# Council Work Session - April 17, 2012 > Auto-transcribed civic record · April 17, 2012 - **Permalink**: https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/meeting/2474 - **Source video**: https://lfucg.granicus.com/player/clip/2474?view_id=14&redirect=true - **Date**: 2012-04-17 - **Last revised**: July 17, 2026 - **Length**: 9,637 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 April 17, 2012, at 3:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers on the 2nd Floor of the Government Center, with the Mayor presiding. The council addressed eight agenda items during the session, including new business, a Downtown Development Authority quarterly update, and personnel matters. Four motions were voted on, and the council heard seven public comments from residents regarding both agenda and non-agenda items. The council approved two items: New Business and the NDF List. Two items were deferred for later consideration: a proposal regarding Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) and salary increases for Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government employees, and a Council Report. The meeting also included informational presentations on the Downtown Development Authority's quarterly update and the Mayor's Report, along with two public comment periods—one for issues on the agenda and one for issues not on the agenda. ## Attendance The following individuals were present at the meeting on April 17, 2012: * Mayor * Vice Mayor Gordon * Council Member Blues * Council Member Henson * Council Member Ellinger * Council Member Farmer * Council Member Myers * Council Member Stenet * Council Member Beard * Council Member Ford * Council Member Lane * Council Member McCord * Council Member Crosby * Council Member Kaye * Council Member Martin * Commissioner Hamilton * Commissioner Mason No members were absent or late. ## Votes and Decisions The council took four votes during this meeting, all of which passed by voice vote. **Motion to place resolution supporting the Empower Lexington Energy Plan on the docket for April 26, 2012** [timestamp: 00:06:43] Council Member Blues moved to place this resolution on the April 26, 2012 docket. Council Member Henson seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote. **Motion to approve the Neighborhood Development Funds (NDF) list** [timestamp: 00:10:41] Council Member Ellinger moved to approve the NDF list. Council Member Myers seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote. **Motion to enter closed session for discussion of employee appointment** [timestamp: 01:04:09] The Vice Mayor moved to enter closed session to discuss an employee appointment. Council Member Henson seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote. **Motion to schedule interviews for Citizen Advocate candidates on April 24, 2012** [timestamp: 01:05:09] Council Member Crosby moved to schedule interviews for Citizen Advocate candidates on April 24, 2012. Council Member Kaye seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote. ## Budget and Financial Actions The meeting approved four financial actions totaling $1,177,405: **Todds/Liberty Road Improvement Project** Authorization was granted to execute Supplemental Agreement No. 3 with the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet for design of Section II of the Todds/Liberty Road Improvement Project. The contract amount is $400,000 (L368-12). **Home Network Project** Authorization was granted to accept a grant award from the Lexington-Fayette County Health Department to continue the Home Network Project at the Family Care Center for FY 2013. The grant amount is $460,560 (L369-12). **Day Treatment Services** Authorization was granted to submit an application and accept a grant award from the Kentucky Department of Juvenile Justice for Day Treatment Services in the Division of Youth Services for FY 2013. The grant amount is $241,845 (L376-12). **Coolavin Rail Trail Project** Authorization was granted to execute a Grant Agreement Amendment with the Kentucky Department for Local Government for the Coolavin Rail Trail project. The amendment extends the project through June 30, 2013, with a grant amount of $75,000 (L389-12). ## Public Comment The meeting included comments from council members and a community member addressing various topics: **John Jacob Niles Commemoration** Mr. Heno Lohmeyer presented a proclamation commemorating John Jacob Niles, the Dean of American Folk Music, on his 100th anniversary. [timestamp: 00:01:00] He announced a concert at the Kentucky Theater scheduled for May 2, 2012, to honor Niles' legacy and contributions to American music. **Public Golf Subsidy Discussion** Council Member McCord presented data on the city's public golf operations, noting that the city subsidizes the program by $1.2 million annually despite generating only $2 million in revenue. [timestamp: 00:38:36] He proposed establishing a policy direction for an enterprise fund with a defined subsidy level. Council Member Ford expressed concern about the timing of this discussion, noting that the Parks Advisory Board had been working on a business plan and cautioning against rushing policy decisions before evaluation. [timestamp: 00:52:51] Council Member Kaye emphasized the need to evaluate golf subsidies within the broader context of the parks and recreation budget rather than in isolation. [timestamp: 00:55:15] Council Member Beard advocated for quarterly performance evaluations of the golf program to enable timely decision-making, rather than waiting for annual budget cycles. [timestamp: 00:57:57] **Other Announcements** Council Member Henson announced the upcoming Downtown Trash Bash, scheduled for the following day at Cheapside Park, inviting council members and the public to participate in cleaning downtown. [timestamp: 01:01:18] Council Member Crosby praised staff for organizing a large dance recital and requested an updated list of fire stations being browned out to better inform constituents. [timestamp: 01:01:52] ## Appointments During this meeting, the following appointment was made: * **Citizen Advocate** — Candidate(s) for Citizen Advocate were appointed to this position. ## Contested Items **Public Golf Subsidy and Enterprise Fund Proposal** Council members were divided on how to proceed with addressing the $1.2 million annual subsidy for public golf. The disagreement centered on timing and approach rather than the underlying issue itself. Council Member McCord advocated for immediate policy direction to move forward with decision-making, while Council Members Ford and Kaye took a more cautious stance, emphasizing the need for thorough evaluation and staff input before committing to any course of action. This split reflected differing views on whether the council should act decisively or gather more information first. **Compensation System Evaluation** A heated discussion emerged regarding how to evaluate the city's compensation system. The core dispute involved whether to hire a new external consultant or re-implement the original Mercer system that had been used previously. Council Member Beard raised concerns about the city's track record, criticizing its history of rejecting consultant recommendations, which he suggested indicated a pattern of not acting on professional advice. Council Member Lane questioned the value proposition of hiring an external firm, arguing instead for reliance on internal expertise. This debate reflected broader concerns about resource allocation and the effectiveness of external consulting versus developing internal capacity. ## Public Comment - Issues on Agenda [timestamp: 00:05:58] No public comments were submitted for issues on the agenda. The council confirmed that no members of the public were signed up to speak and proceeded directly to the next agenda item. ## New Business [timestamp: 00:06:43] Four new business items were presented during this agenda section. **Items Presented:** - Authorization to execute a supplemental agreement with the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet for road design - Acceptance of a health department award for the Home Network Project - Submission of an application for juvenile justice funding - Extension of a rail trail grant **Key Speakers:** Glenda George and Jeff Fugate presented the new business items. **Outcome:** All four items were approved by voice vote. ## NDF List The Neighborhood Development Funds list was presented during this agenda item [timestamp: 00:10:41]. Council Member Ellinger and Council Member Myers participated in the discussion. The presentation included a $450 grant to Captain Reginald Underwood Young Marines for instructional materials. The list was approved by voice vote. ## Downtown Development Authority (DDA) Quarterly Update Jeff Fugate, Executive Director of the Downtown Development Authority, presented a quarterly update on the organization's activities and initiatives [timestamp: 00:11:16]. **Presentation Topics** The update covered the DDA's work across several key areas: - Economic development efforts - Project management activities - Public engagement initiatives - Upcoming Design Excellence Guidelines - Downtown market inventory assessment **Outcome** The report was accepted by the body without discussion. ## COLA & Salary Increase for LFUCG Employees Glenda George presented a detailed overview of the current compensation system for LFUCG employees, including its historical evolution and challenges with the existing Mercer system. [timestamp: 00:19:18] The presentation covered the compensation structure and identified issues with the current system's effectiveness. George outlined how the system has developed over time and discussed the specific problems that have emerged with the Mercer approach to salary administration. Following the presentation, the council determined that an external evaluation was necessary to address the identified concerns. The council agreed to hire a consultant to evaluate the compensation system and provide recommendations for improvement. The council budgeted $40,000 for this consulting effort. The agenda item was deferred, indicating that further action on COLA and salary increases for LFUCG employees would be addressed at a future meeting pending the consultant's findings and recommendations. ## Council Report Council Member McCord delivered a report on public golf operations, addressing the financial structure and future direction of the enterprise. [timestamp: 00:38:36] **Key Presentation** The report highlighted that public golf currently operates with a $1.2 million annual subsidy. Council Member McCord proposed establishing policy direction for converting the golf operation to an enterprise fund model. **Discussion and Concerns** Several council members raised questions during the discussion: - Council Member Ford and others expressed concerns about responsiveness and the timeline for evaluation of the golf program's performance. - The discussion included debate over the timing of the proposed policy changes and the need for greater transparency in how the subsidy is being used. - Council members emphasized the importance of fiscal responsibility in managing the public golf enterprise. **Speakers** In addition to Council Member McCord, the discussion involved Commissioner Hamilton, Council Member Ford, Council Member Kaye, and Council Member Beard. **Outcome** The Council Report agenda item was deferred, meaning the matter was postponed for consideration at a future meeting rather than resolved during this session. ## Public Comments - Issues Not on Agenda [timestamp: 00:38:36] During this agenda item, several council members provided public comments on matters not listed on the meeting agenda. The discussion covered a range of operational and policy topics affecting city services. **Key Topics Discussed** Council members raised concerns and observations regarding: - Parks and recreation services and their management - Golf subsidy programs and their financial implications - General city operations and administrative practices - Staff evaluation processes and their timeliness - Financial reporting transparency - Recognition and appreciation of city staff **Speakers** The following council members participated in this portion of the meeting: - Council Member McCord - Council Member Ford - Council Member Kaye - Council Member Beard - Council Member Henson - Council Member Crosby **Key Concerns** Council members emphasized the importance of timely evaluations for staff performance management and highlighted the need for greater transparency in how the city reports its financial information. Additionally, there was discussion regarding the value of recognizing and acknowledging staff contributions to city operations. **Outcome** This agenda item was informational in nature, allowing council members to raise and discuss issues outside the formal agenda without requiring a formal vote or decision. ## Mayor's Report No mayor's report was presented at this meeting. [timestamp: 01:03:09] --- ## Decisions - **Motion** — passed: Motion to place resolution supporting the Empower Lexington Energy Plan on the docket for April 26, 2012 - **Motion** — passed: Motion to approve the Neighborhood Development Funds (NDF) list - **Motion** — passed: Motion to enter closed session for discussion of employee appointment - **Motion** — passed: Motion to schedule interviews for Citizen Advocate candidates on April 24, 2012 --- ## Full transcript I'll now call the meeting of the work session of the Council together. And first on the agenda is a presentation, is a proclamation, and I'll go around to the podium for this presentation. Thank you. With us today, Heno is planning a concert to honor John Jacob Niles on May 2 at the Kentucky Theater. Today we have a commemoration in honor of the Dean of American Folk Music, John Jacob Niles. And while Heno is coming to the podium, I'll read it. It says that whereas May 2 marks the 100th anniversary of the date, John Jacob Niles visited Lexington for the first time, and whereas he collected, transcribed, and performed traditional songs from throughout the southern Appalachians, and whereas John Jacob Niles performed on national stages in various jobs throughout the entertainment industry, including performances in opera, on the radio, and at the Newport Folk Festival, and whereas he was a noted songwriter basing many of his songs on traditional sources, including I Wonder As I Wander and Go Away From My Window, and Whereas, to honor John Jacob Niles, Mr. Heno Lohmeyer, a Lexington resident, is planning a concert on May 2nd at the Kentucky Theater featuring Hope Kaner, Tedron Lindsay, and soloists from the American Spiritual Ensemble. So, on behalf of all Fayette Countians, I commemorate the many accomplishments of John Jacob Niles on behalf of the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government on the 17th day of April in 2012. Now I'd like to introduce Mr. Lohmeyer, who has put together what will be a wonderful concert. If some of you may not know, but Hanno is the husband of the late Gail Robinson, who was herself a distinguished, had a distinguished career with the Metropolitan Opera, and then later the University of Memphis and the University of Kentucky. And he is working with many of the graduates of U.K. Opera Theater to help them find their way to opera careers around the country. So, Heno, please join us and tell us a little bit more about the concert. Thank you, sir. Can you tell us a little bit about the concert? I'm not prepared for this. So this is, the concert is here right next door, and it will feature a soprano which was educated here in Kentucky. Her name is Hope Kohler, and she becomes the interpreter of Nile's songs, which is very difficult because he had a very special kind of performing. and he was a storyteller and over 1,000 songs he collected. The funny thing is when he came here exactly 100 years ago and made a second, he was a repairman for a machine company but he already collected in the mountains songs which he picked up from people in the mountains and maybe somebody would be surprised to hear that we have members of the American Spirit Ensemble performing on May the 2nd and thinking, why would black people sing James Niles? But the first collection of songs he published was called Impressions from a Negro Camp. So in the Abelagian Mountains, obviously it was before