# Council Work Session - September 27, 2011 > Auto-transcribed civic record · September 27, 2011 - **Permalink**: https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/meeting/2190 - **Source video**: https://lfucg.granicus.com/player/clip/2190?view_id=14&redirect=true - **Date**: 2011-09-27 - **Last revised**: July 17, 2026 - **Length**: 17,763 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 Lexington-Fayette Urban County Council met on September 27, 2011, under the presiding of the Mayor. During the meeting, the Council took 16 motions and votes, heard 10 public comments, and addressed 10 agenda items. The Council approved several items including rezoning and docket matters, budget amendments, and new business. The Environmental Quality Committee Report was also approved. Several items were presented for informational purposes, including public comment, Program 6: Continuing Business and Presentations, an Airport Board Presentation, and Council Reports. One item—the Social Services Presentation on Partner Agency Compensation—was deferred to a later date. ## Attendance The following council members were present at the meeting on September 27, 2011: * Council Member Farmer * Vice Mayor Gordon * Council Member McCord * Council Member Stennett * Council Member Ellinger * Council Member Myers * Council Member Beard * Council Member Lawless * Council Member Kay * Council Member Ford * Council Member Martin * Council Member Henson * Council Member Lane * Council Member Blues * Council Member Crosby No council members were absent or late. ## Votes and Decisions The Council passed 16 motions during this meeting, with 14 decided by voice vote and 2 by electronic vote. **Traffic and Speed Limit Matters** Council Member Farmer moved to place on the September 29, 2011 Council meeting docket a resolution authorizing the Division of Traffic Engineering to install multi-way stop controls at Romney Road and Providence Lane. Vice Mayor Gordon seconded the motion, which passed by voice vote [timestamp: 00:03:37]. Council Member Farmer also moved to place on the docket a resolution designating the speed limit on Pepper Hill Road between Montevideo Road and Shinoahe Road as 25 mph and authorizing installation of appropriate signs. Council Member McCord seconded, and the motion passed by voice vote [timestamp: 00:04:39]. **Business and Administrative Matters** Council Member Stennett moved to place on the docket a resolution revoking Resolution 262-2010 and replacing it with a resolution granting the 1% occupational license fee incentive to SIS Coding Company, LLC, and its affiliates. Council Member McCord seconded, and the motion passed by voice vote [timestamp: 00:05:11]. Council Member Ellinger moved to approve the docket as amended, seconded by Council Member Myers, and the motion passed by voice vote [timestamp: 00:06:13]. Council Member Ellinger moved to approve the summary, seconded by Council Member Crosby, and the motion passed by voice vote [timestamp: 00:06:44]. Council Member Farmer moved to approve a budget amendment (Journal 55-176) for community corrections to provide funding for the director of community corrections as a seasonal employee with no benefits. Council Member Crosby seconded, and the motion passed by voice vote [timestamp: 00:07:52]. **Committee Referrals and Assignments** Council Member Beard moved to approve new business, seconded by Council Member Farmer, and the motion passed by voice vote [timestamp: 00:10:03]. Council Member Blues moved to assign the Valley View Ferry issue to the Planning and Public Works Committee, seconded by Vice Mayor Gordon, and the motion passed by voice vote [timestamp: 00:16:05]. Council Member Blues moved to assign the issue of renegotiating and expanding paving warranties to the Planning and Public Works Committee, seconded by Council Member Myers, and the motion passed by voice vote [timestamp: 00:16:38]. Council Member Blues moved to cancel the October 4 Environmental Quality meeting, seconded by Council Member Crosby, and the motion passed by voice vote [timestamp: 00:17:40]. **Contested Votes** Council Member Myers moved to assign discussion on creating a policy for funding partner agencies regarding employee raises to the Social Services Community Development Standing Committee, seconded by Council Member Ellinger. The motion passed by electronic vote 11-4 [timestamp: 01:07:44]. Voting in favor were Council Members Myers, Ellinger, Blues, Crosby, McCord, Ford, Martin, Henson, Lane, Lawless, and Kay. Voting against were Council Members Stennett, Beard, Gordon, and Ford. Council Member Beard moved to refer the issue of farm animals in residential areas to the Planning and Zoning Committee, seconded by Council Member Crosby, and the motion passed by voice vote [timestamp: 01:21:50]. Council Member Martin moved to refer examination of the existing tree ordinance and recommendations for increasing tree stock to the Planning and Public Works Committee, seconded by Council Member Ford, and the motion passed by voice vote [timestamp: 01:39:28]. Council Member Ford moved to refer examination of the recent history of cost of living adjustments and salary increases for LFUCG civil service employees to the General Government Committee, seconded by Council Member Ellinger. The motion passed by electronic vote 11-4 [timestamp: 01:52:46], with the same voting pattern as the earlier contested motion. Council Member Henson moved to move spay and neutering funding from Public Safety Committee to Budget and Finance Committee, seconded by Council Member McCord, and the motion passed by voice vote [timestamp: 01:57:07]. Council Member Ellinger moved to adjourn, seconded by Vice Mayor Gordon, and the motion passed by voice vote [timestamp: 02:03:04]. ## Budget and Financial Actions The meeting included one financial amendment related to personnel funding. **Director of Community Corrections Position** An amendment (Journal 55-176) was approved to allocate $112,900 in funding for the director of community corrections position. This funding was designated for a seasonal employee with no benefits. ## Public Comment Council members offered remarks on airport operations, partner agency funding policies, community initiatives, and local development during the meeting. **Airport Operations and Community Engagement** Council Member McCord praised airport leadership and staff for their community outreach efforts, particularly the Second Sunday event, and commended their openness and collaboration with the city [timestamp: 00:31:54]. Council Member Lawless expressed strong support for flying out of Lexington Airport, noting its affordability and excellent service compared to regional airports [timestamp: 00:32:58]. Council Member Gordon thanked the airport for hosting the Sister Cities display, highlighting its importance for community representation and international goodwill [timestamp: 00:33:30]. **Partner Agency Funding and Compensation Policy** Council Member Ford raised concerns about the fairness of funding partner agencies that give raises to employees while city employees have not received raises, calling for a broader policy review [timestamp: 01:08:16]. Council Member Myers emphasized the need for a policy to guide funding decisions for partner agencies that plan to give employee raises, especially when city employees have not received raises [timestamp: 01:05:00]. Council Member Lawless countered that partner agency employee compensation should not be over-scrutinized, comparing it to how the city contracts with other businesses [timestamp: 01:14:11]. **Community Announcements and Development** Council Member Martin shared observations from a trip to Greenville, South Carolina, highlighting its tree-lined downtown and transportation planning, and urged Lexington to prioritize similar urban beautification and traffic management [timestamp: 01:36:46]. Council Member Henson announced a poverty forum hosted by the Community Action Council to discuss rising poverty rates in Lexington [timestamp: 01:43:59]. Council Member Stennett invited colleagues to attend the grand opening of a new Humane Society adoption center at PetSmart in Hamburg [timestamp: 02:01:26]. Vice Mayor Gordon announced the grand opening of the Heisel Farm Archery Range and invited council members to attend [timestamp: 02:01:59]. ## Contested Items The September 27, 2011 meeting included three significant areas of disagreement among council members. **Funding partner agencies that give employee raises** Council members were divided on whether to fund partner agencies that were providing raises to their employees at a time when city employees had not received raises. This disparity prompted heated debate about the fairness and appropriateness of allocating municipal resources to agencies increasing compensation for their staff while the city's own workforce faced a pay freeze. The disagreement resulted in a motion to study the issue further in committee rather than resolving it immediately. **Transparency of partner agency funding data** Council members raised concerns about the availability of salary increase information for partner agencies during the budget process. Specifically, they questioned why data on partner agency compensation increases had not been provided earlier, which would have allowed for more informed decision-making. This lack of transparency prompted discussion about fairness in how budget decisions were being made and whether the council had adequate information to properly evaluate funding requests. **Scope of committee review for partner agency compensation** Council members disagreed about the appropriate mechanism for addressing the partner agency compensation issue. Some argued the matter should be reviewed by the Social Services Community Development Committee, while others contended that the scope of the issue was too broad for a single committee to handle effectively. There was also discussion about whether the matter should be addressed through administrative channels rather than committee review. This split vote reflected uncertainty about the best process for investigating and resolving the underlying concerns about partner agency compensation practices. ## Public Comment The council opened the meeting to public comment on agenda items [timestamp: 00:03:00]. No members of the public spoke during this portion of the meeting. ## Rezoning and Docket Approval [timestamp: 00:03:37] The council approved three separate motions to place items on the September 29, 2011 docket for consideration. The first motion addressed traffic stop controls at the intersection of Romney Road and Providence Lane. The second motion concerned speed limit designation on Pepper Hill Road. The third motion involved a resolution to revoke Resolution 262-2010, which had previously granted a 1% occupational license fee incentive to SIS Coding Company, LLC. Council Member Farmer and Council Member Stennett participated in the discussion of these items. All three motions were approved by the council. ## Approve Docket as Amended [timestamp: 00:06:13] The council considered and approved the docket as amended. Council Member Ellinger presented amendments to the docket, which modified the agenda for the meeting. Following the presentation of these amendments, the council voted to approve the docket in its amended form, allowing the meeting agenda to proceed as revised. The docket was approved by the council. ## Budget Amendments The council considered a budget amendment for community corrections during this agenda item [timestamp: 00:07:52]. **Discussion and Presentation** Council Member Farmer and Mr. Barris were the key speakers on this matter. The amendment addressed funding for a director position within the community corrections department. A notable aspect of the discussion involved the amount being halved from a prior council action, which was acknowledged during the deliberation. **Key Issue** The proposed amendment would fund the director as a seasonal employee with no benefits, representing a change from previous staffing arrangements or budget allocations. **Outcome** The council approved the budget amendment for community corrections. ## New Business [timestamp: 00:10:03] Council Member Beard presented a motion to fund new business initiatives. The council voted to approve the motion with no further discussion. **Outcome:** Approved ## Program 6: Continuing Business and Presentations Council Member Farmer reported on two Planning and Zoning Committee meetings [timestamp: 00:10:35]. The first meeting addressed the Lexington Complete Streets Manual. The second meeting focused on comprehensive plan goals and objectives, which included discussion of public input on land use and downtown traffic management. This agenda item was presented for informational purposes. No motions were made during this portion of the meeting. ## Environmental Quality Committee Report Council Member Blues presented the Environmental Quality Committee Report [timestamp: 00:14:19]. The committee received a presentation regarding the greenway system. Based on this presentation, the committee developed recommendations that included the establishment of a greenway coordinator position and the development of management policies for the greenway system. The committee assigned two issues to the Planning and Public Works Committee for further consideration. Additionally, the committee canceled its scheduled October 4 meeting. The report was approved. ## Airport Board Presentation The airport board presented an economic impact study demonstrating the airport's significant contribution to the community [timestamp: 00:18:49]. Key speakers Richard Hopgood and Eric Frankel led the presentation. **Economic Impact Findings** The study showed that the airport contributes $370 million annually to the community and supports 3,500 jobs. The presentation also highlighted that the airport maintains strong air service. **Presentation Content** The airport board included praise for staff and employees as part of their presentation to the council. **Council Response** The council offered positive feedback on the airport board's presentation and findings. **Outcome** This agenda item was informational in nature, with no formal action required. ## Social Services Presentation: Partner Agency Compensation [timestamp: 00:40:14] Commissioner Beth Mills presented data on eight social service agencies that had requested salary increases. The presentation prompted discussion among council members regarding transparency, policy, and fairness in how the city funds partner agencies compared to city employees. **Key Discussion Points** Council members, including Council Member Stennett, Council Member