for this report since we were running pretty late at this point. and the pilot program for the street sweeping was entirely in the 3rd District. I said I would report the findings to the constituents in the 3rd District, and nobody opposed this process. So we went to number four, Oliver Lewis Way update. Mr. Grunwald, Division of Engineering, updated the committee on this project. The update included information on the overhead utility cables, time frame for completion of work, and discussed supplemental agreement number two. Items referred to the committee. The committee held discussion regarding the remaining items in the committee to be reviewed. Items discussed were utility poles, horse cruelty, taxi cab ordinance, itinerant merchants, emergency snow plan, and sidewalk specification. A motion by Council Member Crosby and seconded by Council Member McCord to approve removal of the Graffiti Task Force. The motion passed unanimously. A motion by Council Member Crosby and seconded by Council Member Ellinger to remove street cleaning from the committee. The motion passed unanimously. And lastly, a motion was made by Council Member Crosby to adjourn and seconded by Council Member Ellinger to adjourn at 1.45. The motion passed unanimously. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Lawless. Are there any council reports? Council Member Farmer. Vice Mayor, this doesn't really take the form of a report per se, but I want to go back to the NDF notification or lack thereof. And I guess I would kind of direct this to counsel or to our counsel. So if someone wants to know, a member of the public, who has given what from this group in the form of an NDF request, will they have to file an open records request to get that information? I'll call on Glenda George, our attorney. Kind of stumped me here. We can do it later. We have plenty to do today. But I just want to get the difference between disclosure and secrecy here. Maybe Keith Horn can enlighten us. Let me make a general statement about there's a policy on open records that the government abides by. Part of that policy is that if a record is readily available and clearly open, you don't require someone to file a written open records request. So the question may become what is available, whether we know it's readily available, etc. et cetera. Does that answer your question? Well, I think it does. It tries to, but I'm still just trying to get back to the fact that if a neighborhood development fund request passes through here and we may choose to sign off on it or not, it then goes around, it is docketed and put on for action. If someone wants to know who made up the group of funds, how will they find out? I don't know how those are accounted. And so I don't know off the top of my head if there is a record of money comes from cost centers or where that comes from. And it may be that your office knows how those funds are accounted for, but standing here, I don't know. I understand, but I appreciate you trying to answer the question I had asked. We may need to take this up at another time and place, because I think there needs to be a way for there to be disclosure for those who want to know as well as if we want to know, because I think the way this was left, there wasn't even going to be a copy of it placed in our boxes so we could look at it ourselves. And I'm not comfortable with that, because I think if we want to be open and transparent, we should. Council Member Martin. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I had the pleasure of attending the Southland Association annual meeting this week, and the Vice Mayor was there as well. And it's really a vibrant business community over at the Southland Association. and we covered a lot of reports and we'll be coming out particularly with information about the new exchange at Harrodsburg Road soon. I also want to sort of report, I passed out a quick wireless internet poll to council members and it told me a couple things. One is that not many council members use the wireless on our fifth floor. This is a work session so I thought this might be a good time to do this. I find it very difficult as we enter sort of a wireless consumer and business environment to use the wireless on the fifth floor. It's locked down very heavily by LFUCG, and so the council members have indicated they're not interested in changing things, But to the extent that you want to use wireless on the fifth floor, I might recommend we just contract with Insight Wireless. So we'll leave that for another day. I also want to report that I attended a meeting of the Police and Fire Pension Fund, and I wanted to report on the numbers brought to the meeting by Callahan Associates. This was a chart that was an open meeting. This was put on television, but I want to walk the council through this. This is assuming a 7 percent cost of return, sort of a rate of return on the pension funds. Under the employer part, the left column is what we currently are required to contribute to the fund, which is approximately 17.5 percent. Under the employee, that's 11 percent fixed, and those are in millions. But the unfunded part, in order to achieve, I believe it's about a 69 percent funding after 20 years, we're going to be required to start at about $15.5 million, and it's going to work its way up to about $34 million each and every year over the next 20 years. And so if you go to the next chart, and you might have to back off that a little bit. This is the projected funded status. If those extra $15 million to $35 million contributions are not made, essentially the police and fire pension fund will be without any assets after 20 years. And so unless dozens of millions of dollars are contributed each and every year over the next 20, 25 years, basically the pension is going to run out of money. I want to make the council aware of this and sort of keep this on our forefront. This is a very serious issue, and the numbers are just extremely difficult. