# Urban County Council Work Session - December 11, 2012 > Auto-transcribed civic record · December 11, 2012 - **Permalink**: https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/meeting/2792 - **Source video**: https://lfucg.granicus.com/player/clip/2792?view_id=14&redirect=true - **Date**: 2012-12-11 - **Last revised**: July 16, 2026 - **Length**: 12,220 words > ⚠️ **Auto-generated content.** Audio from the official Granicus video was auto-transcribed with OpenAI's open-source Whisper large-v3-turbo model, run locally by The Lexington Times. Structured facts were extracted with GPT-4o; the narrative summary was written by Anthropic Claude. Verbatim wording may contain errors. See [methodology](https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/about/methodology) or [report a correction](mailto:editor@lexingtonky.news). --- ## Meeting Overview The Urban County Council met on December 11, 2012, at 3:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers on the 2nd Floor of the Government Center, with Mayor Jim Gray presiding. During the meeting, the Council addressed 10 agenda items and took 16 votes. The Council heard 12 public comments from residents, including remarks on both agenda and non-agenda issues. The meeting included several substantive actions. The Council approved requested rezonings and docket items, adopted a summary of previous proceedings, and approved budget amendments. New business and continuing business items were also approved, along with the Mayor's report. In addition to voting matters, the Council received informational reports from Council members and heard presentations during the continuing business portion of the meeting. The meeting concluded with adjournment following the completion of all scheduled business. ## Attendance **Present:** Mayor Jim Gray and the following council members: Blue, Beard, Martin, Ellinger, Henson, Crosby, Farmer, Gorton, Lawless, Lane, Stinnett, Kaye, McChord, Crosbie, Mason, Hamilton, Driskell, Bastin, Mills, Lucas, Graham, Emmons, Crowe, Moloney, Wilson, Paulsen, Hawkinsmith, Such, Rose, Schmidt, Bloomberg, Arianna Huffington, Bennett Midland, Jane Driscoll, Jamie Emmons, Derek Paulson, Nick Such, Aaron Gold, and Goodwill Industries of Kentucky. **Absent:** Council Member Beard **Late:** None ## Votes and Decisions All motions during the December 11, 2012 meeting were decided by voice vote and passed unanimously. **Procedural Approvals** The council approved the docket for the December 11, 2012 meeting [timestamp: 00:07:00], the summary [timestamp: 00:10:45], and the Mayor's Report [timestamp: 01:08:31]. **Infrastructure and Services** Resolution 18-86 authorized the installation of multi-way stop controls at Tupelo Lane and Savannah Lane [timestamp: 00:07:00]. The motion was made by Council Member Martin and seconded by Council Member Ellinger. Resolution 18-86 authorized execution of a multi-vendor IT recovery services contract with IBM for business continuity and recovery services [timestamp: 00:08:09]. Council Member Henson made the motion and Vice Mayor Gordon seconded it. **Property Matters** Resolution 18-86 authorized execution of a release of easement for property at 516 Llorento Place [timestamp: 00:09:10]. Council Member Crosby made the motion and Council Member Martin seconded it. **Budget and Committee Actions** The council approved budget amendments [timestamp: 00:11:46], with Council Member Beard making the motion and Vice Mayor Gordon seconding it. The council approved new business [timestamp: 00:12:18], with Vice Mayor Gordon making the motion and Council Member Ellinger seconding it. A motion to withdraw a new business item for further study was tabled [timestamp: 00:12:18]. Council Member Lawless made the motion and Council Member Farmer seconded it. A motion to substitute an amendment changing two half addresses on Richmond Avenue to 28A and 44A passed [timestamp: 00:39:15], with the condition that only addresses 28.5 and 43.5 be changed while all other addresses remain unchanged. Council Member Lawless made the motion and Council Member Farmer seconded it. The council approved Neighborhood Development Funds [timestamp: 00:45:23], with Council Member Ellinger making the motion and Vice Mayor Gordon seconding it. The council placed on the docket a resolution authorizing a grant application for the Planet matching grant program for tree replacement at 1201 Manowar Boulevard [timestamp: 00:46:25]. Council Member Blues made the motion and Council Member Kaye seconded it. The council approved the Budget and Finance Committee summary [timestamp: 00:47:31] and the Environmental Quality Committee summary [timestamp: 00:50:44]. **Other Business** A motion to place the issue of clothing donation boxes in the Planning Committee passed [timestamp: 01:04:24], amended from the General Government Committee. Vice Mayor Gordon made the motion and Council Member Farmer seconded it. The council adjourned [timestamp: 01:29:30] on a motion by Council Member Lawless, seconded by Vice Mayor Gordon. ## Budget and Financial Actions The meeting approved the following financial actions: **Purchases and Agreements** * Rental Agreement (L1283-12): $8,100 to Lexington Center Corporation for the 2013 Martin Luther King Day Celebration * Land Transfer (L1313-12): $10 deed of conveyance to FRM Lawson, LLC for the Wolf Run Pump Station site **Grants and Donations** * Grant (L1308-12): $11,488 from Blue Grass Community Foundation's Family Care Center: Making a Difference Fund for Parent Education and Child Care programs * Donation (JOURNAL 65442-43): $1,125 from Partners for Youth to William Wells Brown Community Center for Healthy Life Skills program * Donation (JOURNAL 65446-47): $125 from Kentucky State University to William Wells Brown Community Center Health Program * Budget Contribution (JOURNAL 65444-45): $5.44 from TRUIST for the Domestic Violence Prevention Board **Service Contracts** * TLO Systems Agreement (L1310-12): $200 per month for 1,000 monthly transactions for advanced data source use by the Division of Police * Emerson Network Power Renewal Contract (L1315-12): $9,855 for uninterruptible power system service * University of Kentucky Memorandum of Agreement (L1319-12): $125,000 for construction of public restroom facilities at the Arboretum **Appropriations and Reimbursements** * Federal Funds Appropriation (JOURNAL 65449-50): $2,480,000 in additional federal funds for Clays Mill Road Improvement Project from Kentucky Transportation Cabinet * Sanitary Sewer Fund Appropriation (JOURNAL 65456): $20,000 for trench protection equipment * Overtime Reimbursement (JOURNAL 65453-54): $740 for overtime related to Susan G. Komen Race for the Cure ## Public Comment Council members addressed several topics during the public comment period of the December 11, 2012 meeting. **Address Changes** Multiple council members discussed a proposed change to historic half-addresses on Richmond Avenue. Council Member Blues argued that the address change is a public safety matter and criticized delays as a delaying tactic, emphasizing the need for consistency and timely action to ensure emergency services can respond efficiently [00:14:42]. Council Member Farmer expressed concern that changing historic half-addresses would erase the unique character of the neighborhood and make Lexington less special, urging the council to allow the community to be heard before acting [00:15:50]. Council Member Lawless stated that residents in the affected neighborhood were adamantly opposed to the changes and that public safety officials had not reported any issues with current addresses, suggesting the changes were unnecessary [00:20:47]. Council Member Kaye criticized the addressing office for applying an overly high standard for public safety risk, arguing that the policy lacked balance and that the issue had already been discussed at length [00:25:41]. Council Member Crosby supported withdrawing the item, noting that the issue had been repeatedly voted down and that the council should accept the community's preference [00:30:42]. Council Member Myers suggested grandfathering existing half-addresses and using A/B designations instead, arguing that the current policy is inconsistent and the public safety argument is not compelling [00:33:23]. Council Member Kay questioned whether the addressing policy was applied fairly, noting that some areas with single-digit numbers were not changed [00:38:13]. **Other Topics** Council Member Stinnett urged the council to consider options for addressing fire department brownouts, requesting that staffing and budget data be presented by January 15 [01:00:04]. Vice Mayor Gordon raised concern about for-profit businesses misrepresenting clothing donation boxes as charitable and moved to refer the issue to the Planning Committee [01:01:07]. Council Member Hanson confirmed that several such boxes exist in his district and expressed interest in reviewing relevant ordinances [01:05:40]. Council Member Lawless expressed sympathy to the family of a young woman killed in a traffic incident and reminded residents to practice safety during the holiday season [01:06:59]. Council Member Henson shared condolences and acknowledged the emotional toll on firefighters and the community [01:08:01]. ## Contested Items **Address Changes on Richmond Avenue** The council engaged in a heated discussion regarding proposed half-address changes on Richmond Avenue. The primary disagreement centered on whether these changes were necessary for public safety purposes. Residents and council members voiced strong opposition to the proposal, arguing that the address changes would erase neighborhood character and were unnecessary for the stated safety objectives. The debate was prolonged, indicating significant division among participants over the merits and consequences of the proposed changes. **Clothing Donation Boxes** A procedural dispute emerged regarding the appropriate committee jurisdiction for addressing the issue of for-profit clothing donation boxes. The General Government Committee was initially considered to handle the matter but was deemed inappropriate for this purpose. Following the dispute over proper committee assignment, the Planning Committee was ultimately selected to take responsibility for the issue. ## Public Comment – Issues on Agenda [timestamp: 00:06:30] No public comments were made on issues on the agenda during this portion of the meeting. ## Requested Rezonings / Docket Approval [timestamp: 00:07:00] The council approved the docket containing several rezoning requests and other resolutions that did not require public hearings. The approved items included changes to zoning designations for properties located on Harrodsburg Road and Leestown Center Way. Council Members Martin, Henson, and Crosby participated in the discussion of this agenda item. The council voted to approve the docket as presented, moving forward with the rezoning requests and associated resolutions without further deliberation or public comment periods. **Outcome:** The docket was approved. ## Approval of Summary [timestamp: 00:10:45] The council approved the summary of prior committee meetings during this agenda item. Council Member Ellinger and Vice Mayor Gordon were the key speakers on this matter. The approval encompassed summaries from two committees: - Budget and Finance Committee - Environmental Quality Committee The item was presented as a resolution and was approved by the council. ## Budget Amendments [timestamp: 00:11:46] The council approved several budget amendments during this agenda item. **Key Speakers** - Council Member Beard - Vice Mayor Gordon **Amendments Approved** The council approved budget amendments that included: - Funds for the Susan G. Komen Race for the Cure - Donations to community centers - Federal funds for Clays Mill Road improvements **Outcome** All budget amendments were approved. ## New Business [timestamp: 00:12:18] The council addressed new business items during this portion of the meeting. Vice Mayor Gordon, Council Member Lawless, and Council Member Blues participated in the discussion. Two main motions were considered: - A motion to approve the Neighborhood Development Funds - A motion to place a grant application for tree replacement on the docket Both items were approved by the council. No specific concerns or objections were recorded during the discussion of these new business items. ## Continuing Business / Presentations [timestamp: 00:47:31] During this agenda item, the council reviewed presentations from two standing committees with updates on several ongoing projects and initiatives. **Budget and Finance Committee and Environmental Quality Committee Summaries** Council Member Ellinger and Council Member Blues presented summaries from the Budget and Finance Committee and Environmental Quality Committee. The presentations covered multiple topics of municipal interest and concern. **Key Projects Discussed** The presentations included updates on the following initiatives: - Affordable housing - Blue Sky Pump Station - Distillery District **Outcome** The council approved the presentations and the information contained within them. ## Council Reports During this informational segment, council members provided updates on various municipal matters affecting the community. [timestamp: 01:00:04] **Key Speakers and Topics** Council Member Stinnett, Vice Mayor Gordon, Council Member Lawless, and Council Member Henson each contributed to the reports, addressing staffing levels, public safety concerns, and community issues. **Issues Discussed** A significant topic of discussion involved the proliferation of clothing donation boxes throughout the community. Council members raised concerns about this issue and its impact on the municipality. In addition to the donation box matter, council members addressed staffing levels and public safety concerns, though specific details about these topics were not elaborated in the available information. **Outcome** This agenda item was informational in nature, with no formal action or decision required. The reports provided council members and the public with updates on current municipal conditions and community concerns. ## Mayor's Report [timestamp: 01:09:06] Mayor Jim Gray presented a report on the Bloomberg Mayor's Challenge application, with contributions from Derek Paulson, Nick Such, and Jane Driscoll. The presentation covered three main areas: * The team's experience and activities in New York * Development of the Citizen Lex platform * Next steps for the final submission The report detailed the progress made on the Bloomberg Mayor's Challenge application, highlighting the work completed to date on the Citizen Lex platform and the team's engagement during their time in New York. The agenda item was approved. ## Public Comment – Issues Not on Agenda [timestamp: 01:29:30] No public comments were made on issues not on the agenda during this portion of the meeting. ## Adjournment [timestamp: 01:29:30] The council voted to adjourn the meeting with no further discussion. Council Member Lawless and Vice Mayor Gordon were present for this motion. The adjournment was approved. --- ## Decisions - **Motion** — passed (0-0): approve the docket - **Motion** — passed (0-0): place on the docket for the December 11, 2012 Council Meeting a resolution authorizing and directing the Division of Traffic Engineering, pursuant to Code of Ordinances section 18‐86, to install multiway stop controls at Tupelo Lane and Savannah Lane - **Motion** — passed (0-0): place on the docket for the December 11, 2012 Council Meeting a resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute Multivendor Information Technology Recovery Services Contract Documents with International Business Machines Corporation, for Business and Continuity and Recovery Services, at an estimated cost not to exceed $82,800.00 - **Motion** — passed (0-0): place on the docket for the December 11, 2012 Council Meeting a resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute a Release of Easement releasing a portion of an access and utility easement on property located at 516 Lorenzo Place - **Motion** — passed (0-0): place on the docket for the December 11, 2012 Council Meeting a resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute and submit a grant application to the Plant for the Planet Matching Grant Program, and to provide any additional information requested in connection with this grant application, which grant funds are in the amount of $4,000.00, and are for tree removal and replacement program at 1201 Man‐ O‐War Boulevard - **Motion** — passed (0-0): approve the summary - **Motion** — passed (0-0): approve the budget amendments - **Motion** — passed (0-0): approve the new business - **Motion** — passed (0-0): table item b until further study - **Motion** — passed (0-0): approve the neighborhood development funds - **Motion** — passed (0-0): refer the proliferation of clothing donation boxes in Fayette County to the General Government Committee - **Motion** — passed (0-0): amend her motion to refer the proliferation of clothing donation boxes in Fayette County to the Planning and Public Works Committee. Amended motion - **Motion** — passed (0-0): approve the Mayor’s Report - **Motion** — passed (0-0): adjourn --- ## Full transcript Music We can go out driving on Slow Hand Road We could stay inside and play games I don't know I'm going to go ahead and get a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. guitar solo guitar solo Thank you. Thank you. Hello, everybody. Greetings, and we will call the meeting to order. Welcome. Welcome to the work session of the Council. All right. First on our agenda today, Mr. Mundy's shaking his head. Nobody has anything to say about issues on the agenda today. All righty. Then we can move on to the next item on our agenda, which is docket approval. Is there a motion? Motion to approve by Council Member Blue, second by Council Member Beard. We've got some walk-ons, so we'll pull them in now. Council Member Martin. Thank you, Mayor. I move to place on the docket for a December 11, 2012 council meeting a resolution authorizing directing the Division of Traffic Engineering pursuant to Code of Ordinances Section 18-86 to install multi-way stop controls at Tupelo Lane and Savannah Lane. So moved. Second. Motion by Council Member Martin. Second by Council Member Ellinger. Is there any discussion on the motion? All right. Hearing none, then we can take a vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Councilman. Thank you, Councilman Martin. Councilmember Henson. Thank you, Mayor. Mayor, I move to place on the docket for the December 11th Council meeting a resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute multi-vendor information technology recovery services contract documents with International Business Machines Corporation for business continuity and recovery services at an estimated cost not to exceed $82,800. So moved. Second. Motion by Council Member Henson. Second by Vice Mayor Gordon. Is there any discussion on the motion? All right. Hearing none, then we can take a vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Council Member Crosby. Mayor, I do have a motion to add a resolution onto the docket. It was prepared by law. I'm waiting for it. If we could wait to vote on the docket and maybe move on until I get that, would that be a problem? It should be Ernie's. Oh, here it comes. Oh, great. See if I stall long enough, things happen. We could have managed it. All right. I've got it now. Thank you. All right. I moved to place on the docket for Tuesday, December 11, 2012, a resolution authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute a release of easement, releasing a portion of an access and utility easement on property located at 516 Llorento Place. Second. Motion by Council Member Crosby. Second by Council Member Martin. Is there any discussion on the motion? It's his. Yeah. He gets it. All right. Hearing none, then we can take a vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. All right. If there are no further welcomes, then we can now take a vote on the full motion. All in favor of the motion to approve the docket, please indicate by saying aye and voting electronically. I want to vote electronically as well. Can we do that? Well, we've got it. We're fine. We're fine. We're fine. We're fine. All right. Next on our agenda is approval of summary. Is there a motion? Move approval. Second. It's a motion by Vice Mayor Gordon, second by Council Member Myers. Is there any discussion on the motion? Okay. Hearing none, then we can take a vote. Nope. All right. Almost. Council Member Lawless? Yes, I would like to talk about item B. We're on the summary now. No, I'm sorry. Never mind. It's already. We've got a motion. We've got a second. Here we go. We're there. All in favor, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Thank you. Next on our agenda is budget amendments. Second. Motion by Council Member Beard. Second 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. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Next on our agenda, here we go. New business. Is there a motion? Second. That was a race to the finish there. motion by Vice Mayor Gordon second by Council Member Ellinger alright is there any discussion on the motion Council Member Lawless I think Council Member Farmer ok item B yes I would like to make a motion to withdraw that until further study. There's a motion and a second to withdraw. It was tabled. To table it. The motion was to withdraw. And there's a second to the motion. All right, then. Now the floor is available for discussion. Vice Mayor Gordon. Thank you, Mayor. This item already was worked through committee, as you will recall, and the item surrounding it was to change the rules governing property addresses, and that motion came to the full council and was defeated. And so this has already been in committee, and I would just like to hear from, I think it's Commissioner Mason, on this, because we've already put it in committee once and taken it around the block a few times, and I'd like to ask your take on why it's here. Well, it's being brought back up to comply with consistency for the Address Committee. We've had a number of changes over the past, I think since 1996, there have been over 200 half-addresses which have been changed. And so we're just trying to be consistent to ensure the efficient and timely delivery of emergency services. All right. Council Member Blues. Thank you, Mayor. I think this is just another attempt to delay needlessly action on an issue that started now something over three years ago. And instead of dealing with it in a cooperative manner, it never was. And so the final action on this address issue had just been kicked down the road time after time after time. the council rejected, I think this was just before break, an attempt to not change the addresses in the interests of public safety. And by some mistake, it was not brought forward for second reading. So this is an attempt to take advantage of an error, to ask for some needless study of an issue that should have been dealt with years ago. And so I think we should reject it and move on. Thank you, Mayor. Council Member Blues. Council Member Farmer. Thank you, Mayor. I think that Dr. Blues' appraisal of the situation and mine may be different. But there was a lot of work done around this issue and before break to change some of the characteristics that the Addressing Office uses in its alchemy for changing addresses. And, you know, I agree absolutely with Council Member Lawless's call to withdraw this. speaking to each of you individually, I think it would be a mistake to place this on the docket and vote for it today without that neighborhood having the opportunity to even know we're talking about it again. But in a larger sense, if you step back and look at what makes Lexington different, essentially, what makes it better, what lets us see the creative part of Lexington, if you look at places where the addressing ordinance has been applied and you see these large, not special numbers that have to be placed on commercial properties. I just don't think that we're doing anything to make Lexington really credibly better. I think that the technology is there, and I think that the discussion at the time pointed out that a different technology could direct folks to a half address. But I think day by day, motion by motion, the changes that take place through the addressing office may make Lexington safer. But I know from a taste and a personal standpoint, they make Lexington less special. Lexington doesn't look the same and it doesn't feel the same after the addressing ordinance has been applied block by block. And you begin to see large numbers rather than the front of the building. And I know that there's great conversation on both sides of this issue, but on this street, in this neighborhood, these numbers, which are some of the only ones in Lexington that are under 100. I mean, these are 26, 24, 28, 28 and a half. Those are the things that make Lexington special. Turning this all to a block of 160, 162, 164 is as bland as it gets. and I don't believe that it changes the opportunity for services to be delivered. I think it takes something very special away from that neighborhood, and I think it's taken things away from other neighborhoods, and that's why the council, in a very close vote, decided not to change some of the characteristics on how we decide where addresses are changed. And I would just encourage the council to step back for a moment, not act in haste today. Give the neighborhood the opportunity to appear again and let us know what they really think, rather than to sneak up on them in a Christmas surprise and change all their addresses. Thank you. Council Member Lane. Yes, sir. I'd like to ask Dave Lucas to come up. And I would just like to get a little bit of an update briefing on the status with the people in those neighborhoods, if they've consented to the numbers or they're still opposed to it, whatever the situation is. We haven't had direct communication with them since this went to committee, and that was discussed at that time, and that was in May, I believe, when it was in committee or came out. And you're right, this originally started in May of 2010, so it's been 31 months. I understand Councilman's viewpoint and Ms. Lawless's. Quite frankly, the addressing office, we just want a conclusion. If the vote is yes, we move forward. If the vote is no, we will handle that. But for this to be lingering over the residents for this long period of time and for it to still be in the process is longer than any one we've done. So obviously we would like to see a conclusion one way or the other, so we could, no pun intended, address it however it comes out. Do you consider the numbering still to be a public safety issue? As we discussed in the committee, I believe that this is the correct solution for this block. We look at each one individually, and we believe this is the best solution for this situation. Okay. Thank you, sir. Council Member Lawless. Thank you. There were alternatives and suggestions made, and there was quite a bit of discussion and a meeting with the people in the neighborhood. They are adamantly opposed. And when you look at the ordinance, it says you can't have single-digit numbers, but there are many blocks that have single-digit numbers, and including one block over. So these have double digits. One option was to, there were about four properties that are 100 at the very end. There are no properties with 200. One option was, okay, change those to double digits. That was rejected by Mr. Lucas and