my time, there have a lot of African-American people working there. So that's why we have this kind of performance there too. But when he came here, he boarded a boarding house not very far from City Hall now. And the first job, I hope this is allowed to say here, the first job, he got to the brothel. He worked for a madame in the evening, and he got 50 cents a warm meal, and he said, the red is none of your business. but he came here 75 years later already a very established songwriter and performer and stayed for the rest of his life here in Lexington died here and he sang in the White House many times invited by FDR he performed in Paris, in Rome, in Berlin all over the world and so I thought that he deserves on concert and a memory. That's why we do it on May 2nd. Thank you very much. Thank you. All right. First on our agenda is the public comment for issues on the agenda. I don't have anyone signed up for issues on the agenda. Second is any rezoning or docket approvals. Not this week. There's no council meeting. Mayor. Yes, sir. Council Member Blues. True, we do not have a docket for this week, but I do, with permission, would like to walk on a motion for the April 26th Council meeting. And the reason I would request that I could do it now, I know there are folks here from environmental quality and citizens who have worked on the Empower Lexington initiative. And if I could do the walk-on now, I could save them the time from sitting through to council reports. So with permission, Council Members, you recall when I reported out the last Environmental Quality Committee meeting that I said I would bring forward the resolution that the committee approved, although first amended, to support the Empower Lexington Energy Plan. I have sent that to all Council members as amended electronically and placed paper copies in front of each place at the horseshoe. So I'll go forward with that motion as follows. I move to place on the docket for April 26, 2012, a resolution supporting the Empower Lexington Energy Plan designed to reduce Fayette County's energy use by 1 percent annually through voluntary measures and supporting its implementation. So moved. Second. There is a motion by Council Member Bleu, seconded by Council Member Henson. Is there any discussion on the motion? Council Member Blue has been asked by Council Member Martin to repeat the motion, please, sir. It is my chagrin that in my old age I am losing my hearing, so I appreciate it. I'll speak even more closely into the microphone. I move to place on the docket for April 26, 2012 Council meeting a resolution supporting the Empower Lexington Energy Plan designed to reduce Fayette County's energy use by 1% annually through voluntary measures and supporting its implementation. All right, is there any discussion? Okay. Hearing none, we can take a vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion to be. All right. Let's do a show of hands then. All in favor, please hold your hand up. We can do the monitor. Can we, Jeanette, have you got it on? It's on there. Okay. All right. The vote reflects passage of the motion. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you. Council Member Blues. Next on the agenda, there are no budget amendments today, so new business. Move through. Second. It's a motion by Council Member Ellinger, seconded by Council Member Farmer. Is there any discussion? All right. Hearing none, we can take a vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Move through the NDF. Second. Next on our agenda under continuing business is the NDF. We have a motion by Council Member Ellinger, second by Council Member Myers. Is there any discussion? All right. Hearing none, take a vote. All in favor, please say aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Next on our agenda is an update from Jeff Fugate, who is our recently appointed executive director of the Downtown Development Authority. So, Jeff, welcome, and thank you. Thank you, Mayor. Counsel? All right. So the last time I was before this body, it was a get-to-know-me meeting, and I actually asked to tell you a little bit about myself, my story. And at that meeting, the vice mayor asked me if I knew what my job was yet, and the answer to that time was no. Had a few months, and I wanted to stop back by and basically give you an update on what I think the job is and field some Q&A. So knowing that we're a little behind schedule, I'm going to go through quickly and then be happy to answer any questions you might have. Just briefly a review of my photos here. You'll recognize the one at the top as work to be done, the one at your far left as work to be done, but an exciting announcement this past week. And then the others are representative of work to be done and work that has happened. And I am going to learn how to do this. I know how. There's a laser in anything. I like anything that comes with lasers. All right. So our destiny. Downtown Development Authority was created a little over ten years ago by this ordinance here. and I pulled out this as an excerpt giving an idea of the duties and I won't read this to you but it should be in your packet but this speaks to an organization that really holds and carries forth vision for the downtown the downtown is an economic engine for the city and a role of facilitating that engine basically tuning it up and keeping it humming and that's very much I think the spirit of where we're headed. I also wanted to show you this map, which is, interestingly, in the ordinance, the Downtown Development Authority, despite having the term downtown in the title, was actually given basically the authority to work anywhere in Fayette County. The DDA, a few years later, drew this line just to kind of rein in what we might consider to be downtown in the area in which we work. Of course, obviously, lasers, lasers, there we go. This is what we know of as the central business district most often, for those in the audience here. But obviously there's much more interesting things, not more interesting things. There are more interesting things also happening at the edges of this. So in the area where BCTC is working, the East End, of course, anything related to the campus, the north side. So I bring this up just to say that while downtown often is here, Lexington is not a big enough place to ignore the rest of it. And so while we work out here, we also keep an eye on what our actions impact the neighborhoods, the near neighborhoods, the far neighborhoods, and then also how do we preserve the world-class farmland we have surrounding our city. So it's all part of the same system, and so we're part of that conversation. So this is what I call our buckets of work. I like to categorize things. Jeff, can I hear you? I'm sorry. Whenever this speaks, it's confusing, Ken, but I was just going to encourage you to speak a little bit more into the microphone. It's hard to hear you. Thank you. Does that work better? Ah, there we go. All right. These are the buckets of work. So as I think about what does the DDA do, what is my job, why am I here, economic development, which is about doing what we need to do to drive public outside investment into our city. and sometimes that's spending public money but it's it's about leveraging private investment project management there's a role that we play for the city on behalf of lccg and then public engagement which is we have to continue to put forth what the vision is for our downtown why it matters to the rest of the city because you only have one downtown and so we also play a thought leader role and engage in partnerships with other institutions. And then just to go back to what do I spend my time doing, here's the hot list for the next year. We've got multiple private projects in development. Obviously 21C is out there. CenterPoint is moving forward. They've actually issued RFPs for construction companies today. The main Vine project, we're continuing to talk with them about what could happen. We have nibbles around retail. We have what I would call a strike, if you'll allow the fishing metaphor, from entertainment for downtown. So there's definitely people inquiring, and we've got an opportunity for, I think, some strong