McCord, and Council Member Kay, engaged in debate about the compensation requests. The discussion centered on concerns about transparency in partner agency funding decisions and the principles that should guide salary increase approvals for these organizations relative to city staff compensation policies. **Outcome** The council agreed to defer the matter for further study. Rather than making an immediate decision on the salary increase requests, the council determined that the issue would be examined in committee, allowing for more detailed analysis of the funding policies and fairness considerations involved in compensating partner agencies. ## Council Reports Council members provided updates on various municipal matters during this informational segment of the meeting. **Topics Covered** Council members addressed several issues including: * Animal ordinances * Flu clinics * Redistricting * Candidate interviews * Community events **Key Speakers and Contributions** The following council members participated in the reports: * Council Member Beard * Council Member Blues * Vice Mayor Gordon * Council Member Stennett * Council Member McCord * Council Member Lawless * Council Member Martin * Council Member Henson * Council Member Ford **Notable Comments** Council Member Martin urged the city to emulate Greenville, South Carolina's urban planning approach. **Outcome** This agenda item was informational in nature, with council members sharing updates rather than taking formal action. [timestamp: 01:18:53] --- ## Decisions - **Motion** — passed: Motion to place on the docket for the September 29, 2011 Council meeting a resolution authorizing and directing the Division of Traffic Engineering to install multi-way stop controls at Romney Road and Providence Lane. - **Motion** — passed: Motion to place on the docket for the September 29, 2011 Council meeting a resolution designating the speed limit on Pepper Hill Road between Montevideo Road and Shinoahe Road as 25 mph and authorizing the Division of Traffic Engineering to install appropriate signs. - **Motion** — passed: Motion to place on the docket for the September 29, 2011 Council meeting a resolution revoking Resolution 262-2010 and replacing it with a resolution granting the 1% occupational license fee incentive to SIS Coding Company, LLC, and its affiliates. - **Motion** — passed: Motion to approve the docket as amended by Council Member Ellinger. - **Motion** — passed: Motion to approve the summary. - **Journal 55-176** — passed: Motion to approve the budget amendment for community corrections to provide funding for the director of community corrections as a seasonal employee with no benefits. - **Motion** — passed: Motion to approve new business. - **Motion** — passed: Motion to assign the Valley View Ferry issue to the Planning and Public Works Committee. - **Motion** — passed: Motion to assign the issue of renegotiating and expanding paving warranties to the Planning and Public Works Committee. - **Motion** — passed: Motion to cancel the currently scheduled October 4 Environmental Quality meeting. - **Motion** — passed (11-4): Motion to assign the discussion on creating a policy for funding partner agencies with respect to those who want to give employee raises to the Social Services Community Development Standing Committee. - **Motion** — passed: Motion to refer the issue of farm animals in residential areas to the Planning and Zoning Committee. - **Motion** — passed: Motion to refer to the Planning and Public Works Committee an examination of the existing tree ordinance and recommendations for increasing the age, quality, and quantity of Lexington's tree stock. - **Motion** — passed (11-4): Motion to refer to the General Government Committee an examination of the recent history of cost of living adjustments and salary increases for LFUCG civil service employees. - **Motion** — passed: Motion to move spay and neutering funding from Public Safety Committee to Budget and Finance Committee. - **Motion** — passed: Motion to adjourn. --- ## Full transcript Music Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Oh, two, so we should have begun by now. So let's begin. We'll call the meeting to order. This is a work session of the Council. September 27th. First on our agenda, public comment on issues on the agenda. Does anyone wish to speak from the public about issues that are on the agenda today? All right. If not, then we can go to item number two, which is rezonings and the docket approval. Council Member Farmer? Mayor, I have two motions I'd like to add to the docket for Thursday night's meeting, if now is the proper time. That's, we can do it now. I move to place on the docket for the September 29, 2011 Council meeting a resolution authorizing and directing the Division of Traffic Engineering, pursuant to the Code of Ordinances Section 18-86, to install multi-way stop controls at Romney Road and Providence Lane. So move. Second. Motion back. Council Member Farmer, seconded by Vice Mayor Gordon. Is there any discussion on the motion? All right. Hearing none, we can take a vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. All opposed, no. Motion counts. Motion passes. Council Member Farmer. One more. Thank you, sir. I move to place on the docket for the September 29th, 2011th Council meeting a resolution pursuant to the Code of Oranceses, Section 18-66, designating the speed limit on Pepper Hill Road between Montevideo Road and Shinoahe Road as 25 miles per hour and authorizing and directing the Division of Traffic Engineering to install proper and appropriate signs in accordance with the designation so moved. Second. Motion by Council Member Farmer, second by Council Member McCord. Is there any discussion? If not, we can vote. All in favor, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Council Member Farmer. All right. Wait a second. I'm trying to find my... Did we approve the docket? Not yet. Council Member Stennett? Thank you, Mayor. I have to have another walk-on for Thursday night for the docket. I move the place on the docket for Thursday, September the 29th. Council made a resolution revoking Resolution 262-2010 and replacing it with a resolution granting the 1% occupational license fee incentive to SIS Coding Company, LLC, and its affiliates SIS LLC and VBS LLC. So moved. Second. It's a motion by Council Member Stenet and a second by Council Member McCord. Is there discussion on the motion? Hearing none, we can vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. All opposed, no. Motion carries. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, sir. Motion to approve the docket as amended, I guess. Motion to approve the docket as amended by Council Member Ellinger, seconded by Council Member Myers. Is there a discussion? All right. Hearing none, can vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. All right. We can move on then to summary. Move approval. There's a motion by Council Member Ellinger, seconded by Council Member Crosby. Is there a discussion? Hearing none, all in favor please say aye. All opposed, no. Motion carries. Okay. Problem number four, budget amendments. Are there any, Council Member Beard? There aren't any. there's a nun written after each of them so there's no sense in the development summary summary of 920 the uh october i'm sorry september 20th work session that was in the summary i believe so that's what we were proving oh okay yeah all right do you need a motion we got it didn't have the motion okay yeah So, Council Member Farmer. Wait a minute. Budget amendments. Okay, wait a minute. What did we do just now, Jeanette? Help me. You just approved the summary. Right. So we approved it. We got that vote. So we can move on to budget amendments. Right. All right. Council Member Farmer. Thank you, Mayor. Mine is on the very first budget amendment, Journal 55-176 for community corrections, to provide funding for the director of community corrections position as a seasonal employee with no benefits. The general fund dollar figure there is $112,900. I don't think that's reflective of council action at our last council meeting two Thursdays ago where we halved that. And I would either like an explanation or withdraw it or to have it now. I would move to withdraw this then, unless we've got some conversation. Okay, I'll ask Mr. Barris to come to the microphone. I apologize, Council Member. I didn't understand the question we have that. We did. by council motion we changed the line item and the amount to cut it in half completely at the time of our meeting two Thursdays ago. Okay, I unfortunately was not there that evening so I will get with law and we'll get this corrected. Rec and order it for Thursday? Excuse me? Change it up for Thursday night? Yes, it's a reduction so I don't believe it would be an issue. Very good. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mayor. So is there any action then on that or not? Move approval. There's a motion to approve. Is there a second? Second. Second. Motion by Vice Mayor, second by Council Member Crosby. Is there any discussion on the motion? Mr. Farmer. Even though I did not move to amend, I would assume that given the words exchanged here that this will appear in this amended form. Just hold them accountable. Thank you, sir. Yes, sir. 48 hours. What, it's not three days? Is that it? I don't know. Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday. Is there any further discussion? All in favor of the motion, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. All right. Can we move on to new business? Move approval. Motion by Council Member Beard. A vigorous motion by Council Member Beard. And a second by Council Member Farmer. Is there any discussion? No discussion? All right. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. All opposed? No. Motion carries. All right. Next on our agenda, is Program 6, Continuing Business and Presentations. Council Member Farmer. Thank you, Mayor. I'll be brief. There are two sets of planning and zoning committee minutes in our packet today. The first one is from the July 5th meeting, in which we took delivery of the Lexington Complete Streets Manual from the Division of Planning, had some good conversation about that, and I think there will be more follow-up there within the committee. There were no actions taken during our meeting at that time. Also on that day, we had our first presentation about Conferency Plan goals and objectives, and all those conversation points are in here. We're still waiting on the Planning Commission to act on those, to send them forward to the full council. So for this item, there are no motions. and unless I've missed a page, that is all that transpired at the meeting. It was a fine discussion, and we were adjourned at 2.37, so I would tender that on behalf of the committee. Thank you, sir. Secondarily, we met again on September the 13th at 1 p.m. We had another follow-up, a little further conversation about comprehensive plan goals and objectives. had some input from the public about a couple of land use issues. I think that we will take up in a different time frame during our goals and objectives work. Secondarily, we had a report of the downtown traffic management and revitalization study, which talked about downtown two-way streets, which led to a rather lively discussion because there are folks on both sides of the issue who feel very passionate about either the one-way streets we have now or the two-way streets we could have back. That conversation for the day resulted in no motions. We had an update about the planning commissioner position, which Jamie Emmons came forward to update us on the job creation and hiring process there. We appreciated that. We went through some items that were referred to the committee and made motions to remove one item from committee. And we motioned to adjourn. And I still move on behalf of the committee there. Thank you, sir. Thank you, sir. Council Member Lawless. Thank you, Mayor. I just noticed on item G, it says that it's about address changes for several districts for the first quarter, and I believe that was referred to committee, that ordinance, by Council Member Farmer. and I want to make sure that... I'm sorry, Councilman Wallace. Are you... Where are we? New business. New business. I'm sorry. G? Well, okay. Are you wanting to reopen new business because we just passed on it? Right. Yes, sir. Okay. We'll just pass on it. Does it? I'll get clarification from Mr. Lucas. All right. If it doesn't work, then let me know. Is that okay? All right. Council Member Farmer, you also got the Planning and Public Works Committee report out? Yes, sir. Yes, sir. Yes, Mayor. You want to do that? You've already done it. I just have an A and a B here, so I was a little bit confused. All right. Okey-dokey. No motions. All right. Thank you so much. Then we can go on to item number C, where Dr. Thomas Blues is ready to report out. Thank you, Mayor. The Environmental Quality Committee met at 10 a.m. Tuesday, September 20th. We welcome new members Casey Crosby, Jay McCord, and George Myers. Department of Environmental Quality Commissioner Cheryl Taylor and Keith Lovin from Division of Engineering made a presentation on the greenway system covering a number of issues, including the needs for a greenway coordinator and a coordinating committee, a consistent management structure, a standardized maintenance system, a public education component, and measures to lower maintenance costs. Following the presentation and a wide-ranging discussion, Councilmember Farmer moved to charge the administration team as follows. To propose a budget, to identify land acquisition, development, and maintenance policies, to propose a Greenway Coordinator job description, develop a plan for Greenway Planning and Acceptance Policies, and to present those recommendations at the November 15 meeting. The motion was seconded by Vice Mayor Gorton and passed unanimously. I should say that subsequent to the meeting and at the request of Commissioner Taylor, the requested presentation of items has been rescheduled for the December 6 meeting. In other business, Steve Mulligan from Department of Finance discussed the quarterly financial reports, and Division of Water Quality Director Charles Martin highlighted various projects in the Environmental Quality Projects Update. Committee members voted to remove four items from our agenda list, recommending that two of those items be assigned to other committees. Therefore, on behalf of the committee, I move to assign the Valley View Ferry issue, that is to work to establish a better partnership with Madison and Jessamine counties, to the Planning and Public Works Committee. So moved. Second. It's a motion by Council Member Blues, seconded by Vice Mayor Gordon. Is there any discussion? Hearing none. Okay. Council Member Lane. I'd just like to say I think this is a really good idea. The Valley View Ferry services the three counties, and we did have a little bit of a breakdown in communications during our budget process this year, and I think working for better communications with the Ferry Authority would be a great idea. Thank you. Okay. Anybody else want to speak to the motion? All right. You can vote then. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Thank you, Mayor. Also on behalf of the committee, I move to assign the issue of renegotiating and expanding paving warranties to Planning and Public Works Committee. So moved. A motion by Council Member Belief, seconded by Council Member Myers. Is there any discussion? No. No discussion. All right. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. All opposed, no. Motion carries. Thank you. the meeting was adjourned at 11 50 a.m finally mayor one more thing in order to allow more time for department of environmental quality and division of water quality to prepare agenda items for our november 22 and december 6 meetings i move to cancel the currently scheduled october 4 environmental quality meeting so moved motion by council member blues second by All right. Council Member Crosby? All right. Is there any discussion? All in favor, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. All opposed, no. Motion passes. Thank you, Mayor. That's my report. All right, sir. Thank you, Council Member Blues. Next on our agenda are two. We've got two presentations today. One is the airport board presentation on the economic impact of Bluegrass Airport. And we have with us today Mr. Chairman, Richard Hopgood, and the Executive Director, Eric Frankel. And the presentation documents are in pages 39 through 51 of our packet. So, Eric, thanks for joining us today. Appreciate you all pulling this together for us. Thank you. And thanks for having us. And we know you're very busy. I've been down here enough times to know that you've got a lot of work on your agenda. So we won't take much of your time today. But we've actually had some really good news that we thought the council would want to know about. And so obviously I asked the board, our board chair, Richard Hopke, to come with me today. And we just want to give kind of a brief presentation. Then we have a short video. And then I think Mr. Hopke would like to make a few comments as well. So with that, we'll go ahead and do the presentation if we can. No, the PowerPoint. Many airports around the country, this is not anything new, certainly probably not new to you, go through these economic impact studies every once in a while. We had not done one since 1998. We thought it was prudent, given all the changes that occurred, particularly with the new runway, that we take another close look at that, and we certainly thought the community would want to be aware of what the economic impact is, in addition to, obviously, the air service that the airport provides. So we hired from Wilbur Smith & Associates, very well known in our industry, very reputable. They do aviation-specific. They do a lot of economic impacts for other entities as well, but they do a lot of work for airports. And what I wanted to just say quickly about that is these are not pie-in-the-sky numbers. They do a really rigorous analysis, and you'll see that through the presentation. That's what this is for. Thank you. Okay, and again, I'll just kind of go through these quickly, and we'll get to the bottom line. But I just wanted the council to understand the process as much as anything. These studies analyze a lot of things, certainly, obviously, employment being one, but not just the employment of the airport, but the employment of all of the tenants and all the operators at the airport, looking at wages, salaries, benefits, et cetera. But then we also look at the capital improvements that are done on an annual basis, not only again by the airport, but by many of our tenants that do work regularly on building hangars and facilities. And the way we do this is we gather data. It's fairly detailed, and we go out to all of our tenants. And as you can see, 57 different operators on the airport. It's hard to imagine. That goes on. Everyone typically thinks in terms of airlines, but there's a lot of different entities that do a lot of different work out there. We survey them. We follow up, and we get some pretty good information, or at least enough that is statistically important. And then we actually did surveys with the people that flew in themselves, visitors that flew in, whether they were here, that they live here, or they were visitors. We got the same amount of information, not only for folks that come through the terminal, but also that come through our corporate facility. And this is obviously pretty important, particularly during times of Keeneland or the horse sales or certainly World Equestrian Games, because the folks that come through the terminal are not necessarily the only folks that have an economic impact on our community. And, of course, this won't be familiar to you. They look at direct impacts. Then they have a multiplier that's consistent with how the Commonwealth of Kentucky, the impact of the Commonwealth of Kentucky. Basically, they evaluate the impact until it leaves the state of Kentucky. And that's just a visual of that. The bottom line is, after that analysis, they basically have determined that over on any given annual period that the airport, basically the airport or its tenants or the contractors on the airport provide about 3,500 jobs a year, $104 million annual budget payroll, and a $370 million output for our community. This did surprise me, honestly. I would have been happy if it had said $200 million, honestly, for an airport our size. So this surprised me somewhat. And part of it was driven to by perhaps the World Equestrian Games, perhaps the construction of the new runway. But we tried to mitigate those one-time events to really do a better analysis. And we were very proud of that, and we thought the council would want to know that as well. But then there are other issues that the airport obviously provides outside of that economic impact They're a little harder to quantify, and we just listed those. I think they were impressed in terms of some of the different types of industries that go on at the airport, particularly the equine industry, very unusual for airports, for air horses to fly in and out of, and they definitely want to make note of that. And then, obviously, the local societal benefits of the airport outside of the economic benefits, and I think the council is very well aware of the medical and the police activity that occurs at the airport as well. And then I just wanted to touch on briefly the route map. This community really is blessed, I believe, with the amount of air service we have for the population, and particularly given our proximity to Cincinnati and Louisville. And I was just actually at a conference out in Tucson, and that airport is about, we have about 500,000 people that depart on any given year. And Tucson has about 1.8 million passengers. And they also, the thing that we share in common is they serve 15 cities directly as we do. And that just gives you some idea of really how fortunate I think our community is to have as much service as we have. And I would suggest we'll never be satisfied with that. The community is never satisfied. We're always trying to find niches and opportunities that we think we can improve upon. But it really speaks well to the economy of the Bluegrass region and the capabilities of the airport. And then obviously, just wanted to wrap up on this. If you've been watching the news lately, we've had some very exciting announcements, particularly Las Vegas, one of the cities that the community has been asking us about, well, certainly during my time here, but I suspect for a long time. And then Punta Gorda, Fort Lauderdale, Orlando, and Tampa. Allegiant Airlines serves 70 markets. Our size is smaller, but we are only one of five, I think, that actually serves five cities for Allegiant. They usually serve one or two from any given market. So they're very happy right now with the performance of our community. Our community is responding to their product. And we just think, you know, obviously we love all of our airlines, and particularly the network carriers too, but they've been a great addition, and that additional flight we think is going to be successful as well. So with that, we put together a short video that kind of illustrates a lot of the things that happen out at the airport that people may not be aware of. Thank you. I'm out. I'm out. Thank you. I'm sorry. We are really, truly proud and grateful for the amount of progress we've made over these last few years. And I want to recognize Ed Lane, too. He's been a great board member. And I think Richard Hopgood would like to say a few words, and we'll wrap it up. Thank you, Eric and Mayor and Councilmembers. I just want to bring the focus back just for a minute on the employees at Bluegrass Airport. Eric is the face of the airport, and he's a good face. He certainly understands every aspect of airport operations and has built a very good management team at Bluegrass Airport. He's a good steward of the airport's assets, and he operates with the highest integrity. and that tone is set at the top, and everybody that works with him knows that, and it's filtered down. But one thing that I think you don't see often in these videos or when you fly out of Bluegrass Airport is we have 83 full-time employees, six part-time employees that really make the airport run every day. You don't see them there. We have 18 public safety members, people that do maintenance, that keep the runway safe, that keep the building operating, and those folks often, they go about their jobs quietly and don't get a lot of credit, and I think I want to make sure that they're recognized as well. The one thing that I've been most amazed with in the three years I've been on the airport board is the complexity of the operations of an airport. And Councilman Lane can tell you this, we have a myriad of federal regulations that we have to maneuver in construction and operations and everything we do. Our public safety officers are trained as police officers, firemen, and EMTs, cross-trained in three areas. It takes about 180 hours a year for those public safety employees to keep their certification. And we have other folks, licensed electricians and plumbers, that are doing their trade but also doing it mindful of what the FAA requires, which is often very strenuous. So I wanted just to point that out. And every month we look at our travel and expenses, and we have spreadsheets, and I'm amazed at the amount of travel and training that is involved by all of our employees. And I can tell you it's a privilege for me to serve on the airport board and to work with 80-plus very talented, dedicated people. Thank you. Mr. Thank you, sir. So we've got council members who have signed up for some comments maybe and some questions. Council Member McCord first. Then Council Member Lawless. Thank you, Mayor. I just wanted to say thank you all for the job that you do out there. and working with you directly, Eric. I'll say that you're certainly one of the most accommodating visionary leaders that you and your staff, Amy and Scott, have been phenomenal to work with. Obviously, our involvement has been through Second Sunday, and you're opening up your doors and your runway to people from across the community to have a community day there is unlike anything in America, and so you're to be commended for taking that step because it was very easy. It could have been very easy for you to say, no, that's a bad idea, Jay, for you to have these folks out here or whatever. But it was exactly the opposite. And, Richard, I want to thank you for the job you and the board do. You all are truly a credit to the city. Thank you for everything you do. Thank you, Council Member McCord. Council Member Lawless. Thank you, Mayor. I'd like to say that, well, before I was on council, I traveled a whole lot. And the traveling I've done since then, I will pay more to fly out of the Lexington Airport than go to one of the ones in the region. And the employees out there, the TSA, the employees of the airlines out there are incredible. And it's well worth, often it costs less to fly out of Lexington than it does Louisville or Cincinnati. So, anyway, kudos. It's beautiful. The renovations are beautiful. And everybody ought to look at flying out of Lexington. Council Member, Vice Mayor Gordon. Thank you, Mayor. I also don't have a question, but I want to thank you for your work with Sister Cities. Along with Councilmember McCord and Councilmember Lawless, I have observed that you've been very willing to partner. And for those of you who've traveled and gone toward baggage claim, you'll notice right before the revolving door to go down to baggage claim, there is a beautiful Sister Cities display on the wall. and I think it would have been so every traveler who comes in sees that and it would have been very easy for the airport to say no, that's very valuable wall space and you were willing to work really hard to get that up before the World Equestrian Games and I know that it meant a lot not only to Lexington but to our sister cities because lots of those folks came into town also So you've been great community partners, and I appreciate your hard work. Thank you. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Council Member Ford, then Council Member Lane. Thank you, Mayor. Eric, I have just a question for you. I appreciate you bringing this information to us to let us know the economic impacts of the airport. I've heard great things in regards to the capital projects that the airport has undertaken here recently, and perhaps more so the involvement of minority and disadvantaged businesses in that. I look forward to learning more about what you guys are doing out at the airport, maybe some things we may be able to replicate here inside of urban county government. If you could speak briefly just a little bit in regards to the capital improvement projects and your participation with minority, disadvantaged businesses and the economic impact there. I'd be happy to, and thanks for acknowledging that. We have worked hard, and frankly, this isn't a staff initiative. This is driven by the board directly, and certainly, obviously, the staff supports that. And we have a pretty robust program, and for us, it's not about just meeting a goal. It's about truly inviting and engaging the minority community where it makes sense. And we find many times that there's opportunities, but there's not partners or partners that understand the program. So we do have an outreach program. In addition to just providing that opportunity, we actually reach out to the minority community where it makes sense and try to engage them. And we do training throughout the year. A couple times we try to have training courses out at the airport, and we invite all kinds of suppliers. And the board is very focused on that, and it's certainly going to be focused in the future as well. Thank you, Eric. I appreciate your work, and I look forward to learning more about what you guys are doing. It would be our pleasure. Councilman Lane. Thank you, Mayor. I just wanted to add to what Chairman Richard Hopkins said. I think that the leadership we have at the airport is extremely good, and I think all the employees there do a great job and represent our community well. And we also believe the airport has improved its relationship with the tenants and the people that operate businesses out there, because I hear a lot of good feedback on that also, where some of the relationships in the past could have been a little bit better. so just as a board member I'd just like to say thanks to our staff and our employees for the work that they've done I don't think you can ever say that enough and probably the board should say it a lot more but thank you all for coming today and I appreciate what you're doing Thank you, Council Member Lane thank you for your work participation in the board anybody else? anybody else? Mr. Chairman, Eric, thank you all very much for joining us today. This is informing and very beneficial for us. Actually, we don't need to cover this right now, but I was curious about the forward. Maybe at another session you guys could help us with an understanding of where things might be going in the future. as it relates to our airport benchmarks. I appreciate the way you're describing Tucson and its departures and contrasted with ours and how we are imagining or thinking 10, 25 years downstream. Actually, it will be our pleasure to do that. We're actually just initiating a master planning process, which hopefully will be less controversial, but something that we need to go through from time to time. And it's a great conversation for Council to be involved with, and it would be our pleasure when we get farther down the road to come and keep the Council informed on that progress. Is that a process by the Federal Transportation, or is that a required process, or is this self-initiated, or a little bit of both? A little bit of both. There's components that are required that we have to update for the FAA. And obviously when we're going to do a requirement, we want to try to look at the whole process and see if there's anything that we can do. So there's part of it, and actually it's federally funded, so there's part of it that we have to do and there's part of it that we want to do. Okay. Chairman Hoppe. Mayor, I would say in response to that, we certainly would like to come back. We started last year having a board retreat about a half day. We brought in a speaker who MIT runs an aviation group in Washington, brought in an amazingly brilliant guy who understands everything. And so we're setting that up in December. We certainly can make that a focus of our retreat and then come back and talk to you. I know Eric is constantly looking at air service, how to improve air service. We're looking at things like we have actually a state-of-the-art fire training facility that may be of some benefit to private industry to utilize for testing things. We're looking at ways we can use that as an economic development enhancer, as a revenue enhancer for the airport. So we've got a lot of things that we're looking at. We've spent the last couple of years on very intense organizational matters. We've got that in place, and we're certainly looking at strategic things now. Thank you. Thanks a lot. Thank you all for joining us. All right. Next on our agenda is social services presentation regarding the partner agency compensation or salary adjustments. Commissioner Beth Mills and Craig. Is Craig going to join you? No, he's not. Okay. Commissioner Beth Mills. All right. Thank you very much. Yes, ma'am. I've got a real brief presentation. The council had asked for an update on the agencies that requested raises this year with the money that we gave them for partner agencies. And the highlights don't show up too well. They probably show up better in the information you have in your packet. Of the 15 agencies we fund, eight of them did ask for increases for various salary members. you have the backup detail of the personnel and salaries of all of these 15 agencies. The first thing I'd like to point out on the left column, this is not just salary, this is the total amount of money that we gave these agencies. So in some cases, we award them less than $30,000 a year. Some agencies don't receive a lot of funds. In most cases, it is 10% or less of their budget that we fund them. The next column will show the positions that are funded by urban county government. Only four director's positions have any funds from urban county government, only two of those who ask for raises. Most often the personnel positions are targeted. They'll be for a specific program that they have asked us to fund. The only thing we ask in the application is please let us know when the increases will become effective. and then we ask them if those are why did you need the money and the three choices are cost of living, merit, or other. And that's what we currently get on our application. We went over the new application this morning and we will ask more details about agencies that ask for raises. So Big Brothers Big Sisters is the first one that asks for raises on page one. They fund two persons in the Fayette County Public Schools to recruit and work with parents and children. Bluegrass Domestic Violence Program funded two positions, and rather than give a percentage increase, they were going to give each of those family advocates $1,500. Go on to the next slide. Oh, can I board it somehow? Can you put the next one for me? Okay, did we do the Bluegrass Rape Crisis Center? Go back one. Okay, no. That's the last one. Do you need a second slide in there? The Bluegrass Rape Crisis Center had four positions, and they asked for 5% cost of living for each of those, and so on. Center for Women, Families, and Children. We're in the Hope Center, 35 employees. And they were graduated increases. The management team got the largest amount of increase. The program managers, the second amount. And the line workers got 3%. And then the last slide is MASH Services of the Bluegrass. We fund that agency at a higher level. They're very specialized. There's shelter for teenagers. And they also have a safe place for kids that need cooling down from their parents. The movable fees, we funded two of their three positions. They asked for raises in the Salvation Army, 25 positions, most of whom were cooks and shelter employees. So it's pretty straightforward. They asked for raises. The ones that were the larger, the 6, 14, and 20 percent raises, sometimes they shifted the amount of money that that position was funded. Rather than the urban county government funding $3,000 of that position, we funded $9,000 this year. So that's why it looks larger. So basically, these are the eight social service agencies that ask for raises, and this is the information we have. Thank you, Beth. We've got comments or questions? Is that all right? Council Member Stennett. Thank you, Mayor. Commissioner, thank you for getting this to us. Just a couple questions. So this is self-reported information that the agencies have reported to us on their applications? Right. They have to provide financials to us in the budgeting when they apply. And so they've all admitted to this, saying we're going to hire this, this is our raises for our organization this year, and this is what percentage? That's correct. And are those copies in here? Is this copies of each one of their applications? You should have. These are their personnel. It's not their entire applications, or you'd have two foot thick. But it's all of their salaries should be the backup sheets. I think you all got a copy of those? No? Yes, they were in the packet. Okay. And so when did you all receive all these? in January when they applied for funding. So I guess I'm trying to, because the question was brought up during the mayor's veto of the outside agency monies, the vice mayor brought up that she had heard there were 10 that received raises for personnel. Why wasn't council notified of that if you received these in January prior to our deliberations on the budget? If this is a big issue. Let me answer that. Oh, you're here. Yeah, I sure is. Let's hear it. Now, I've been on the council for five years, five including now, and that has not arisen. And the reason it arose this year was because we were asking critical questions related to the partner agencies and our commitment to them. and this issue only emerged after we were asking those critical questions. And I think you know that. That's when they came up, Council Member Stenet. Well, the fact is they didn't come up when the Council deliberated the budget as being an issue of concern that we should look at these agencies because they're getting raises as possibly not giving them the money, if that's an issue. I'm not sure we were able to... The level was also an issue. The level of position, and if, as Commissioner Mills, and this is information to me, too, it's the same information coming to me as it is to you, and the level of the positions, if we're talking about some people in these agencies who are at a, you said, a cook level, so we're talking about probably $8 an hour, $10 an hour, people without even, perhaps even benefits. So I think what we need to do, if we're going to examine this carefully, we need to then slice it down at that level. And we can look at that next year at that level, but that's what we'll do. But instead of perhaps being critical of the process this year and the level of examination, we can say issues emerged in this process that cause us to examine perhaps more intentionally, more deliberately next year. And I'm certainly willing to engage it at that level. And that's what I'm getting to the point of this presentation, is how are we going to use this information going forward? because obviously we didn't have this during this year's process. So with the new application process that we debated earlier and our new goals and needs assessments, how is this going to fit into it? And that was my next question to you is, how is this really going to fit into overall? Because I'll tell you what some people do. They don't put their jobs on our sheets. I'll tell you that right now. I know for a fact they shift those fundings to the other sources, and they say zero on ours. And that's easy to do. There's nothing wrong with it, but that happens. So I'm trying to figure out what a value is this really to us today, and how are we going to use this going forward? Well, Ryan Barris just said that this comes in every year, has been in the past, and you all did have this whole packet when you got partner agency funding. I know you had a lot of paper to go through. The new process, we ask detailed questions about please explain in detail why you won't raise this for your employees, and sometimes it may be justified. Maybe they can't hire anybody at that salary, and we're saying, when is it going into effect? What's the percentage increase? There's four or five questions on the new application. When we do the new scoring rubric, budget is worth 25 points. And we will look at excessive salary increases or things like that when we're scoring those with the review committees. So it will be more detailed in the new application process. And I applaud the organizations that do admit, because, you know, that's what we want. We want full disclosure in the process. And I applaud those that are recognizing, hey, we are giving our employees a raise. Here's how much LFQCB. We did have one of those this year that noted in their application, not only that, They noted our space as in-kind space, and I'd just like to give a shout-out to the nursing home ombudsman agency because they did say we will give our employees raises, we will not be using your funds, and we're counting the lease space as in-kind. So they were ahead of the game. They weren't required to do that. I'm not hearing from you policy that we should be making that we want to not give to agencies that do this. That's not our message today. Our message is here's what the full disclosure has been, and here's how it will fit into our process. I understand. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Councilor Stennett. Good questions. Appreciate it. Vice Mayor Gordon. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Commissioner, for being here and responding to the Council's question. I wanted to just ask a technical question on page 53. You said that the Bluegrass Domestic Violence Program, they showed $1,500 increase, and you said that was not a salary raise, was that like a bonus that they just gave them an amount of money, or what was that? It could have been a salary increase. On their application, if it's in here, each one of those employees' salary was going to be increased by $1,500 this year. And that's what they had put in, like a merit for those two employees. Okay, so it could have been a salary increase. It could have been. It would continue in the future years instead of it being a percentage increase. Okay. All right. Thank you. Council Member McCord, then Council Member Kay. Thank you, Mayor. This was the item that I asked for, so I thank you very much. My question, I guess where this came from, from my end, was that we got to the night of vetoes. You know, the mayor had taken out 10 percent out of the partner agency's budgets. Council Member Stenet made the motion. Well, we put it back in as a council. The mayor vetoed that, and we were in that discussion that night about putting it back in, and I had seconded the motion. And what came to light that night was that there was a list of folks that had asked for raises as a part of theirs. The vice mayor brought that up, and I believe the list was 10 or whatever. Now, I know you've only got the social services side here, so are there others that are a part of this list that are on that side? We don't have managed oversight. We have eight in the social service agencies, so I'm assuming the other two came from other departments that have partner agencies. Okay. I'd also like to see those, Richard or Jamie or whoever, can bring those to us because I think it's good information for us to have. And as Council Member Stenet said, you know, what are we going to do going forward? But I think what was very challenging for me that night was, and I continued to vote to put the money back into partner agencies because I had not seen the list. I didn't know if that was true or not or whatever. But we got down to a very critical moment, and this was certainly something that the council spoke a lot about that night. And there's a lot of strong feeling for these partner agencies. and I think that one of the difficult things for me that night was seeing that we couldn't give our employees raises and we had partner agencies that had put that in and that was something we didn't know going into it and I think it just left us a little bit awkward. I know it hit me in a way that didn't sit right and it kind of put me in a very difficult spot. So again, thank you for running this information down. I'd appreciate from the administration anything on any one of the other ones But I do think that in the times that we're in, and especially as we're dealing with our own employees, it's very, very difficult when partner agencies will put this in. But I do appreciate their honesty. Thank you, Commissioner. Thank you, Mr. McCord. Council Member Kay. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Commissioner, for the information. My questions really are to help me understand what I'm seeing. Okay. I'm having a hard time making sense of this. The number, starting on page 53, so Big Brothers and Big Sisters, we fund them at $8,570. Number of LFUCG funded positions, two. What does that mean? That means we partially funded two positions. We didn't fund the entire positions. Financially, I could pull out their sheet for you. There are two people that work in Fayette County public schools. And of their salaries, which are $25,000 and $29,000 respectively, LFUG pays $6,000 of one salary and $4,280 of another. So in some respects, we're paying partial salaries. They're funding employees through blended streams. I see. So I presume that applies to many other agencies on this list. So Community Action Council, 20 employees. that means that some proportion of their time is funded by LFUCG? That's correct, but they didn't ask for raises from our funds this year. And we are buying services the way they target those 20. I know at Community Action we pay for senior services programs, transportation for seniors, the retired and senior volunteer program. They have a multimillion-dollar budget, So they've targeted what they ask us to fund. Okay, but my point is that for the most part, as I look down the list, it looks like we don't fund any full positions. No, none of the positions are fully funded. They're partially funded. Okay, and when we have an application, do they list the other employees and their salary? Do we have a full list? Yes, your backup sheet should have the employees and the salaries of everyone in the agency, and there's a column that we have them list all their employees and then we say, is it funded by LFUCG? So we have some agencies where we fund no employees, but we do have the employees and their salaries. You don't have that? I did not have those backup sheets and perhaps others. We can get those to you all. I thought you all had a copy of this. Yes, you do. Jeanette indicated that you all did get those in your packet. No, we did not. We did not. Only social service. No. Oh, okay. Okay. I'm sorry. Y'all should have gotten me. That's okay. I think those are my questions. I do want to make a comment. I also felt when we got to that point in the budgeting process that we did not have the right kind of information. I'm not saying that to blame anyone. I think it's just where we were. I think going forward it's going to be important to have that full kind of information. And it seems to me to make a judgment about whether an agency is justified in assigning increases, we need to know a lot more about their entire employee structure. I'm not inclined to look negatively on a small increase on a small salary. I think these agencies, a lot of them don't pay that people a whole lot. And so I think we need to do a comprehensive analysis rather than simply saying if they're, you know, pretty much. And we hope that the new application process will get at some of that, and particularly when we have review committees, we'll go into that in more detail, I'm hoping. Great. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. I want to speak to that because I think it's always have the question when a question like this presents itself as to whether or not to intervene with a comment. But there seems to be a – maybe I'm misinterpreting something. But I heard you say, Beth, that this data was included in the original information that was presented to the partner, the outside agency's committee. Is that correct? I think Mr. Barrows is saying everyone got this information. Okay, so because there seems to be, I appreciate you saying that, because I didn't see this until a couple of days before. We'll let Mr. Behrs explain. Let me explain, because there seems to be this suggestion that there was something that was not being revealed. The information was available, and the information was revealed as we were going through the process. Someone showed me these numbers a couple of days before. So it was not that anything was not being revealed. Am I correct? Yes, Mayor. When we send out solicitations for applications, we get three completed applications back. One copy resides in my office, obviously, for the budgeting process. One copy resides into the commissioner's office responsible for managing those relationships. such as Commissioner Mills, who has the 15 analyzed before you, various other commissioners. And a complete packet also goes to the council office for your all's review that has the complete information that is very comprehensive with all the details, such as this you see before you today. So we began, what my point is, that this issue was revealed, and the data then was illuminated within the context of the question we were debating. at that time. So I don't think that we should be suggesting that more communication or more data would make it, would be an aspiration necessarily, because the data is there. As we go through any process, we are going to discover information that might be right there in front of us, is what I'm trying to say. On that issue? Yes, sir. Okay. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Mayor. I want to make a clarification on that with those three applications. In the past, when the Partner Agency Oversight Committee was in place, that committee used to receive that third packet that goes down to the council floor. And it used to be that the Partner Agency Oversight Committee would go through those applications and also interview agencies. Many years ago, we stopped that process because what it came down to was the mayor had their process for putting together their proposed budget. And it turned out that if agencies weren't in the budget, then they would try to do an end around and come to the partner agency oversight committee and say, well, we want to come and have a seat with you guys and see if we can get you to do what the mayor didn't do, and that's put them in the budget. And so in order to stop that conflict, we stopped that process years ago. So also that committee has gone away. So I'm not sure where those applications are in the council office, but those have never been reviewed, I don't think, by any council member, and they haven't been for years. So although there may be an application down there somewhere, the council has not reviewed those applications. Thank you. All right. Council Member Lane. Yeah, I supported giving back some of the money that was cut from the outside agencies, and there were basically two reasons why I supported that. One is that some of these were helping people that were down and out in our economy, and my judgment was about as bad as it's ever been. It was sort of in the valley of the downturn in the economy, and I felt that was maybe not the best time to cut that. And then also with our economic development agencies, I supported it because I felt when times are tough, that's when we need to be promoting more economic development. That's why I initially supported the override of the veto, and I supported putting those funding back in. Also, during the process of the budget, I believe we ended up with a greater amount of budget surplus than was originally in the mayor's budget. So if we were going to put a few dollars back in, I felt like this was a good place to do it. But having said that, the budget was cut, and I'm happy with that. But I think the issue is really the process more than anything else. And I think the mayor, I think you're absolutely right. It's very difficult for council to get information and micromanage everything that's done. You know, we didn't see any of this information. If I had known that we were proposing raises for people, then I would have said, well, I don't think that's a good idea. I wouldn't have tried to override the veto. That information didn't come out until the night of the override veto vote. but at the same time I think if we say if you're putting any increases in for employees you won't be eligible to get an additional funding or whatever a lot of aids will figure some way to work around the guideline we've laid down so it becomes a very hard thing to manage but I think if we could get information further in advance it would be a lot better and I guess that we should give ourselves as a government a mulligan on this particular issue because, you know, Council didn't get the information on a timely basis. Maybe the mayor didn't get it on a timely basis. No, it was only revealed. The information was available and there. It was revealed in the process of examining carefully this issue, which is not unexpected. I mean, I think when we have these kinds, which is what you're saying here, when we have these kinds of tough times and tough issues, we are going to examine questions and issues at a more granular level than we would have otherwise. So, you know, what happened, I think, is not unexpected. Some of the agencies that got cut were like the Hope Center and the Salvation Army. You know, there's a number of those charitable organizations that are helping unemployed people that are down and out. As I said, I just, you know, I felt like this was a bad time to cut. And it's not that they had not been cut previously, because some of these agencies have been cut some in the prior two years. I haven't gone back and analyzed that in detail. So this wasn't like the first time they'd ever been cut. This might have been the second time or the third time, and I felt maybe we were being a little bit overzealous on cutting these agencies. Anyway, that said, that's all I have. Thank you for allowing me to make my comments here. Difficult and challenging times and difficult and challenging decisions, which is, you're right. Okay. Council Member Lawless. Did the Social Services Link Committee have any information on outside agencies? I don't know. I can hardly remember what I did yesterday. I don't know what helped. Well, I know I'm here now. Really? I think Council Member Kay and others have made a very good point, and that is that there are a lot of agencies that maybe didn't ask for a raise in their pocket but gave raises or have much higher paid employees than some of the other ones. And so it really is apples to oranges. And for some of them it's 10 percent or 15 or 20 percent of the total salary of the person. So I think we need to keep that in mind and not roast these agencies in a single amount because other agencies may have put other things in there at an increase but not salary. So thank you. And my interpretation is that that would be the policy issue or policy question that Councilmember Kay was referring to, right, in a sense, right? So how we would examine that. Councilmember Myers? Thank you, Mayor. I guess I would say also I was the one that made the motion to restore that funding, the 10 percent cut that the mayor put in the budget. But when we heard at the last minute that there were agencies that were giving raises and our employees hadn't received raises, and I also heard from one of the council members that there was a particular agency that the director was making a 5% or 6% raise on a pretty hefty current salary at the time. And that's what made me step back from going ahead and voting to override the mayor's veto of that restored funding. So I guess going back to what Councilman Stenet said, it's really a policy issue that the council needs to take up, and that is how do we want to fund agencies going forward with respect to their desire to give their employees raises because there are many agencies that I think should have received that restored funding, but I didn't vote that way to override the mayor's veto based on this information that we kind of got at the last minute and didn't really even know who all the agencies were on that list. We heard there were ten. We've seen eight. I think Council Member McCord has asked for the other two, so we'll get that maybe next week. But I guess we're currently in Social Services Community Development Standing Committee looking at a policy for funding partner agencies, and maybe this is something that we need to add to that discussion is in the application process that the commissioner's put together, a really strong application, we ferret out more information about that, but then we make a determination as a government, do we want to fund agencies that are giving raises, or is there a way to fund that agency without providing money for their raise so that the agency still gets funding, we just don't fund the raise? So those are questions, I guess, that we need to ask. And I don't know if I need to make a motion to put that little aspect of it into our committee or can we just continue looking at that and working with the commissioner on that as part of the application process. So I would look to the mayor, the vice mayor on that. I would suggest that if there's a policy issue related to the distribution or the process of requesting information, take a look at it in a committee and give us some ideas. Do we need that? No. Also, there's only so much bandwidth that staff has, of course, and the more we examine the outside agencies, the more it's going to cost, so more calories, and