Mr. Hawkinsmith. Another option was make them 28A and 23A instead of a half if that was an issue. And that also was rejected, even though that is done on other blocks. So if you look at the ordinance, and it is, I believe, applied inconsistently. And these numbers have been that way forever and ever. And everybody's mail gets in. There were public safety people who said, firefighters and police, who said that's going to make it more difficult for us. You know, we know where these houses are. No one has ever not had an ambulance, or there's never been an occasion where they couldn't find them. And My Street, again, I think we're looking at a situation where they talked about pizza delivery and Mr. Lucas and Mr. Hawkinsmith. If you type in my street, which was changed probably 12, 13 years ago, it will take you to Fontaine Road on just about any map you have. So, again, maybe I should ask to table it, but one of the things they were going to come back with us about was what have there been any instances where services were delayed and there haven't been. So, thank you. Council Member Blues. Thank you, Mayor. I just wanted to add two points. I understand Council Member Farmer's desire to keep Lexington as a special and unique place, But I would not agree that a street number makes us special. There are so many other qualities of our city. It seems to me that this is essentially a safety issue and a policy issue. And I think we ought to be prioritizing safety and the provisions for getting and meeting emergency obligations at the quickest possible moment and not taking any chances. Second point is that fiddling with these changes and delaying them and setting up these strange excuses for not going forward with the recommendations of E911 puts all council members who will have to deal with these situations in the future in a very difficult situation because there will be no reason not to indulge the same kind of excuse-making in the future. So I do hope, for the sake of safety and for consistency and a very sound policy, that the Council will reject this delaying tactic. Thank you, Mayor. Council Member Kaye. Thank you, Mayor. My experience with this renumbering system is that the staff and committee who make the initial decisions are so focused on public safety, which may be appropriate, that they do not take into account hardly any other concerns. And the standard, it seems, for rejecting a change is that you can't conceive of anything possible that could, in any scenario, happen that would actually result in some way in which the public safety responders would be hindered. I think the standard is way too high. I don't think there's enough balance on that. So I've seen this in a couple of these cases where it seems to me a reasonable person would look at it and say, It's not obvious, it's not clear at all that there's a risk here, any risk, any enhanced risk, and yet the ruling comes down that there is, and we get these proposals before us. So I'm not sympathetic with this on the substance. On the other hand, I agree that this has been discussed at fair length. I think everybody has had an opportunity to weigh in. I've not heard anything today that was new or different, and so I will vote against the proposal to delay, and when it comes up substantively, I'll vote against approval of the measure itself. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Council Member Beard. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Mayor. David? Throughout Fayette County, how many different spots do we have one and two-digit or even fractional digits? I do not know about the one or two digits, but those are not a concern to us. We don't want to assign those in the future. But the half addresses, we have identified 350 of 200 of them we have corrected. I'm sorry, 350 of 200 we have corrected. Do you have other streets that are similar to Richmond Avenue? There are other half-addresses, and there are some that are similar, not as large as this. Richmond Avenue is a very long block, and the change for this one does probably affect more than any other ones that we have done in the past or foresee in the future. I do know I have a spot within my district, which is single and double digits. Only. And I'm not going to tell you how it is, however. Well, I will say that I've lost all their votes. The single and double digits, there are several of them. And Ms. Lawless pointed one out next to her, which is actually where I grew up. I grew up in a double-digit street. And those aren't an issue. They all fit in. And it's the non-whole numbers, which create a problem not just locally but nationally. So we just do not allow future assignments of one and two digits. Let me just make one other comment because, you know, we have played this situation, Richmond Avenue situation, ad infinitum, but in my wanderings during campaigning, at least in my district, I would guess that probably 50% of the people either don't have house numbers or they've got them in some of the strangest places to try to pick them up when you're driving down the street in the evening. Is there any move afoot or can there be any move afoot to strengthen that portion of this public safety issue? Actually, we've done a study, and around 40% of the people do not have them posted at all or correctly. and we are working systematically through the county to doing that. I know that currently we're in Mr. Farmer's district, and we've been talking to some of his constituents. We've been going street by street, so we're doing it geographically, very close to zip code. So we haven't made it to your area yet, but we will someday. That's fine. And I just hate to see somebody paint something, a public safety brush over here, and then totally forget about it over here. So all the new development are meeting our criteria. If you go out to Hamburg, you can see their numbers are well posted. All the new apartments, we're working with the new people so they don't fall behind. But the older areas, we're doing geographically. We started in Mr. Blue's area and moving clockwise inside New Circle Road. Then we'll continue that outside New Circle Road. Okay. Very good. Thank you, David. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Council Member Beard. Council Member Crosby. Thank you, Mayor. I wasn't going to comment, but I think I will. I'm going to support the motion because kind of a point that Dr. Blues said that made me think about it was we have brought this up several different times, and each time we've brought it up, it has been voted down, which tells me that, one, we've heard from public safety. We've had police and fire up here who've told us it won't affect the job that they do. Two, the neighbors don't want it. And we have put this off and put this off because sometimes it's just a bad idea. And maybe our way of doing it is just to put it off, where maybe we just need to say, don't do it. I would encourage my council members who are staying on to maybe go through. I've been through minutes of the address changing committee on another issue. I would encourage you all to go through and look at these minutes and look at the committee and how things are discussed and what's discussed. I think you find it very interesting. Thank you. Thank you. Council Member Crosby, thank you. Council Member Lane. Mr. Lucas, I've got just a quick follow-up question. I do not know the answer to this. With regard to GPS systems in cars or delivery trucks, et cetera, can you actually put in like 2.5 or 2.5 or something into the ñ is that a standard way to reach it? Is that the problem? Actually, during our presentation during the committee, we actually showed displays where we did that off the shelf and also with what we use internally, and they do not interpret halves or .5s, which is one of the problems. Our systems don't internally, and the ones out in the common market off the shelf do not either. So that's why we currently have the policy that we don't allow that for any new numbers whatsoever. That is true. Okay. All right. I mean, I feel sort of frustrated, too, if it's been 31 months. It seems like something this mundane that we could make a decision a little bit faster. Yeah, the history in those three, it's been, it got first reading, it's been tabled twice, went to committee. Committee came out, did not pass their motion, and it just never came back up. I think it was an oversight. Since that time, we have other address ordinances that have passed that did change half addresses. I think this one just got caught in our system, should I say. Thank you again. Council Member Myers. Thank you, Mayor. I agree with what I've heard from a couple of my colleagues here. It seems to me we ought to just vote this thing down and maybe make an amendment to the policy so that people that have a single-digit or double-digit number can be grandfathered in. If you've got a half number, make it an A or a B like we do duplexes. Maybe in the future, new construction shouldn't be allowed to do that, but it doesn't make sense to me to change all these people's numbers just because of the reasons given. It seems like public safety doesn't have an issue with the way things are. The neighborhood doesn't want it either. So rather than do all