projects in the coming year. Design Excellence Guidelines, working with Council Member Blues to push those across the finish line. These matter because downtown development is often driven by what a developer feels like the next person, what rules the next person is going to have to play with. And so these rules matter, and it matters that they're transparent, and it matters that we get them done. We're wrapping up Streetscape. Final little pieces to push across the finish line. And then also we have undertaken an annual downtown market inventory so that we know what's available, what's out there, and are able to really think about what do we have space for and what do we need space, and then where do we need space. On the horizon, development schemes. We can play defense or we can play offense. And we will always have to play a little defense, but I think we also need to play offense. And the offense is putting together development schemes, thinking through, if we wanted to reach out downtown, what would it look like? What kind of square footage do we need? What kind of inventory do we need? and what kind of foot traffic do we need? If we want to see more entertainment downtown, what can we support as a city if we're going destination? So the CBD, the arena district, the inner neighborhoods, we'll have the capacity to do all of this. Public-private development plan for the courthouse area, the arena district, and the town branch commons, as those projects come to fruition. And then working with UK, which has just issued an RFP for a master plan update, Transylvania, which is also doing a master plan and campus expansion. And, of course, BCTC, which is in construction. So all three of these major institutions are undergoing growth right now, and we need to be paying attention and working on how they tie into the rest of the city. And then finally, just good old-fashioned retail recruitment and business recruitment for downtown locations. We've got about 12% vacancy downtown. A lot of that's office space, but not entirely. And we need to be working on filling the space we have as well as building new space. So with that, I will open up to questions. Thanks, Jeff. Anyone have any comments or questions? All right. Then it sounds like the satisfied report. And done. Thank you, sir. Thank you, Council. Thank you, Mayor. Vice Mayor. Thank you. Next on our agenda is a cost of living and salary increase for LFUCG employees. Glenda George from our law department. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. Good afternoon, everyone. At the February General Government Committee meeting, a motion was made for the Department of Law, Department of Finance, and the Division of Human Resources to make a presentation to the Council concerning our employee compensation package. Now, I'm not really sure what happened, but somehow I drew the short stick. So I will be presenting this information to you all today. Let's see here. Prior to 1995, we had a compensation system which was referred to as the HAY system. And that was a nine-step pay system where employees moved through the steps each year after they reached their anniversary date. Now because that was only a nine-step system, employees who had been here longer than nine years were maxed out in terms of receiving raises, and they only received cost of living increases. Under the HAYS system, we had 53 pay grades and 377 job classifications, which at that time it was determined that that was too many. Also, there was a salary study done at that time which showed that 75% of our job classes were below the 45th percentile in pay. So based on that information, we hired a consultant to review and make recommendations concerning our compensation system. And as you all know, we hired the William M. Mercer Incorporated Company, which is a human resources consulting company, to help us in developing our compensation system, classifications, performance evaluations, and training and development reporting system for all urban county government employees. Now, the Mercer system had two components. One of them was the merit pool increase and then a structure movement. But before we move to those two components, what Mercer recommended was that all employees fill out something that was called a position analysis questionnaire, in which we described what we did on a day-to-day basis. And the PAQ, it had a point factor analysis which looked at certain job evaluation factors, factors and those were our knowledge and experience, complexity and creativity, impact on operations, physical demands and working conditions, internal and external contacts and direction exercise. Those factors were used to determine our pay grade and then our experience was used to determine where we went within a range to determine the salaries of each individual employee. Also, the end result of the Mercer system was that we went from 54 pay grades to 24, and from 377 job titles to 295. Also, under the Mercer system, we moved away from the SEP system, and we were moving towards a pay-for-performance or merit pool. And under that, employees who received a high score on their performance evaluations would theoretically receive a higher pay increase. The merit pool ordinance is found in 21-29 of the Code of Ordinances. And what that ordinance says is that each year the council was to determine the merit pool by appropriating a certain amount of funds to go into that pool. And then we would come up with the merit pool increase by dividing the amount that was put in the merit pool by the aggregate salaries of all employees. and then that would be used to determine a percentage. And how it would work, say for example, if the merit pool percentage turned out to be 3%, and then I received a 4.5 or in the range of a 4.5 to a 5.0 on my performance appraisal, my supervisor could give me an increase anywhere up to 1.25%. So say Janet thought I was outstanding and she wanted to give me a 1.25. then my raise would wind up being 3.75%, which would be the merit pool plus the percentage increase set forth in the ordinance. This illustrates how the difference between a movement within the range and the structure movement. So say, for example, on the top line where it says the merit pool increase, if I got a raise, I would just move within the range. But for employees who were maxed out, we would do a structure movement, and so the entire range would shift. So as you can see, under the second line, the minimum and the maximum have changed from $11,000 to $21,000. So an employee who was at the beginning of the range, their salary would change to $11,000, and employees who were at the end of the range would change to $21,000. Now we all know that we've had problems with the Mercer system over the years, and there are several reasons why it didn't work. One of those is that we never really used it the way it was designed. We never used the pay for performance or merit pool concept. Instead, what we did is just gave employees the same raise regardless of your job performance. This shows what we've done in terms of pay increases over the last 10 years. As you can see, in 2002, employees received a $2.5 increase plus $310, and for whatever reason that year, we did something a little different. And then the structure movement also moved $2.5. In 2003, for the first six months, there was a 1% raise, and then for the second part of the fiscal year that increased to 2% and the structure movement was the same. In 2004, the raise for employees was 3.7% and the structure movement was 2.3. In 2005, there was a 5% raise and the structure movement was 3.6. In 2006, it was 3.8 and the structure movement was 2.4. In 2007, the raise was 3.9% and the structure movement was 2.7. In 2008, the raise was 2.3% and the structure movement was the same. In 2009, the raise and structure movement were both 1%. And in 2010 and 2011, there were no raises and no structure movements. This slide just shows the trend, and it's just plotted out the previous slide so you can see how our salaries have gone down over the last 10 years. or excuse me, our raises have gone down over the last 10 years. So what do we do now or where do we go from here? We've reached a