we have reduced resources. So we've got to be mindful of that as we go through any kind of policy change or dialing up inspection, I think. Sure. The Vice Mayor nodded to me that I need to make a motion to go ahead and add that to our committee. So I will move that we put into Social Services Community Development Committee the discussion on creating a policy recommendation to the full council around how we fund partner agencies, specifically with respect to those who want to give raises to their employees. So moved. Motion by Council Member Myers, second by Council Member Ellinger. Is there any discussion on the motion? Okay. Council Member Ford. Thank you, Mayor. I'm against the motion that we have. I think that, as evident by our activity in the Social Services Committee today, we have a great deal of work that's already on our docket. I don't fault the council members that requested this information in regards to the raises for the social service agencies, and I appreciate Commissioner Mills for bringing this forward. My concern is that we're being unfair, and we're jumping on the pile in regards to partner agencies. partner agencies and the raises for their staff members are minute in the grand scheme of things in regards to what we spend and what we dedicate funds for in urban county government. If we're going to examine partner agencies to this level, we ought to do so for everybody that does business with urban county government because that's what partner agencies do. They provide a service. We set up a purchase service agreement, and we remit monies for them. So if we're going to examine their personnel policies in regards to how they compensate their employees, we need to do so for everybody that does a service contract for this government, everybody that responds to a bid, scope of work for our government. Let's take it another step. Let's look at their benefits packages. Let's look at their vacation and leave policies. being facetious to an extent, so excuse me, Council, but I think that we're really, really overstepping in regards to particularly over-scrutinizing our partner agencies. Again, they are a minute of the business community that does work with this government. A greater question, I think, that I would support if we put into committee is how do we plan to afford to provide merit raises or Coaling increases for the civil service employees of this Irma County government. I've sworn have been afforded pay raises. That's where the question is. And I think it's unfair for us to sit here and say that we haven't been able to afford raises for our employees because partner agency employees have gotten raises. So I'm against the motion in regards to studying that. I think we need to be very careful in regards to unfairly scrutinizing our part in the agencies, and perhaps we need to look at the bigger issue that's at play. Thank you, Mayor. All right, so anybody else want to speak to the motion? All right. Very good. This is to the motion that Councilman Myers' motion. All right. All right, then we're ready to vote. The motion is to assign to committee the question of partner agency compensation increases. Why don't you restate the motion, Council Member Myers? What I move to put into committee is the discussion of creating a policy specifically around how this government funds partner agencies with respect to agencies that want to give their employees raises. And the reason I'm doing that is because however minuscule the amount of money we give them is, we didn't give our employees a raise. That was the issue that came up during the budget process. That's why most of the council members backed off of restoring the funding to partner agencies. So we made a policy decision this year in the budget cycle to not override the mayor's veto to restore that funding to partner agencies based on this idea that there were ten agencies out there that were giving their employees raises. So we've already made one policy decision this year on that. What I want to do is come up with whatever the decision that we want to use moving forward. Do we not fund agencies because they're going to give their employees raises if we're not giving our employees raises? Or do we try to fund them in a way that we say we'll fund everything but that employee raise? Okay. How was the motion stated? That we would put into committee. Okay. The issue of? The discussion to create a policy. Regarding? Regarding. Compensation for partner agencies? Funding of partner agencies, specifically with respect to agencies who are going to give their employees raises. Okay. Council Member Crosby, did you understand the motion? Now. Yeah, I'm just trying to send my comments to the motion. Okay. Are you going to? That's all I'm saying. All right. This is to the motion. Council Member Lane. Council Member Lane. I think that this is a difficult issue, and I'm not sure putting it into committee is going to be the solution, because each of these organizations, they may have letter agreements, they may have contracts with employees and all that, just like we have contracts with our unions where we're obligated to make pay increases. And I don't know that we could just unilaterally say if your labor costs go up, then the coming year we're not going to fund you or we're going to reduce your funding. So I don't know how that really helps us, Council Member Myers, to go into committee on that. Anybody else wish to speak to the motion? Council Member Lawless. Just briefly, Council Member Ford couldn't have said it better. We talk about a business model. These are businesses, whether they're nonprofit or for-profit. We contract with them for the purchase of specific services, just like we do construction companies or anybody else. And so for that reason, I will not support this. I don't think it's in our that we need to be digging into how the businesses we contract the services for services with are paying their employees and benefit packages. And we need to look forward. Thank you. Anybody else wish to speak to the motion? Council Member Myers wants to respond. Give him a chance to do that. First, anybody else want to speak to the motion? All right. Council Member Myers. Thank you, Mayor. I would just say that, Council Member Lawless, your reason for not supporting the motion is interesting to me because you were the first one who contacted me and said that one of the agencies has a director that's making $100,000 a year. They have a 5% to 6% raise included for them. You sent me their 990 saying that we shouldn't fund this for that reason, and now you're saying that we shouldn't look at this level of policy, but you're the first one that came to me and said, this guy's making $100,000 a year plus. He has a 5% to 6% raise built in. We shouldn't fund this. So I'm kind of perplexed that you would not want to look at this policy. Thank you. Council Member Lawless. May I respond? Yeah. Thank you. I did. I didn't support putting them back in the budget at 10%, and I didn't support the veto. And again, I'm a social worker, but I'm also a business person. And that was across the board. And I think that that is why I said, if we're going to start looking and examining the salaries, et cetera, we need to compare apples to apples. And then when Council Member Ford made his statement, it was an aha moment. He hit the nail on the head square on. So I didn't support giving them 10% raises, and I didn't support overriding the veto. Thank you. Does anybody else wish to speak to the motion? We've already said that no one else was. I already asked if anyone else wanted. Do you want to speak? All right. Okay. Mine's not working. I'm not going to go back and forth with what has already been said. I just would challenge that with this motion, I mean, clearly we have an issue here. And it's a little disturbing to me just when I just saw this chart that there are several agencies where if we did not fund their employees, they would not have a budget at all because we're not paying 10 percent. We're paying almost 100 percent in some cases of directors' salaries with some of these agencies. As I look through the list very quickly, I would just say that this brings up the bigger question as to what does our charter say we need to provide for our community and how are we going to provide the basic needs as charter provides and then what comes next. And if we're not taking care of some of the other areas within government that were mentioned, those are the priorities. We're chartered to do that. So whether it's looking at other businesses that we contract with as a city, I mean, if they are providing a service that's part of what we are chartered to do, then I think that it might be treated a little differently. Thank you. All right. Ready to vote. All right. All in favor of the motion, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. All opposed, no. No. All right. Let's take an electronic vote. All in favor, just please vote electronically. Yes or no. All right. Sorry. Looks like the motion does pass. Okay. Vote for flex passage. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11. 11 to 4. All right. Okay. Okay. Does anyone else wish to speak on the social services presentation? Nobody signed up, so if not, we're ready to move on to Council Reports, Roman numeral 567. Council Member Beard. Thank you, Mayor. I would move that we move the issue found in Chapter 4 of the Court of Ordinances concerning our picking and choosing what types of animals can be kept at residences. it's kind of it needs revamping to say the least and some investigation but we have one residence on tahoma road who has a horse in their backyard a horse which has escaped a couple of times and and the neighbors had to catch the horse and put him back in the backyard. And I honestly don't think backyards are really made, or most backyards are not really made for horses. We can also keep cows in case anybody's interested. Goats. There was some discussion a couple months ago that some people wanted to have more goats. And I guess they have some, and they wanted more, and the neighbors didn't like the idea, and I haven't heard any more about that. But anyway, this is a situation that needs to be corrected, and we need to get on some kind of a sensible page. So I would suggest that the General Government Committee, if Council Member Lane would accept, needs to study this and go from there. Is that in the form of a motion? Yes, sir. I was going to say motion. That's a motion. Council Member Blues has put a motion. Pouring water here. I believe this is a zoning issue. I didn't even hear the point of order, Mr. Lane. Oh, you think it's a zoning? Pardon me? He says it's a zoning. He thinks it should go into planning. Would that be okay with you? Oh, I don't care. No, he's okay. I think somebody needs to read. I think it's a form of emotion. Chapter 4. Not a request or a suggestion. He heard that's made. Oh, very good, Mr. Stennett. Dr. Blouses was on the horse yesterday. So this is back to normal here. So, Mr. Beard, did I hear a motion to place this in planning and zoning? A motion to put it in planning and zoning, this question of farm animals. and maybe more, maybe even zoo animals. Who knows? It shocked me to death that we had a horse over on Tahoma. With all due respect, Mr. Beer, we do have some strange animals in the government agencies here. Okay. Now we're really stretching. All right. Is there a second? There's a second by Council Member Crosby. We have a motion, and we have a second. Is there any discussion on the motion? just why don't you hold up your hand if you would please council member Kay this is just a piece of information I've actually had a request from some constituents to look at the issue of what kinds of animals should and could be able to be kept in the urban areas and there's a draft ordinance that's just gone to legal so I'll send that back if this passes I'll send that back through to the committee All right. Anybody else wish to speak to the Council Member Stennett? I would say that we have an animal care and control group that can probably weigh a little bit better on this issue than the planning committee because it's not a zoning issue. It's an animal care and control issue. It has to do with the state statutes and what they allow you to have in an urban area. So I think we could address it there personally. But if we want to start with the planning committee and let the animal care and control board weigh in, But we do have these issues come up all the time, and they do respond to these issues. And I think they could give us a lot better information. So just some food for thought. Councilman Kaye. I think there's two sides to the question. One is how we want to regulate animals that we might not want to have, and the other one is how we might want to allow animals under certain circumstances. And right now, that's a zoning regulation. There's a part of the zoning ordinance that specifies what kinds of animals under what conditions can be kept in which zones. I think you'll find that state statutes do oversee some of the horses and things that can't go there anyway, even if you want them to. So there may be some similarities. All right, Council Member Blues. Mr. Dennett, let's come back to that maybe in a minute here. Council Member Blues. Thank you, Mayor. I just have a question for Council Member Kay. You say there's a draft ordinance in the works? Just some draft language that I asked my aide to work on, and she's talked to Legal about putting it into the correct form. I see. Okay. So I just wondered whether already some group was working on this. I do know that our ordinance, as it's presently written, prohibits only pigs, hogs, and goats. It doesn't explain the distinction between a pig and a hog, but nevertheless, beyond those prohibitions, any animal goes at the present time. So I'd be happy to support Council Member Beard's motion, and I'm sure that we would want to talk to Animal Care and Control, possibly the Humane Society. But it's an issue certainly in the 2nd District as well, and I'm glad to see this come forward. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you. Anybody else wish to speak on the motion? All right, hearing. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. All opposed, nay. Was that just one? I think then, sadly, Mr. Farmer, the motion carries. Sir. Well, that was serendipity, wasn't it, Council Member Blues? We were just with the same condition yesterday afternoon. All righty. All right. Mr. Beard, is that complete your report? That's all I have. That's a lot. For today is one of those. A lot of work today. Yes, sir. Council Member Blues. Thank you, Mayor. First of all, I would like to announce that the Lexington-Fayette County Health Department will again this year feature Free Flu Friday. That's a special one-day clinic designed to give up to 2,000 flu shots to Lexington residents who want to fight the flu this fall and winter. Now this event is going to be held between 10 a.m. and 6 p.m. on Friday, October the 14th at the Health Department's North Campus, which is located at 805 Newtown Circle. So I hope that people will put this event on their calendar again, October 14th, Friday, October the 14th, 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. at the Newtown Circle Public Health Campus. And if you're going out Newtown Pike, that's the first light left turn past New Circle Road. I should add that in addition to the seasonal flu, this year's vaccine will also provide protection against H1N1. So two flus for one shot and recommended for anyone six months of age and older. I also have a couple of neighborhood meetings to announce on Monday, October the 3rd. At 6 p.m., the Georgetown Neighborhood Association will hold its monthly meeting in the O'Rear Center in Douglas Park. And at 7 p.m., Green Acres, Hollow Creek, Breckenridge neighborhood will hold their monthly meeting in the community center in Green Acres Park. And then on Tuesday, October the 4th, Woodward Heights Neighborhood Association will meet at 6 o'clock in the Community Action Building on High Street. Thank you, Mayor. That's my report. Thank you, Council Member Blues. Vice Mayor Gordon. Thank you, Mayor. Council Members, there are three things I wanted to highlight. First is you will be receiving the updated job description for the citizen advocate. I want to thank Councilmember Steve Kay, Councilmember Tom Blues, and Councilmember Julian Beard, who worked with me, Law and Human Resources, to update that. And so that will be coming to your mailboxes this week. And you also have already received two scheduling surveys regarding when you would be able to attend a committee of the whole for redistricting. This morning we had our workshop with the redistricting committee, and so our next step will be to have a committee of the whole meeting and discuss moving forward on a redistricting plan. And then thirdly is I've set, along with Council Member Ellinger, a committee of the whole for council administrator interviews. And we have our final candidates coming forward on October 3rd from 9 to 12 to be interviewed by the full council, and Council Member Ellinger will chair that committee of the whole. So I hope you can all be there. And Councilmember Ellinger may want to add something. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Vice Mayor. We have all three of the candidates have responded. We'll be here. And if there's any questions that you would like to be asked of the candidates, please send those to either the Vice Mayor or myself so we can get that prepared for the day of the questioning. Thank you. Thank you. Vice Mayor Gordon, that's it. Yes, I'm finished. Thank you. Council Member Stenwick. Thank you, Mayor. And I would just follow. Vice Mayor, when we're talking about the Citizens Advocate, will we still have one after the current position expires? Because didn't we just approve it for a few months? Who's going to answer those calls? Have we talked about that? Well, we don't know yet. And we'll have to work something out because I think there will probably be a break in service, so to speak. and we discussed that at our last, the council members at large discussed that with our current citizen advocate and in our quarterly meeting with her and she's putting together a recommended plan for how to cover that brief period where we don't have a citizen advocate. I believe I talked about the name acting person. Yeah, she's going to bring us a recommendation. Very good, thank you. And then also I know during the budget we had several discussions about different departments being cut in staffing, and some were cut, some weren't. But I wanted to know if our CAO could give us a presentation at our upcoming work session on what our current staffing levels are in GTV3 and who's filling in for the roles that we took out of the budget. Also for computer services, I notice we're losing a lot of folks in there. What are we doing to fill in those roles? Could that be accomplished, Mr. Maloney, here soon? and just to give us an update on how those departments are performing and who's performing those tasks, such as the graphic designer task. Are we outsourcing that? Are we someone else in government completing that task? I think Parks has asked about it because I know they utilize them a lot and some of their programming, so if we could get that answered, that would be great. And then I have two neighborhood meetings this evening. One is the Eastland Parkway Neighborhood Group meeting at 630 at Christ Center Church. They're off Eastland Parkway. And then the North Point Homeowners Association will be meeting at 7 p.m. at Bryan Station High School this evening, both of them. First one begins at 6.30, and that's Eastland. The second is North Point at 7.00. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you. Council Member McCord. Thank you, Mayor. Just again, I want to reiterate that not this weekend, but next weekend is a very large weekend for Lexington. On October 8th, we welcome in hundreds and thousands, actually, runners from across the country as a part of the Bourbon Chase Relay, 200-mile relay race that goes across Kentucky's Bourbon Trail ends in Lexington from 3 o'clock to 9 o'clock. I want to invite everyone to come out to cheer folks on, but also there'll be food, drinks, and live entertainment down at Victorian Square in that general vicinity for after the race is over with. And then the following day is Second Sunday on October 9th from 2 o'clock until 6 o'clock. At 2 o'clock is the sedentary Go Nowhere Parade in the middle of Centerpoint, and this is a direct tongue-in-cheek, back-at-you Men's Health magazine for naming us the most sedentary city in America. Council members, Mayor, some of the folks that wrote those articles will be with us that particular day, and so I would encourage you to come out and be a part of that day with your families and your friends, but also to have a conversation with Men's Health and maybe give them a different view of what Lexington looks like. We're also partnering with the PTAs of Fayette County. They're having the PTA 5K as part of Second Sunday. So it's a day that we will kick off kind of this transformation of Lexington and move us in a different direction culturally than we've been in as far as health, wellness, and physical activity. It's free. It's something that if you want to learn more about it or be a part of that, just go to Get Healthy Lexington on Facebook and become a fan, and that's where all the interchange of information is. Thank you, Mayor. All right, sir. Council Member Lawless. Thank you, Mayor. I want to remind people that the Lexington Farmers Market is still open until October 30th, Saturdays at Cheapside Park, the corner of Maxwell and South Broadway on Tuesdays and Thursdays, and the Southland Drive location on Sunday. and I encourage everybody to get out and get fresh veggies and maybe some horses and cows. There are many, many things going on right now in the 3rd District. National Avenue Arts Festival is this Saturday, October 1st from 9 to 5, and that's a great event. We have Thursday Night Live at the Pavilion still is going on, and there's some Friday night events in the Pavilion. The Wabash Goodrich Neighborhood Association is having a fall picnic and fundraiser at 2 p.m. on Sunday, and that's a great event. So family friendly. It's at the end of Goodrich Avenue off of Nicholasville Road. I also want to let people know two things. One, we all get a lot of e-mails, so if people want to contact me, often Facebook is the last place I look because I can't get to them all. Please contact me here at the DLawless at LexingtonKY.gov to let me know things rather than through my personal Facebook page. And also I want to announce that my aide of two and a half years, Diana Queen, Friday will be her last day. She has been a wonderful aide for the third district and will be sorely missed. So in this transition, things are getting juggled around, and just be patient. We're working on it. Thank you so much. Council Member Martin. Thank you, Mayor. For my council report today, I wanted to just talk a minute about something that had to me last weekend. I missed the trip that Commerce Lexington took to Greenville, South Carolina, but as it turned out, I had a wedding there last weekend, and so I'm sort of catching up with the members of the council who went on the Chamber of Commerce trip this year. and I was struck by the just enormous beauty of the downtown in Greenville, South Carolina. You have mature trees, 30, 40, 50 years old, lining downtown. It's like if you could copy Gratz Park over Lexington's downtown, over Main Street. That's what you would end up with. And I was really struck. The transportation planning there, you have an interstate that gets traffic out of the center of the city. a half a mile to a mile from downtown. You have a false park at the heart of downtown that leverages enormous natural beauty and economic development. And you have open-air trolleys and buses circulating citizens and visitors throughout downtown. I've been told that we can't have open-air buses here, and I can't figure out why. So we have the same transportation U.S. Department there as we do here. The conclusion, I think, has to be that Greenville has made tough decisions requiring political courage that we have failed to make over the last couple of decades. You can't have trees 40 years old if you cut them down. And they have been taking care of the trees. They have valued the natural beauty of their town longer than we have in many ways. we have a number of folks who a number of players in town that they're affected by trees the corridors commission the the tree board and and we on the urban county council who sets budgets in order for us to have the type of downtown that you'd see in greenville south carolina we have to dedicate funds over an extended period of time to plant and take care of and protect trees. And if we want to be anything like a town like Greenville, South Carolina, I think we have to put the same priority on the beauty of our community that they do. And so I'd like to make a motion to refer to the Planning and Public Works Committee, an examination of the existing tree ordinance, and the review of recommendations for increasing the age, quality, and quantity of Lexington's tree stock. So, mood. Second. To make a motion, who's a second? Council Member, who's a second? Council Member Ford? Thank you. Motion and a second. Is there any discussion? Any discussion? It's your lucky day, Council Member Farmer. All right, you ready to take a vote? All in favor, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. All opposed, no. Thank you, counsel. Motion carries. The other item, which is probably not for this council, is the recognition of transportation planning as an important tool for a community. The single lane, I guess it was a two-way street downtown Greenville, one lane each direction, and on-site, I guess, on-street parking there. It's something I know that folks in this community have talked about and folks on this council. I know the mayor has talked about that, to try to bring two-way streets back. The inability to manage our spoke wagon wheel system of city here in Lexington is the reason we've got so much traffic downtown. And I think that's something for the NPO and maybe something for an expanded NPO or some other agency. But it's clearly something that if we want to have that type of walkable, beautiful downtown, we have to be able to manage our traffic. And so I appreciate the Council's letting me sort of talk a little bit about what I saw in Greenville. And in many ways, I'm catching up with many of what you saw when you went to Greenville on the Chamber trip. But it was an enormously beautiful downtown. It was stunning. I was just blown away. And I just want to make sure that I can do anything that I can to help bring that to Lexington. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Council Member. Yep. Very inspiring. It happened in the span of a quarter century. One thing, just FYI, the transportation study, the RFP has been prepared for the transportation study, focused on the downtown, the urban core, and specifically the traffic, automobile traffic patterns. That is, if it's not already out for response, I think it's ready to go out. When you're driving I-385 downtown, the medians on the interstate have trees and bushes and landscaping in them. It's like, wow. Thank you, Mayor. A lot of intentionality to it. Yep, you're right. And good takeaway. Thank you, sir. Council Member Henson. Thank you, Mayor. I had a question for Council Member Martin about Greenville. I think one important thing when you plant trees is they have to have room to grow. And so when it's in committee and being discussed. But I was just curious, do they plant their trees in concrete like we do? It was obvious. And I was up there for a wedding, and a friend of mine, an engineer, was up there, and he could help me understand some of the engineering part of it. But they have dug up their sidewalk and re-poured that concrete a number of times. You can see on the sidewalk where they've done that. And you have to let it grow. There's no doubt about that. It takes advanced planning. It takes insight. But these are huge trees. These are 50-year-old trees. I think that's something we need to look at because with all the asphalt and concrete around it, it's very hot. Trees do not survive well in that atmosphere, and I think that's why they're cut down. Well, these don't have time to get hot because they're under too much canopy. But that's the actual point, and I think we should look at that. And I'll bring up public art at a future council meeting because the public art was stunning there as well. Thank you. Thank you. And just one other announcement. In the past week, there was a survey, some data showing that Lexington's poverty is increased by 20.4%. And there is a Community Action Council sponsoring a poverty forum at the Embassy Suites on October the 3rd, next Monday, from 6 to 8.30. 