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Thank you. Council Member Blues. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I'm sorry. I was engaged in a side conversation here. A couple of announcements. The Historic Western Suburb Neighborhood Association Board meeting will be tonight at 7 p.m. at 645 West Short Street. And then Monday, March 21st, the Winburn Neighborhood Association will hold their monthly meeting at 6.30 p.m. in Martin Luther King's King Park Community Center. And I did want to announce an All-You-Can-Eat Pancake Breakfast fundraising event, which will be set this coming Saturday, March 19th, at 7 a.m. to 11.30 a.m. at the Amani Family Life Center at 1555 Georgetown Road. Here's the menu. All-You-Can-Eat Pancake Buffet Breakfast with menu to include buttermilk pancakes, fried potatoes, sausage links, ham, bacon, and biscuits. All of this for an adult for $6, for children $3.50. So I'll see you all on Saturday morning. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I trust you're running there, correct? Council Member McCord. I'm getting ready for the walk. Welcome to the Fit City. I want to make a couple of announcements. This Thursday night at Picadome Elementary will be the meeting for the Wellington Elementary School, for that new school for the attendees and the parents of that school to ask questions. So it's at 6 o'clock on Thursday night at Picadome Elementary. on the 28th of this month, March 28th, Sunday night, Copperfield Neighborhood Association will hold their annual meeting. And just want to make folks aware in the 9th and the 10th District and those who travel through the south side of Lexington that Clay's Mill Road is underway, that there is dirt moving, and there will be obstruction on that road until November. And then from July to November, you'll also see major construction on Harrodsburg Road underneath New Circle. and so make plans accordingly to avoid the south end of town for those months. But lastly, I want to welcome all those coming to our city for the Sweet 16 and something that's very unique to us and to Lexington and something that we have to fight very hard to keep. I think Council Member Stennett has said many times that one of the major issues about looking at Rupp Arena and looking at the new arena and what Louisville has done is an issue like the Sweet 16, that this is not just a foregone conclusion that we get to keep it because we're Lexington. This is something that we have to fight for. And I want to just welcome those that are coming and hope that this is a great weekend of sports, and I would encourage everyone in the audience and everyone here to go and at least catch one session of something that is very unique to Kentucky and very unique to Lexington. But also as a body and as a leadership group, We need to start a broader discussion about things such as the Sweet 16 and how we keep these type of economic generators in our community. That's the end of the report. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Council Member Lawless. Thank you, Vice Mayor. This Sunday, March 20th at 5 p.m., the Belcourt Neighborhood Association will be meeting at 154 Forest Avenue. The Goodrich Neighborhood Association will meet March 24th at 7 p.m. at the end of Goodrich. I hope everybody can come. The Division of Water Quality will host the Great American Cleanup Information Meeting on Tuesday, March 22nd at 630 at the Division of Water Quality Administration Building on Lyle Avenue. For more details, you can contact Mike York at myork at lexingtonky.gov, or you can also contact my office at dlawless at lexingtonkentucky.gov. So many of the neighborhood associations have talked about participating in this, and it's a great event. So thank you very, very much, and I'm excited with my new, turning over my new leaf of walking 10 minutes tomorrow and then running, being invited to carbo-load with you at the pancake breakfast, I think is the beginning of my training. Council Member Ellinger. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I just wanted to update the council. We had our work session with the administration last Monday on the 7th, and we talked about the council links in that, and we had a survey monkey that went around, and we appreciate everybody for getting back with me on that. We had a couple options how we went to the links, and we chose the old option by a large majority. And with that, in case you don't know, the 2012 budget links, the first one in general services will be chaired by Steve Kay. Casey Crosby and Diane Lawless are on that one. On the finance, budgeting, social service, and outside agency, you'll be chaired by Julian Beard. Myself and Chris Ford will be on that one. On the general government, CIO, administrative services council, clerk and assistance advocate will be chaired by Ed Lane. Doug Martin and Kevin Stinn will be on that. On the environmental quality and public works, you'll be chaired by Bill Farmer. Tom Blues and Jay McCord will be on that one. And on public safety, you'll be chaired by George Myers and Linda Gorton and Peggy Henson on that. I want to thank the chairs for graciously accepting that that because it will be a lot of work and I will be getting with all the council members at the budget and finance to go over what we're going to be preparing for. We've got a lot of work to do with this budget, but thank you all for getting back so promptly on this. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Thank you. Next item on the agenda is public comment. Issues not on the agenda. Is there anyone who wishes to speak? If not, before I entertain a motion to adjourn. The council members have requested a five-minute amenity break, which we will take. So do I hear a motion to adjourn? And I have a second. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Opposed? We are adjourned. you