this, I think just like Council Member Kay and Council Member Crosley said, just vote this thing down and then make an amendment later. Thank you. Vice Mayor Gordon. Well, based on what Council Member Myers said, I want to clarify, this is not about double-digit numbers, correct? It's about half numbers. That is correct. It has nothing to do with the double digits. It's because some are like a half. There are two halves on the street. There actually were two others that we already changed. We were able to change those without affecting any of the neighbors. But he is correct. The current ordinance does say no single or doubles, and we only enforce that into the future. It does not specifically grandfather them in, but I understand where he's going with that. But you both are correct. This is only dealing with halves, but it does eliminate the uniqueness of the double digits that are on Richmond Avenue. We do not allow halves anywhere regardless, and single and doubles are not allowed since that ordinance was in place. Well, let me ask this then. If these addresses had no halves in them, would you have even brought up forward? We would not be here. That's what I thought. This is not about double-digit numbers. It's totally about whether the half is what is the confusing part. We found halves earlier in the process in the late 90s on Richmond Avenue. I think it was two and a half, and we changed them to four. So we tried to change these things into the series. This, as we have seen, is a unique situation. Okay, thank you. All right. This will be the third time for your comment on this, Council Member Lawless. Is this to clarify a point that's already been made? Is it to clarify? That's all right. If it is to clarify. To clarify. I think there is an option to solve this and look at grandfathering in. And again, we have A's and B's in other areas, and that would solve this problem. if those two addresses were 28A and whatever, I don't know which two they are. All right. Okay. Councilor Myers, do you have something to add to what you've already said? Yes, sir, I do. Mr. Lucas, could you come up for a second? I think you were right in saying that both the vice mayor and I were correct. If you were to make an amendment to this and take the two numbers that are halves and change those to an A or a B, wouldn't that resolve this issue? Except for we do not assign units as A or B per the post office request in our own system. All new units are given numeric, not alphabetic assignments. But in this case, there's only two addresses that are impacted by a half number. Is that correct? That's correct. So wouldn't it make sense just to do that? I understand that we don't do that in the future, but essentially just grandfather those two in as A's or B's so that all the rest of these addresses don't have to be changed. You're impacting so many people just because you're trying to eliminate that half number in two instances. I agree with you. It is a difficult choice. So since we have A's and B's when it comes to duplexes and things like that, wouldn't this be the simpler solution? We do not assign A and Bs for duplexes or any alphabetic. Central Park, we just changed all the A and Bs to unique numbers. That's part of our partnership with the post office. We do not assign new alphabetical assignments. So that was the solution we have is the one we have before us today. Well, I'm looking for a motion from the council member that this impacts their district, and I would support that if you made that as a motion. Thank you, sir. You're welcome. Council Member Kay. I guess I'm not clear about something. Are there properties in our communities that have A's and B's on them? Yes. A, I've seen up to G. That is correct. And they're allowed to exist. You're not attempting to change those? No, we are not. Those were all done before we created our ordinance in 96 or 98. I see. So we would have to amend our rules in order to allow you to do this simpler change in this particular neighborhood. Is that correct? That's correct. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. All right. I have nobody else signed up, so we're ready to take a vote. Council Member Lawless. I'd like to amend my motion. I'd like to move that the two half addresses on Richmond Avenue be made A, 28A and 44A, whichever the two numbers are. Okay. So amendment by Council Member Lawless to her motion and the second, which was offered by Council Member Farmer. Are you substituting this or amending it? She's amended. I'm substituting and withdrawing my old motion and making a new one that we make the two half addresses A and B. All right. And that's okay with Council Member Farmer? Yes, sir. All right, sir. Thank you. All right. Is there no discussion on the motion to substitute? Then we can take a vote on the motion to substitute. Council Member. I'm sorry. I just have a clarification. I think I understand the intent of this motion, but I'm not sure if it's stated in the way that it needs to be. What we have before us is a whole list. You're saying only on that list amend 28A, 28.5 to 28A, and 43.5 to 48A, and not change the other numbers. Is that correct? Yes, sir. I'm sorry. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. All right. All right. Is there any further discussion? All right. Okay. So we can now vote on the motion to substitute. All in motion. Motion to leave all of them the same except the two half numbers. Make them A. All right. And that's what the motion to substitute. Yes, sir. Is. All right. Okay. All in favor, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, no. No. All right. Then let's vote electronically. All right. Motion passes. All right. Everybody's voting. Motion passes. All right. Motion to substitute passes, yes. Can I request a clarification to make sure we have that correct on our end? to change the half addresses to either A or B or make them A because if you change the 28 and a half to A, you still have a 28. And when someone doesn't put the A on, they're going to show up at the wrong location. So one would need to be A, one need to be B. Yes. Okay. Okay, I mean, okay. So you'll have a 28A and a 28B. And then a 23A and a 23B. Yeah. Or whatever the other number is. Yeah, 44, 43A, and B. All right. Yeah, we still need to vote on the final motion. All right, now we need to vote on the original motion. No, wait, wait, wait. Substitute. We voted on the substitute, so. What are the substitutes? We voted two substitutes. Two substitutes. As substituted. All right, okay. Now we can vote on the motion as substituted. All right. All in favor of the motion, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, no. No. All right, vote electronically then. Please vote electronically. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Motion succeeds. All right. We are now still on new business. Is there any further discussion on the motion, new business motion? All right. Does anyone wish to speak to new business beyond what we've discussed? Vice Mayor Gordon. Yes, thank you, Mayor. I just had a comment about J, which is the memorandum of understanding with the University of Kentucky for construction of the public restroom at the Arboretum. Council members, you'll remember that we put this into the budget, and this restroom will be very important, particularly to the use of the children's garden, and it will be available on weekends and when the indoor restrooms are closed. So I appreciate Commissioner Hamilton's work on this memorandum and look forward to using the new bathroom. What can I say? There is much discussion at the university about how to build a restroom that is very secure and not subject to destruction. And there are some really new examples out in the other communities where they're doing this. And I applaud you and the university for looking at this and moving it forward. Thank you. Thank you, Vice Mayor Borton. Does anyone else wish to speak to new business? All right. Then we can take a vote. All in favor of what's it? I think Chris, did he read it? Chris, oh, I didn't see him. Mayor, I apologize. Thank you. I just want to get clarity for trying to keep up with on resolution number B. Yes, sir. As amended, I just want to be clear what the action will be. Will the action only pertain to those two properties? Yes. That's my understanding. Okay, great. Thank you, Mayor. Thanks so much. Yes, sir. What? Where are we? Councilman Lawless, do you wish to speak? No. All right. All right. Then we can vote on the motion for new business. All in favor of the motion, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Motion to approve the NDF. Second. It's a motion to approve the NDF. We're now on item number six. It's a motion by Councilman Ellinger, second by Vice Mayor Gordon to approve. The NDF. Is there any discussion on the motion? Okay. Hearing none. All in favor, please say aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Mayor. Council Member Blues. Thank you, Mayor. I'm sorry to interrupt the flow here, but I do have a very late walk-on that just came to me. Very late walk-on, very late. It is kind of a run-on. And since it, if approved, needs to be gotten to the clerk as quickly as possible, I would ask your and the Council's indulgence to