6.30 to 8.30, I'm sorry. So if you have an opportunity to go and can, I appreciate it. I think it may give us some insight as to what's going on and things that we can do to make things better. So thank you. Yeah, I missed that. What date? It's October the 3rd at the Embassy Suites, Room 630 to 830. Thank you. All right. Thank you very much. Council Member Ford. Thank you, Mayor. I would ask the council's consideration to carry on the conversation that we've had in regards to compensation. I would move that we place into the general government committee an examination of the recent history of cost of living adjustments and salary increases for mayor and employees of the urban county government. So moved. Okay. Motion and a second. Council Member Ford, would you repeat the motion just so we got it? Yes, sir. The motion is to refer to the General Government Committee and examination of the recent history of the cost of living adjustments and salary increases of civil service LFUCG employees. Okay. And if I could, Mayor, just to give just a little background for this request, my understanding is that my recollection to this past budget is that I'm not certain that we really discussed in great detail proposed saddle increases for civil service employees. I know we're in a very, very tough budget time, but as a new council member, I'm very much interested in the recent history of that. Again, as all of you, most of you know, I'm a former civil service employee. And I ended my service in 2008, displaying thereof. And at the time that I left, we were not in line for increases at that time. I'm not certain if increases have been granted or even considered in the interim. So I would ask for the general government committee's consideration of helping us examine that from a compensation and HR standpoint. The discovery may help us in future budget deliberations. So thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Council. All right. There's a motion. Was there a second to the motion? Yeah. Council Member Ellinger, second. Okay, we have a motion and a second. So the floor is available for discussion. Council Member Stenet. Thank you. Council Member Ford, would it not be better to start with the administration and just present us the history to each council member? Because I'm not sure what work we'd like for us to do in the committee in terms of policy changes. If you want to put the ordinance in there, that's one thing. But just to get a history, I think we can get that first, and maybe there are some different topics that will come out of that discussion from a presentation first. I'm not sure what exactly we're going to get to in committee. I would hope that an end result from the committee's consideration of it is, again, that it may help us in future budget deliberation activities. But I very much hope that it can be a policy. My understanding is that there are several, there are perhaps ordinances that pertain to this compensation issue of civil service employees already on the books. And so I think it deserves committee examination first and hopefully committee work that will lead to policy changes if deemed necessary. So I would prefer that it go to committee. My understanding is that the committee's docket is limited at this time, so I think it will be a good start there. If those items are included in that motion, I'd be glad to examine those ordinances and look for policy changes. And I think that would be good work of the committee. I just don't want to put an item in the committee and just have a presentation, because I think there needs to be work on it if it's put into a committee. That's correct, Council Member Stanton. I appreciate that. Anyone else wish to speak on the motion? Council Member Lane. I'm not trying to shift any responsibilities away from the General and Government Committee, but I feel like this might be more appropriate in the Budget and Finance Committee because it's an economic issue. And I serve on that committee as vice chair, so I'll still be working on it, but that's just a question of an appropriate committee to put it into. Does anybody want to speak to that? Maybe I'm wrong on that. All right. Council Member Blues? Well, I think that's a good question, and in light of Councilmember Stennett's comment that it might be appropriate to get the information first from the administration, have a report on the matter and then determine whether what we have merits assignment to a committee, and I think we'd have an indication of what committee. It seems to me that assigning this issue to a committee at this time is premature, and at this point I don't think I can support the motion. Thank you, Mayor. Well, let me speak on behalf of the administration in just a second. If anybody else wishes to speak, anybody else? Council Member Ford. Mayor, we spend a great deal of time talking about partner agencies and the raises thereof. The reason I think it deserves to go to general government is because there are ordinances and policies already on our law books. And for whatsoever reason, it has not resulted in any kind of budgetary impact in regards to us granting those COLA adjustments and those pay increases. So I think it starts in general government. I don't think it's premature to start that discussion there. And as a first-time council member who's very much interested in this subject, I think it's worthy of committee discussion. I don't see any harm or distraction of the committee for us to consider it there. Thanks, Mayor. All right. Let me speak a little bit to this. I think this is representative of other issues that we have. And I say this with a lot of respect for the inquiries, the curiosity, the nature of it. I think that being specific on the question on an issue like this is real important as well. For the administration, for people to start making a report, I'm going to just ask that be specific on it when it goes into a committee, and that the Council also exhausts its resources, its research resources, to examine a question like this. As we go downstream, I think that clarity on the scope of inquiries and questions and stuff like that, all of which have a lot of merit. You know, don't dispute that at all. That's one of the things that we want to, I'd like to see us work on, and this represents an opportunity for that. Ready to vote? All right. All in favor, please indicate by saying aye. Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. Mr. Lane has asked for a restate of the motion. Okay, Council Member Ford, you got it. Thank you, Mayor. A referral to the General Government Committee for an examination of the recent history of the cost of living adjustments and salary increases for LFUCG civil service employees. Okay, I understand the motion. All right. Ready to vote? All in favor, please say aye. All opposed, no? No. All right, let's do an electronic vote then. Okay, motion passes. All right. All right, back to council reports. Council Member Farmer. Thank you, Mayor. Just a couple of quick things. First, thank you to the Council for placing so much at the disposal of the Planning Committee today. Really, we have a lot more to do than we did before. While we've been sitting here, I'm in receipt, I think as many of you are, a transmittal email from Chris King forwarding the goals and objectives that the Planning Commission filed last on the 22nd when they passed them. So we now have something specific to work with, and we'll work on a framework for us to come up to speed and to work those over and to pass them accordingly. And then, Mayor, I just wanted to make light of your – I found your comments today at the opening of the new Tiffany facility in town quite eloquent. I thought that your comparison at the end of the blue of the Big Blue Nation and the blue of the Tiffany organization as something else for people to cheer for in Lexington was excellent, and certainly the facility and the jobs and the celebration were all very nice. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, sir. Council Member Henson, is that okay? Okay, dokey. Yes, ma'am. Of course. I apologize. There's an item that I placed in Public Safety Committee, spay and funding for spay and neutering. And after speaking with Council Member Lawless, who's the chair of that committee, we thought it would be more appropriate in budget and finance because it is regarding shifting the funding. So I would like to make a motion to move spay and neutering funding from Public Safety Committee into Budget and Finance. Second. No. The motion and the second floor is available for discussion by Samaria Gordon. Yes. I had talked with Council Member Lawless about this, and so Paul Schoeniger is going to talk with, and I'm supportive of the motion, but before the committee spends a lot of energy on it, Paul is going to talk with Bill O'Mara and Commissioner Driscoll and the folks out at the Humane Society to see if there's a simple change administratively that they can do without it spending, because it's my understanding from Council Member Lawless, it's a matter of how the funds are accessed. and so I think it's good to move it to the committee, but you may not have to do anything with it if the administration can figure out a way to change the access to the money. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Anyone else wish to speak? Peggy? I'm fine with that, and I think that's a great idea, But this was brought to me and asked from the Commissioner of Public Safety's office. So if we could get it worked out without spending a lot of time, I think it could be fairly simple to a simple solution. So I appreciate that. Thanks. Is there a moment? You got a second? I can't remember. Was there a motion? Peggy made a motion. Peggy, was there a second? Second. Okay. Motion by Council Member Henson, second by Council Member McCord. Any further discussion? All right. Hearing none. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Okie dokie. All right. Council Member Lane. Just a short follow-up on Council Member Farmer's comment. And I also went to the Tiffany's Manufacturing Plants Grand Opening here in Lexington. And the information I got at the meeting today was that, of course, they're already in operation. They've already hired over 90 people to work at the facility. And they even have additional land for expansion, so I'm hoping they do very well. They also announced today they were making a major commitment to support several of our arts organizations here in Lexington as part of their commitment to coming to the city, and I think that's terrific. So I'd just like to say welcome to Tiffany's, and it's great to have a globally recognized company locate its business here in Lexington. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Lane. Just as a postscript on that, thanks to Councilmember Farmer for recognizing the blue metaphors. I fail to recognize that there's different color tones and hues to the two, of course, significantly different ones. But you would recognize that being in the jewelry business. It's not Carolina blue. That was the important one. There you go. So one other thing, though, that Council Member Lane did mention that I think is worthy of sharing with the council members and worthy of sharing with the public, the president of Tiffany's, the CEO, was there, the chairman was there, the operations vice president, senior vice president was there. And I don't think that they were speaking gratuitously or in hyperbole when they said, you know, we have really been impressed with the workforce, the quality of the workforce here, The people that they have hired and recruited are working there. The level of commitment, the level of dedication, the level of skills, they were overly praising of it, and I think it really should make us all feel good. So I wanted to mention that. Thanks. All right. Now, Council Member Lawless, is this for Council Report? Am I seeing this right? Okay. I thought you had given. I had. It's on the lines of the committee referrals, if I could speak to that. All right. Council Member Stenet has not given his report. I did, but I forgot something. Okay, fine. Then let's keep. We'll go right along this way then. Council Member Lawless and Council Member Stenet. But changing committees and reassigning, et cetera, has been a large task. There are several items that I think were supposed to be on public safety that aren't, and some that are that maybe belong somewhere else. And I'm going to be talking to Vice Mayor Gorton. Also, those of you that are on the public safety committee, I sent out one of those doodles to set up a second meeting. So if you all would look at that and give your preferences. And to cut down on the chaos and, you know, everybody run around with their hair on fire, any items for public safety, if you want them, if I could be the point of contact, that would help. So people aren't contacting anybody and everybody. Thank you so much. Council Member Stinnett. Thank you, Mayor. And, Council Member Laws, don't forget you have three new people on that committee that may not have got that survey on the Blast email. I will double check. Thank you. One final thing is Saturday the mayor and I will be at PetSmart in Hamburg for the Northside Adoption Center of the Humane Society. It's a brand-new facility. This is one of several going in all the PetSmarks across the country. The CEO of PetSmart is flying in for this event, but they basically have taken the entire back half of the Hamburg PetSmart. It's going to be a huge adoption agency in another location for the Humane Society in our city. So I welcome all my colleagues to come out Saturday morning, adopt a dog, and come see the grand opening of the new facility. Thank you, Mayor. Yes, sir. Thank you, Mr. Stinnett. Vice Mayor Gordon. He's checking his calendar now, Council Member Stinnett. You reminded me, and this is very exciting, Saturday is the grand opening of the Heisel Farm Archery Range at 10 a.m., 10 to 12. And, Mayor, it was my understanding that maybe you were going to be shooting arrows Saturday morning. I'm not going to get squeezed in on this one. I don't know. Thank you. We'll try shooting something one way or another, I guess. Okie dokie. Anybody else wish to speak? Anybody else? Okay. All right. Then we can move on to the mayor's report. These have been, the mayor's report has been sent separately, is what my notes are saying. Hillary? Motion approved. Second. Oh, goodness. All right. Thank you. Motion by Council Member Ellinger, seconded by Council Member Myers. Is there any discussion? Yes. Oh, good. All right. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. All opposed, no. Motion carries. Okay. Is there anyone here to speak for public comment? I don't have anybody signed up. All right. All right. Then we can adjourn. Motion to adjourn. Councilman Allinger, seconded by Vice Mayor Gorton. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. All opposed, no. We are adjourned. Thank you.