point where we should hire a consultant to assist us in evaluating our current compensation system and to make recommendations about what we should do going forward. As you all know, we no longer use the Mercer system as it was initially designed. We have a variation of what the Mercer company originally designed for us, and that's because we've made changes to it over the years to make it work for us. And hopefully a consultant can then help us to determine a strategy going forward for our employee compensation. And, Mayor, at this time I'll entertain any questions. All right. to sign up for questions. Council Member Stenet and Council Member Beard. Thank you, Mayor. Linda, thank you for bringing this to us today. As we've all experienced over the last couple years with the economy and with downsides of government, we've asked a lot of employees to do a lot more. And many of them, their job has changed. I think it's time, and this is the perfect time, to reexamine that and their functions in each individual department. And I'm glad to see the recommendation to do it holistically rather than individually, one by one, because I think that was where we got in trouble four years ago when this council made the conscious decision to stop doing reclasses because of the huge pay inversion that we had to pay, $1.2 million, to fix all those individual decisions we made. And we also started, I think, in 2010 going through and reexamining the classification system, but that was stalled, obviously, with the change in administration. So I'm glad to see this project get some legs and begin. Do we know or have we put a price tag on hiring that consultant yet? Do we know what that would cost us and have we budgeted it for next budget? We have put $40,000 in the Department of Law budget to assist with hiring a consultant, but at this point now we're not sure how much that would cost. Okay, so you have put it in there for next budget. Good. Yes. So I think this is a great time because I'm not sure how people have been getting raises in the past. It looks like it's been given to everyone in carte blanche and just said, hey, you get a raise. And the performance evaluations have been lacking. I don't think every director or manager has been trained to follow this system. So I'd be very eager to see a new system in place that rewards those who need to be rewarded and continues the performance to where we all think it should be because I do think there's some opportunity for doing some good with it. So thank you. How soon is the timeline at this point? If Council approves the budget with the money in there, are you all going to start in July? Yes, we'll have the RFP ready. So if we have the money in July, then we can start with the RFP process and move forward, provided that the amount we've allocated will be enough. And how long do we anticipate that process? Well, that would depend on the consultant and how long they think it will take them to review our compensation system and make a recommendation back to us. Yeah, so I'm looking at, you know, the ideal time is April of next year so that we can incorporate it into the budget so that the budget reflects a better pay system for all the employees. Thank you. I appreciate it. Thank you, Mayor. Council Member Beard. Thank you, Mayor. Glenda, we're going to hire a consultant. That's the recommendation, yes. Yeah, I understand. We hired a consultant once. We didn't like the answer, so we didn't fund what they told us to do. Why spend the money again? Why not just go back to what they told us to do the first time? They're the premier human resources entity in the country, maybe the world. And again, we just didn't like the answer, so we scrubbed them. and then we turned around and sneered at the Mercer system because it wasn't working. Well, it wasn't working because we didn't ever flip the switch. And it seemed silly to go around and find somebody else who's going to give us an answer we want first, and we're going to tell them what we want and then write them a check for $40,000. It just doesn't fit as far as I'm concerned. Well, I would hope if we did hire a consultant that once we accepted their compensation system that we would actually use it and not as we have done before in taking the system and taking out the things we didn't like and done the things that we did like. Hopefully, if we get a new system, we will implement it as designed, and then we shouldn't have these issues like we're having now. who already paid for that information once, why do it again? Well, but that was, I guess we started that in 1995. It might not be a bad idea to look at our system again because things have changed, and even if we had implemented it as designed, we could still be here saying, you know, it's time to look at it again. I don't know that we could even go back and implement what was initially designed for us. We could model the situation and see what it would look like. We don't need to actually implement it. Could we do that? Okay. I don't know whether that's feasible on this. I guess Tammy and I were just talking about that. If we were going to go back and implement what Mercer designed, we would basically just start over with the Mercer model and have employees do PAQs, and then those would be reviewed and assign pay grades and salary ranges as we've done before, and then just go forward with the Mercer model. Which is pretty much exactly what another individual is going to do, too, in my opinion. I don't know how to respond. If not, we aren't going to be getting much for $40,000. In fact, I would guess that it isn't going to be $40,000, but beyond that. Well, one man's opinion, Mayor. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Beard. Anybody else wish to speak? Council Member Ford. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Attorney George, for bringing this forward. I think it's imperative that this is a first step. I know we brought this issue to the General Government Committee and Chairman Lane with the intent, it was my intent just as one of the members here, to kind of bring attention to this issue for consistency. I would think that on behalf of the employees, particularly the civil service employees, is that some recognition of the need for consistency. So to that end, I don't know if you've thought about this, but in prior studies and in this proposed new study that may come forward, how much employee contribution was obtained and afforded? Meaning how much did all 3,000 employees, of course, cannot have hands-on contribution, but how can we engage our employees in going forward to a consistent system on their behalf? Initially, before we decided on hiring a consultant, there was an employee committee that made recommendations, concerning what they wanted to see our compensation system look like. And then after we moved towards hiring the consultant, there was also employee committees that worked with Mercer in evaluating jobs and reviewing reclasses. All employees did have some level of contribution because they filled out the PAQ. and described what they do on a day-to-day basis. And I don't know if you've seen one of those or not, and we can provide the council with a PAQ, but the employees got to tell the committee or the Mercer group, this is what I do on a day-to-day basis. And then based on what was in the PAQ, the Mercer committee then took that information and assigned a job class to that. Okay. So employees wound up in their pay grades based on information that was placed in their PAQs. Okay. And that's helpful from a historical basis. And again, not a small task that we're undertaking, but a very worthy one. And I just encourage and appreciate our efforts to engage our employees' contribution as best we can. I think it will be valuable. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. Council Member Lane. Thank you, Mayor. How are you? First, Ms. George, I'd like to thank you for the presentation put on today at the request of our committee. I thought you did a very nice job on that. The one basic question I have, and I was sort of agreeing with Council Member Beard, that having our HR department try to determine the policy of how we give merit and structure raises would probably be better from my perspective than having some consultant coming in from out of town and trying to do it because I think ultimately the determination of what the pay raises are going to be are set by council with the recommendation of the mayor. And, of course, if we or the mayor may recommend it to us and then we'll approve it and he'll implement it. But rather than to have a high-powered, expensive firm come in, we spend a lot of money, It takes a lot of time. Do you think it would be practical for us to try to do it ourselves, using maybe the prior Mercer study as sort of a base plate for this study? It would be difficult for the Division of Human Resources to do it at its current staff level. There aren't enough employees in that division to do their current assignments plus look at going back and re-implementing Mercer. Okay. Because every year I've been on council, and this is my eighth year, it seems like we're always looking at giving pay raises and referring to Mercer, but we basically just give us some kind of increase for everybody, and it's not really been very effective. And for us to go back and do what we've done before that was not effective There seems to be not a good approach for the future. So just a thought I'm having that maybe we could look at another way to approach this and maybe have some type of a more in-depth report. One of the things that would be helpful would just see how the pay and benefits that we offer at the Urban County Government compare to the benefits that are provided by private employers and corporations. Here in Lexington, to see if we're fairly compensating our employees and that to me would be very helpful and if we mold it more around what the fair pay rate in our community is it might be more effective than having a national firm do it. Just a couple of thoughts but again I want to thank you very much for your report. I think this is of good timing and we can be working on it for next year's budget. So thank you so much. You're welcome. Thank you. I don't have any other council members signed up So thank you all very much. Thank you. Next on our agenda, Council Reports. And Councilman McCord. Thank you, Mayor. At the January budget retreat, I had mentioned we got to talking about parks and a number of issues as it relates to parks. And one of the issues that Councilmember Beard and myself have been looking at for quite a while is the issue of golf. And one of the things that happens every time you bring this conversation up is, I guess, a sense that we're trying to privatize golf or remove golf from what the government does. And I want to say at the outset of my comments today that this council and this government support public golf. There is no, at this stage in the game, we certainly have put our money where our mouth is as it relates to that. But what I'm passing out to you is I want to give you some information during my council report. Commissioner Hamilton, if you don't mind coming to the mic just in case there's any questions, Commissioner Hamilton and I have met. But I want to give you a little background. And given the budget that we're in and some of the things that are going on in our government, I think this is the best time to really just put all this onto the table and see where the Council stands, and I plan on doing that next week. This is for information at this point in time. But the bottom line is that right now we spend $3.2 million a year on golf. This government spends $3.2 million on golf, and golf brings in roughly $2 million. So we are subsidizing public golf to the tune of $1.2 million. I would say that that shows that we sincerely support public golf in our community. But $1.2 million of a subsidy is a little bit much for me, especially given the fact we're browning out fire stations and having a tough time giving employees raises and things like that. And so a couple of years ago, in 2009, I got asked by a constituent, how much are we spending on golf and what gets factored into that? And I was amazed to find that we really couldn't get at that answer very quickly. So what I'm passing around to you all is a June 2010 report that was delivered by our Parks Director, Jerry Hancock. I've tabbed a couple of very key places. The first tab is on page 23, and what you'll see is in that report it showed that we only lost $11,000 in golf. Well, now we know that's not true. It's actually $1.2 million. in. Another tab, the one behind it, said there was no council mandate or even council guidance as to what we're going to do with golf. Well, that's what we're going to do here in the next week or so, is we're going to give some guidance. And we're going to come to an agreement as to what it is exactly we will do with golf going forward, whoever sits in these seats. When you skip back to the next tab on page 34, it says that the management audit said we ought to form an enterprise fund, let golf keep what it makes. And then on the next page it talks about enterprise structure, that there's a real need for creating the opportunity for golf to make revenue and keep revenue. And so, again, this is for your files to look at over the next week. The second piece that's coming is four days after that, or six days after that, was presented on June 8th. On June 14th, Director Hancock sent every one of us an email saying, please don't vote for an enterprise fund, when I had proposed that. Highly confusing. Well, we're asking for it in this presentation, but then when we move it forward, we're not getting it. And so last year in June, I asked for the director and for the golf folks to bring us by December a plan that just showed us breaking even. What would it look like to just spend what we make? That was a golden opportunity to show us that maybe the sky has fallen if we just did that. But what we got was actually something very good. It was a business plan on how they felt like they could save $400 and some thousand dollars. I'll round that up to $500,000 because I think they're just that good. But in that situation, council, that means that we are subsidizing golf to the tune of $700,000. And for me, that's a little too much. Now, what we've done, Commissioner and I have worked on a proposed resolution that we're going to just pass around this week, and it has a blank in there as to what the subsidy is going to be. But I firmly believe that over the course of this budget and over the course of some votes, what we need to do is we need to let golf keep the money they make, incentivize them to do well and make more, but also to set a subsidy level. Is it $100,000? Is it $300,000? Is it $700,000? But this council needs to give policy direction. That is what they ask for. So I wanted to lay out my intent. I wanted to let you know that Commissioner Hamilton and I have met and are working through a number of specific numbers and things like that. But this is where we are with this, and I think it just needs to come to a head, and this is what we're going to do, much like what Louisville does, which is you get to keep your money and you get to here is the subsidy for that. Now, I know that decision will make for some changes in golf, and I'm very sure that the golf hotline will be ringing as soon as this is over, and we'll get all kinds of calls about how you need to support public golf. I'm going to say at the end of this, we support public golf. What we're saying with this next set of actions in the next couple weeks is how much do we support them over and above what they make. So I'm done with my comments. I want to put this into your hands, council members. I want to let you know my intentions coming forward. And, again, Commissioner Hamilton is here to answer any questions that you all may have, and I'll answer any questions that you may have. Thank you. I know my time is up. Commissioner? I don't think there are any questions, are there? Yeah. I can say, well, let me see. I met with Council Member McCord a few days ago, and we had a very, very good conversation. And he showed me these documents. We went over them. We went over the business plan that we presented back in January. I told him that I would, again, since he saw a number of 1.2, and that is the number that you saw in January, that there would be savings this year, there's going to be, and that I would give a firm number of what that subsidy was. But I wanted to double-check that number. I have seen it now, but I want to double-check it with Jane's people to make sure that I'm looking at this number correctly. We discussed that at that particular time that my job here is to implement the policy that you all direct not to make it, and that's what I am trying to do. So I am trying to provide information, and the information that I did provide was that this resolution sets a stage for, I will be telling you, we can't make any more cuts and keep all these golf courses, and correct me, Council Member McCord, if I say this incorrectly, that we can't keep these golf courses all open and reduce the subsidy by half a million or $700,000. So it basically comes to the issue of keeping all of them open or not keeping all of them open. And that's what the gist of our conversation was. If you reported. All right. So if you wish to speak to this issue, just give me the sign. Vice Mayor Gordon and then Councilman Martin. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you for bringing this forward. I will say, Commissioner, I'm glad that you brought up the business plan because it seems to me during our discussions back in January, February, the Council said that it would like to see the results of the new business plan and the new rate structures after a year to have an evaluation. So I'm a little bit, Council Member McCord, I'm a little bit surprised, and I look forward to the discussion that this information, which is two years old, would be brought forward before we've had time to evaluate the new system for the rates. And it's my understanding from our meeting at the Parks Advisory Board that the new system of rates, setting rates, is working very well. And so I'm just a little surprised at the timing of this. Can you answer why this is coming before the look at the evaluation of the new rate? Yes, thank you, Vice Mayor. Because in June, I didn't ask for a business plan. What I asked for directly was show me what it looks like to break even on golf. So what was brought forward to us in December was not what was asked for. And everybody applauded, and as well they should have, they gave a lot of thought. We subsidized golf to $1.2 million. You had a report from your parks director that said we only lost $11,000. I think that's a monster discrepancy. And it took three years of asking and digging and multiple administrations to actually get to that admission. So we have a business plan that comes forward in December that says we're going to save $400 and some thousand dollars. I'll round up to $500. So that says that this government is going to subsidize golf to the tune of $700,000. And this council member says no, not during these times. I support public golf. I'm willing to put a subsidy in there, but not $700,000. And so I firmly believe we should reward these folks and let them keep what they're making. And all these business plan developments, let them keep it all, incentivize them. And if they can make $3.2 million, then great, plus the subsidy. But how they do it in Louisville is exactly this way. It's enterprise-oriented. And then they say over and above that, we're going to subsidize this. And I think the way to look at it and the way Commissioner Hamilton and I have looked at it is what do we do for kids and seniors? Because I think that's where public golf really is needed. And what do we need to subsidize those specific groups? But that's why my timing is here, is because I've been asking for this for three years and never, never gotten what I asked for. And I'm not going to go quietly on this one. Because this is, I don't even golf. But it's one of those things where when you ask somebody for something and you don't get it, after a while you just get mad. And I'm mad. And I appreciate all the work that's gone into the business plan, but I don't know. We've had a record-breaking weather year. No wonder we're doing good. We can golf a lot when it's 80 degrees in January. But at the end of the day, still with that business plan, you're going to subsidize golf $700,000. I can't vote for that. So that's why. I appreciate that, and I'll look forward to when you bring this back. Are we also looking at all the other entities that we subsidize who don't make back their money? I don't know if you know that, Commissioner. I know from dealing in the pools in parks, we naturally subsidize those, and we had that discussion when we talked about the closing of those two pools. But I don't know the others. that there's a comprehensive look at all the programs we subsidize. Okay, thank you. Thank you, Mayor. Council Member Martin. Thank you, Mayor. When the mayor came out with his proposed budget for last year, he proposed closing Metathorpe golf course. And this is not about you, Mayor, but it's about the Herald-Leader editorial board said, while they disagreed with the decision, they praised the mayor for hard decisions and hard times. I asked to look at Kearney last year, and they criticized me for having a hack idea to help private developers, although it has yet to identify whose developers are out there. You know, I don't know how this golf thing is going to get solved. I don't. I think it's going to get solved after I leave. What I do know is that we're running a $50 million per year deficit in our police and fire pension and medical benefits. And that at some point, we are going to have to start making payments on that because it can't increase forever. So not only will we have to make the annual $50 million payment that we're falling short, but we're actually going to have to start catching it up at some point. And I'll be very surprised if Lexington is operating golf the way it currently is in five years. And so that will be up to folks after me to decide how to do it. But golf and many other programs here at the city that all of us love will be disappearing. And so I think that the council is going to have to start paying the piper and cannot continue to, I guess, kick the can down the road. And golf eventually will be a part of that. And so thank you, Mayor. Anyone else wish to speak to this issue? If not, we can move on. Okay, Council Member Ford. Thank you, Mayor. And Council Member McCord, I understand your concerns in regards to responsiveness. But I, too, like Vice Mayor Gordon, serve on the Parks Advisory Board as a designate of the council. And I understand and realize that the Parks Advisory Board has been working very, very hard with Parks staff and leadership over there at Piccadone. to try to get a handle of golf. I think the Parks Advisory Board, if nobody else, is being responsive and being very proactive. I'm concerned how our policy may conflict or restrict the charge that they've been given and that they're currently working on right now. I understand we have a few days to kind of hopefully examine all sides of that, But I hope everybody understands the economic implications of things, every line of business that we're in. But I think we really need to not let things play out in order to kick the can down the road, but if we're going to have a planning exercise, let it come to fruition. Let our staff be able to do that. I will, though, however, in cases all across government, if we have an issue of responsiveness, we can address that. And we can address that without, in some cases, passing a hasty policy that very well may work against the quality of life that our overall parks and recreational opportunities afford us. So let's consider that, please. and we'll look forward to what the conversation brings us into next week. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Council Member. Council Member Kaye, then Council Member Beard. Thank you, Mayor. I, too, have some concern. I've expressed this before. When we begin to look at budgets and the expenses of government, a concern with ad hoc kind of adding programs or taking them away. We have a new commissioner, still relatively new. As the chair of the links for Parks and Rec last year, I was quite frustrated with the difficulty of getting all the numbers to lie down. I believe we're getting much better numbers now. I believe we're getting better planning now. I believe that the question of the subsidy of golf needs to be on the table. It's a lot of money. I want to see how that looks in relation to how else we spend all of our money on parks and rec. So I think it's a good issue to be working on, but I'm interested in not working on it separate from the larger issue of all of the ways in which we invest in parks and rec as one group, and then the overall budget for the city is another. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Council Member Kaye. Council Member Beard. Thank you, Mayor. Commissioner, you made a comment a little earlier about keep it all open or not all open, and there are other options somewhere in between there. We have a lot of golf courses for our size community. the whole situation as relates to this is that and I don't have the numbers in front of me so I'm trying to remember probably Council Member McCord would know crisply but roughly over a period of three or four years our usage utilization has been cut in half now you know everybody says well it could be the weather it could be this or that but i mean those things kind of even out over the over the span of time um golf is not at all popular as it used to be some years ago you know the uh arnold palmers and uh the tiger woods for that matter are not the star-studded people that they we hardly I hardly know the names of the ones that are are playing now and and so people don't watch their TV and then run out and try to emulate so I know I never could emulate any of those folks but but anyway it is the initiative of people have shifted and are doing other things now. The idea of cutting rates, I would like to see some type of an evaluation of that on a quarterly basis rather than await a full council's perusal every this time of year going through a new budget to get a little early warning on some of this as we go along so we can take action rather than having to wait a year or a year and a half before we can actually pull the trigger on something, whatever it may be. And no reflection necessarily on the Parks Advisory Board, but if we are receiving here and the horseshoe bad information, I'm sure that there's no fear to feed the Parks Advisory Board bad information also. So that's something that needs to be looked at closely over time. Thank you, Mayor. Councilman McCord. Just as a wrap-up, again, this is why I wanted to bring it forward this way, just let folks see the timeline that we worked on And the bare bottom line is we spend $3.2 million. We take in $2 million. We've got a business plan to save $500,000 of that $1.2 million. That means we're going to underwrite golf to the tune of $700,000. $700,000 does a lot for a lot of areas of government, a lot of services that are strained or cut. And, you know, to Council Member Ford's point, it's about making decisions, y'all. I mean, we can committee it and we can task force it, and you just keep getting this stuff. Or you can say, hey, this is the policy direction. If you look on that page that says there is no policy direction from council, that is in that report or that presentation, I say you give them some policy direction. And if the policy direction is that we're going to give an enterprise fund and we'll underwrite it to the tune of $700,000, then I think we call for a vote and we see where every one of us stand up here. You know, I mean, we can hide this issue all day long, but at the end of the day, what my intent is is I want to see where we as a council fall on this. What do you actually believe we should subsidize golf to, given the economic times we're in and with some of the issues that Council Member Martin brings up and others? So you have a week to kind of look at that. I'm sure that the phones will start ringing with every person out there saying the sky is falling. But Council Member Beard is correct. public and private is overbuilt, and there is a decline in usage, and there's only so many rounds that will be played, and we have a surplus of property, and we have to make some hard decisions, and government cannot be all things to all people anymore. Thank you, Mayor. Does anyone else wish to speak to this issue? All right. Then we can move on to the council reports. Council Member Henson. Thank you, Mayor. I just had one quick announcement. The downtown trash bash is tomorrow beginning at 10 a.m. at the Fifth Third Pavilion, Cheapside Park. and you come and you have an opportunity to improve the environment of downtown by picking up trash, making it look clean and green. So I'll be there. Come join me if you can. Bring the kids. Thanks. Thank you. Council Member Crosby. Thank you, Mayor. I too want to mention something with parks and recreation, but I just want to congratulate Mindy Stone with the Kitty Capers program who coordinated dance recitals for over 500 kids in our community this past weekend at the Opera House. Truly, Mindy and Amber Llewellyn, who is also in Parks and Rec, they are shining stars within this division and work so hard to make sure that there is opportunity for all kinds of kids in our community. So I just want to congratulate them for a job well done. I also would like to request, I see Commissioner Mason in here, so I will just make the request now that we get an updated list of those fire stations that are being browned out. I don't know what you're calling, out of service, whatever you are calling it. And clearly I've noticed that Station 21 in my district has been out a few times in less than just within the span of a few days of each other. And I thought it was going to be spread out a little more. I'm just trying to get an understanding because it's clearly upsetting when we see within a matter of a few days the station is out of service again. So if you could just send us that list, I believe you have it on a rotation so we can know and understand when we're getting questions from people in our district as to when this is happening. I would appreciate it. That's all I have, Mayor. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Crosby. I don't have anybody else signed up for a council report. The next on the agenda is Mayor's report, and there is not one this week. Public comment, Mr. Mundy? Nobody on the agenda for public comment. All right. Motion to adjourn. Second. All right. There is no closed sessions showing on my agenda, so there is a closed session being requested by the council. Is that correct? I have a motion. Vice Mayor? I apologize. I move that we go into closed session pursuant to KRS 61.8101F for a discussion that may lead to the appointment of an employee. Second. There's a motion and a second to enter closed session. Is there any discussion? Hearing none, take a vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries in our closed session. Okay, good. Okay, thank you. Do I hear a motion to come out of closed session? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Anybody opposed? Thank you. Now, do I hear a motion to schedule interviews for citizen advocate candidates? I'd like to make a motion that we schedule interviews for our citizens advocate candidates on Tuesday, April 24th, immediately starting after our work session. Do I hear a second? Second. Okay, Council Member Crosby moved and Council Member Kaye seconded to interview three candidates who've been forwarded by the Citizen Advocate Search Committee. That's correct. On Tuesday, April 24th, immediately following our council meeting, and it's my understanding that the council work session, and it's my understanding that these interviews will be 30 minutes each. Okay. And those will need to be televised. And is there any discussion about the motion? Okay, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? All right. I would ask that our council administrator arrange those interviews for following work session on April 24th. and there will be three interviews at 30 minutes each. Okay. Do I? Second. Thank you. Motion to adjourn. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? We are adjourned. Aye. Thank you. If you just call me