let me read it and have it voted on. Go ahead. Yes, sir. Thank you, Mayor. I move to place on the docket for the December 11, 2012 meeting a resolution authorizing the Mayor to submit a grant application for the Planet matching grant program for a tree replacement program at 1201 Manowar Boulevard. So moved. Second. It's a motion by Council Member Blues, second by Council Member Kaye. Is there any discussion on the motion? All right. Hearing none, then we can take a vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Council Member Blues. Council Member Ellinger. Thank you, Mayor. Now the Budget and Finance Committee summary? Yeah, it works. Yes, sir. The Budget and Finance Committee met on November 27th. We have four items. The first item was the approval of the minutes. The second item was the comprehensive annual financial report, the CAFR, the fund balances, and the monthly financial report. Commissioner Driscoll stated that the LFUCG was issued a clean financial opinion on November 15th for the year-end financial statement. She stated that the A-133 would be completed by February 2013, and the auditor would present their findings at the February meeting as well. She also stated that the unrestricted balance in the urban fund is $22.8 million, or 63% of the annual revenue. The sanitary sewer fund has a capital reserve of $56.2 million and a fund balance of $4.8 million. The landfill fund has a fund balance of $11.1 million, or 154% of the annual revenue. The water quality fund has a fund balance of $7.2 million, or 59% of the annual revenue. Commissioner Driscoll also stated that the general fund has a non-spendable fund balance of $1.5 million, an assigned fund balance of $39.5 million, and an unassigned fund balance of $3.3 million. She also stated that the general fund assigned fund balance includes funds for the 27th pay period, a litigation reserve, home match, a health care reserve, tax refunds, an economic development reserve, capital carried forward a transfer to the Urban Services Fund for Streetlights and the Economic Stabilization Fund. Mr. Romero discussed the monthly revenue report. He stated that the revenue in the major categories is up $800,000 over budget. Director Barrow discussed the FY13 general fund cash flow. He stated that there is a positive variance of approximately $1.5 million between the actual revenue and budget year to date. He also reported that the actual expenses were about $3.8 million below budget prior to date, providing a net income year-to-date of $5.2 million. However, he said that the timing was a factor in some of these positive variants, but expenses were down and revenues were exceeding budget. The third item on the agenda was the Affordable Housing Trust Fund. Mr. Stinnett had asked several questions that would be put in the September 25th committee meeting, including the role of the Lexington Housing Authority, the Housing Authority winning list, funds expended on affordable housing, a number of affordable housing dwelling units in Lexington, Fayette County. Mr. Schoeniger stated the Housing Authority has a waiting list of 2,376 families for conventional public housing and a waiting list of 316 for choice voucher assistance. He also reported that since 2005, LFUCG has expended $37.8 million on affordable housing programs using a combination of local and federal HUD funds. Dr. K stated the Homelessness Commission will finish its work in early 2003, and he wanted to keep this item in committee. The final item in the committee was the items referred to committee, and Council Member Lane requested that the issue of economic efficiency and the best practice be part of the January 2003 agenda. The meeting was adjourned at 2.45. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Council Member Ellinger. No motions, so we can move on to Environmental Quality Committee summary. Council Member Blues. Chair. Thank you, Mayor. So this is a report on the November 27th environmental quality meeting. And I will also add a brief report on this morning's meeting of the environmental quality committee since the agenda items were essentially a continuation of November 7th. so I think we can clear up both meetings in a single report. There were two items on the agenda for November 27, the Blue Sky Pump Station in Forest Main, and as well the Distillery District update. Regarding Blue Sky, the Division of Water Quality Director Charlie Martin reviewed the section of the consent decree in which the Blue Sky Wastewater Treatment Plant was designated as a supplemental environmental project. The project requires eliminating the Blue Sky Wastewater Treatment Plant and replacing it with a pump station and a force main. To comply with the terms of the consent decree, this project must be completed by January 3, 2015. Director Martin outlined three project options. Option 1, construct a 435-gallon-per-minute pump station discharging into a 6-inch force main at an approximate cost of $1.4 million. Option 2, an 800-gallon-per-minute pump station discharging into a 10-inch force main, approximate cost $5.2 million. And option three, a 1,200-gallon-per-minute pump station discharging into a 10-inch force main with an approximate cost of $7.1 million. Mr. Martin said option two would allow for development and redevelopment of the Blue Sky Rural Activity Center beyond the 150,000-gallon-per-day plant capacity. It would accommodate future flows from Boonesboro Manor beyond the 70,000 gallons per day plant capacity, which option one would not do. He noted that this option, option two, would increase the cost of downstream infrastructure above the cost cited in the current remedial measures plan, and that the Boonesboro Manor flow would be served by a pump station funded by the property owners. While not requesting immediate committee action, Director Martin said that the Division of Water Quality's recommendation is to amend current remedial measures plan projections to fund construction of Option 2 and to develop and implement a cost recovery system for developing and redeveloping parcels within the entire Blue Sky Rural Activities Center. Following questions and comments from committee members, Mr. Wilson, I'm not sure whether that was Phillip Wilson or Steve Wilson, and Mr. Stephen Wilson, representing JFG Enterprises, the owners and operators of Boonesboro Manor and its treatment plant, said that these stakeholders would like to have their concerns and questions considered regarding the options Mr. Martin described. I indicated that these concerns would be heard at the December 11th committee meeting. At this morning's meeting, Mr. Wilson informed us that subsequent to our November 27 meeting, he and Director Martin had met, had seen opportunity for establishing common ground for both private and public interests and suggested more time is needed for further discussions. Mr. Martin suggested that there is potential for a mutually beneficial private-public partnership that would avoid future environmental problems. Committee members now look forward to hearing and considering the results of these discussions at the January 29 Environmental Quality Committee meeting. The second agenda item at November 27 meeting was the distillery district update. Commissioner of Planning Derek Paulson reviewed the history of the project from the Council's initial bonding of $2.2 million for streetscape and trail design and partial construction. forward to the awarding of a contract with Strand to conduct a feasibility study, which is now about three-quarters of the way to completion. Because Distillery District Developer Barry McNeese was not in attendance and thus unable to contribute to the discussion, it was decided to carry over this agenda item to the December 11 meeting. At this morning's meeting, this agenda item will be carried over to the January 29 meeting because Commissioner Paulson was unable to attend due to a sudden illness in his family and because Mr. McNeese is out of town. And with that, Mayor, I conclude my report. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for that report and all the others before it. All right. We can now move on to council reports. If you, council members, the flat floor is available for council reports. Council Member Kaye. Thank you, Mayor. I just want to let council or remind council that the public know that there will be a public meeting to review the ongoing draft for the Mayor's Commission on Homelessness. That meeting will be at the Central Library 6 o'clock tomorrow. That's Wednesday, 6 o'clock in the meeting room, which is in the basement of the library. That draft is now posted on the city website. People can review that, and we hope people will come out and give us their responses to what we've drafted so far. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Council Member Kaye. Thank you. Council Member Stennett. Thank you, Mayor. Just a couple things. One, I appreciate Commissioner Mason getting us the draft on our police and fire sworn officers and the analysis of our staffing levels. I know that's very important, especially usually this time of year when we go on break. I know we've had special meetings in the past while we've been on break to have that discussion, but I appreciate you getting that to us today. But in preparation for our return in January and also with four new council members, I think it would be appropriate to have another conversation. You don't have to come up, Commissioner, unless you want to. But I think on January 15th, when we get back on the 15th of January, if we could have options presented to this body, because I don't think this body has been getting an opportunity to do more to solve our brownout issue. And this has to deal just with fire. It's not saying that our staffing is not doing the best they can because they are. It's not saying the chiefs aren't doing their job because they are. This is saying what can this council do to help you in brownouts? Is it an overtime dollar figure that we need to come up with? Is it authorizing more classes? But I think we can do more because I think that's a topic in our community that everyone is in favor of trying to end. But if you could maybe between now and January 15th come up with some options of here's the pain, here's what it's going to take to get this done until we can get more bodies, I think the council should be given the opportunity to make that decision one way or another. So you don't have to comment today. I believe he's already on the way, though. But you're welcome to comment. but if you can do that by 15. Commissioner Mason. Yes, sir. We have examined some things, and we've allocated some more monies just in the last few days towards some overtime to try and keep the SAPA level, the out-of-service level at a certain number, with the holidays and people taking leave. A couple weeks ago, there was a stomach bug running through Fayette County, and it got some people that had to go home early. Those kind of things come up. and that way we can try and keep the numbers as good as we can. We will run some more numbers in terms of long-term, what kind of cost it would be throughout the spring. And we're just now starting to fine-tune some of the attrition numbers that we were looking for. Tomorrow we've got the pension board, So we'll have a pretty good handle on a number of retirements. And that's why I asked for January 15th because we don't know what's going to happen come December 31st. I think it gives the council an opportunity to say, hey, you know, either we've got to put money at it, bodies or a combination, and, you know, whatever we can do to help. Thank you. Yeah, I think what Commissioner Mason is saying is that, you know, of course, there's points of view that have been on the television quite frequently, but there's also the point of view of management. And, you know, my own view is that we put people in places of responsibility, in positions of responsibility, like a fire chief, to make informed decisions. They have the experience to do that, and that's what Commissioner Mason has asked for and expected and fortunately has gotten from the fire chief that we have today. So I really want to commend Fire Chief Keith Jackson for what he has done in short order and also in dealing with lots of adversity, especially in the last week. I want to say that publicly. I know that all council members feel the same way. So thank you, Council Member Stennett, for bringing that up. Vice Mayor Gordon. Thank you, Mayor. I have one item, Council Members. I distributed a letter to each of you that I received from Aaron Gold, the Vice President of Goodwill Industries of Kentucky, and I actually have also met with folks from Goodwill Industries of Kentucky. They are very concerned about the proliferation of clothing boxes. in Fayette County, many of which are for-profit businesses. They are not non-profit such as the Goodwill Industries who collect the clothing for people who need the clothing. There are boxes which are placed around Fayette County which are then the goods are collected and sold. And so I would like to put this issue of clothing, the proliferation of donated clothing boxes, I move to put it into the General Government Committee. Motion by Vice Member Gordon, seconded by Council Member Farmer. Is there any discussion on the motion? Council Member Lane. I don't. I'm the chairman of the General Government at this time, And I'm trying to see how that fits into the general government concept. It seems like it would be more of some type of a law enforcement type action. If people are misrepresenting this as a charity and then they're selling the goods, that's like a fraud to me. I would be happy to put it in public safety. I just think they're placing them in public places and in parking lots and other places like that. So if the council would prefer it going to public safety, I think that's fine. It could also be maybe planning committee. I mean, I don't know. Somewhere it has an enforcement. If people are doing that, that might be a violation of our zoning ordinance. I mean, I'm not trying to push the buck around, but I was trying to, you know, and I'm honored that you selected our committee. I guess you think we're doing a good job. Thank you. It could go in a multitude of committees. I just wanted to make sure it was an appropriate area, but I'll be happy to do it, but I'm just not sure this is the right committee. Thank you. All right. Councilor Stennett. Vice Mayor, you had mentioned that they're going in public places. Can you give us an example? Because a parking lot is not public. They're going in public and private. They're putting them out in the community. I saw one the other day over near Kinko's, FedEx Kinko's, on Nicholasville Road. And the Goodwill Industries people are out photographing them for us to get some background. So I think they're in a variety of places, and I don't know where all they are. But they're businesses, and they're not not-for-profit. And so the concern by the Goodwill folks is that the public perceives them as a drop-off for a donation to people who need it, but they're really businesses. So I don't know where all they are. Yeah, I would think, though, it would belong in planning because it is a zoning. It's a private property issue. If they allow them to do it, then that's up to the private property owner to allow them to put their box there. So I think that's where it belongs in a zoning-type situation. Well, then I move to amend my motion and place this issue in planning. Second. So there's a motion to amend by Vice Mayor Gordon and by the seconder, Mr. Farmer. Is there any discussion on the motion to amend? All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. All right. Is there any further discussion? We can vote on the original motion. And we can vote on the original motion. Second. Council Member Lawless. The laws about what a for-profit can do in the name of charity are very interesting. I think probably one of the things that would be most important is to get this out to the public if we had some identification of the boxes and where they were. Thank you. All right. We can now vote on the motion. Peggy wants to speak. Peggy, do you wish to speak to the motion? All right. I thought it was for the council reports. Thank you, Mayor. Council Member Hanson. I just wanted to say there are several in my district, and I could get pictures of those. I think it would be interesting to see if you're giving a person the impression that you're donating something to underprivileged individuals or whatever and then turning around and selling it, then I would be interested in seeing what ordinance covers that. But I know Goodwill is a registered non-for-profit that employs people that sort through the close. They put a lot of people to work. So, Vice Mayor, thank you for putting this in committee. All right. Does anyone else wish to speak to the motion? All right. Not then. We can take a vote. All in favor, please say aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. We're back to council reports. Council Member Lawless. Just quickly, this being our last council work session, I want to express my deep sympathy to the family of the young woman who was hit this weekend in the 3rd District on Main and Broadway, and also to all involved in the incident, which I'm sure was extremely difficult for everybody. And also remind people about the general safety issues around Christmas and leaving town and letting neighbors know, stopping your newspaper, looking out for each other, et cetera. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Lawless. Council Member Henson. Thank you, Mayor. I just wanted to wish everyone happy holidays. And I also know Council Member Lawless mentioned the young lady that was killed, but I also have to say that I know many of our firefighters, I know how that's affected the fire department and the community and the person that was driving that truck and on that truck. So it was a bad situation all the way around, but my heart and thoughts go out to all of them. Thank you. Yes, thank you, Council Member Henson. Does anyone else wish to speak? All right. Then we can move on to Mayor's report. Move approval. Order. Is there a motion? To approve and a second. Is there any discussion on the motion? All right. Hearing none, then we can take a vote. All in favor, please say aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. I would like to introduce real quickly, just as my mayor's report, part of my mayor's report tonight, Several council members had asked about the status of the Bloomberg Mayor's Challenge, and so we thought we'd share that. At Derek Paulson's suggestion, Jamie Emmons has worked on this as well, and Nick Such is here. Jamie? Don't forget Jane Driscoll. And Jane Driscoll. Where is Jane? Is Jane here? Yes. And many others. But I would say, just to begin, this is one of the most interesting projects I've had an opportunity to work on while I've been here. But thank you, Council Members, for giving us a few minutes to brief you on Lexington's application to the Mayor's Challenge Grant. Thank you, Mr. Farmer, for recommending this presentation. I'd like to give you three things today, briefly. Just reflect on the Bloomberg Philanthropies New York trip, which happened several weeks back. Secondly, Nick Such, who's an entrepreneur, local entrepreneur, and a partner at Awesome Inc., would like to give you our five-minute pitch, which I think you'll find interesting, which Nick did a really, really nice job in New York, and I think everyone was universally happy with the way he performed. And then third, Commissioner Paulson will give you an overview of our next steps and how the council can get involved. So just to begin briefly as a summary on the trip to New York, It was a two-day marathon series of meetings and presentations where we interacted with 19 other cities across America. There were breakout sessions where we collaborated on our ideas, but also the other applications as well. So we broke down our concept, just the very core concept, and then began to rebuild it. And I thought that was an interesting approach. While we were there, Mayor Bloomberg spoke at lunch. Charlie Rose interviewed him, and he said that they put this grant together to try to make America better and innovate cities. And regardless who wins this grant, I think that they will have accomplished their goal because all 20 cities that were there are thinking a little bit differently now about innovation and looking for new opportunity, not just in this application but universally through existing city programs and services. So we brought back tools from New York that I think will be helpful in budgeting, planning, et cetera. So with that, I would like to turn it over to Derek Paulson, who will give you a little bit more from New York. Thank you, Jamie. I think the key phrase we came away from New York with was a coopetition. And they really forced us, in a good way, not anything bad, but really to work with the 19 other cities to both cooperate but also be in competition. So working together to really build our idea into something much better. And I think that's really supposed to carry forward for the rest of the time. I really can't say enough about the way the Bloomberg Philanthropy Foundation really did a fabulous job while there in terms of the internationally renowned experts that they brought in to help us work on our idea and also just the people that we got to hear to speak. Arianna Huffington started us off. We unfortunately, at least in my perspective, unfortunately were the very first of two groups to give our first pitch. We had to give a 45-second pitch about two minutes after we sat down. but it was great and it really forced us to think about our idea a whole lot more and again over those two days of which it was quite extensively not a lot of breaks i've got to hear eric schmidt on the second day speak a lot about innovation about technological innovation in particular and how we can move forward our cities and again innovation was was a key component but one of the things that we really i think probably came away with more than anything was a new renewed pitch a new kind of our concept 2.0. And I would say a lot of it is attributed to Nick Such. He did a fabulous job. We took four people up to New York City. We were all asked to bring four people that would be involved in the pitch, involved in the creation and kind of the implementation of our idea. And it was myself, Jamie, Jane, and then Nick Such. And I think you'll get to see why we brought Nick because he gives us the five-minute pitch here. and then I'll get back up and talk a little bit about what's coming next and where we have been for the last few weeks since we've been back from New York. Hello, Councilor. How are you doing today? I'll just admit I was a little skeptical when I first talked with Derek and they were inviting me to participate in the Mayor's Challenge application. I thought, you know, I'm an entrepreneur. I don't really know much about how government works. But after the experience in New York and the opportunity to work with Jamie, Jane, Derek, and the rest of the team, I'm really excited to be part of this project. So to jump right in, a lot of the other cities who are participating in this have a problem that they want to solve. In Cincinnati, there's a high infant mortality rate. In Providence, Rhode Island, there are challenges with young people and literacy. In Lexington, the problem that we have is that we have too many people who are energized about making this the greatest city in America. In fact, for the whole Bloomberg Mayor's Challenge competition, there were about 300 cities who submitted ideas to this. In the city of Lexington alone, through our process for finding our idea, we had over 400 ideas submitted, which I think is tremendous. So there's this excess of energy, but where's the outlet for this? So the opportunity we have is to capture some of this learning, the ideas that our citizens have for making our city a better place and for building some pathways for them to turn their ideas into these realities that improve the quality of life in our city. So right now, if someone has an issue that's an emergency, someone's broken my home, you call 911. There's a one-step pathway for getting that solved. If there happens to be a possum that has met its end in your front yard, there's a single call to 311, and that's solved. But what happens if you want a new bus stop? Let's say on Euclid Avenue, something that is very artistically designed, is a covered shelter, how would you go about doing that? And I think this one is particularly interesting, because this is actually going on. So there's a project called the Bank Stop brought forward by the Columbia Heights Neighborhood Association and citizen Kate Savage, who is just a bundle of energy. She's worked on this for almost two years. This process has included several grants. I think many of you have helped her to find a Kickstarter project, which is an online funding opportunity. She's been involved with LexTran, with Art in Motion, with traffic engineering. She found an architect to volunteer time to design this. And throughout this whole process, there were probably a dozen different places that she could have gotten tripped up. But she didn't. She kept going. Now, if someone came tomorrow and decided they wanted another bus stop somewhere else around town, they would essentially have to start this whole process over, learning each step, figuring out where can I go for a grant, whose permission do I need to get, who's someone who knows how to design bus stops. And I think the problem that we're really trying to solve is how do we make this so when one citizen has figured something out, how do we make it much easier for the next person to come along and do this? So our solution is a web-based platform. It's kind of a structured question and answer tool, and there are a lot of other similar tools out there. There's a precedent for doing things like this through a program called Code for America, which our friends in Louisville will actually be a partner city for that program this upcoming year. It's a chance for us to capture these pathways and to share them with those in the future and truly start leveraging partnerships within our city, looking at government as a facilitator and not necessarily this destination where everything gets done. We've got a lot of great nonprofits, a lot of great businesses, and this is a way for us to really take advantage of what they can offer to our city. There are some challenges, though, in this project. Other people have tried platforms like this before. neighborland, mind mixer, change by us. And a few of the things they've struggled with include adoption. Will people actually make use of the system? As well as trust. You know, is this just a black hole into which we're submitting our ideas? But we think that's an area in which our strengths as a city here in Lexington will allow us to kind of transcend those past failures. Many of those include the partners that we have involved with this. Many times that we were in New York, there were comments made on the video that we submitted with our application. Great partner in Bullhorn. There are some great folks at Toyota, as well as the Lean Systems program at UK. Use a very similar process to empower line workers at Toyota, right on the factory floor, to make these changes that ripple all the way back up through the organization. I think we're doing something very, very similar with our citizens here. and other partners such as Cornette and Civic Rush who are helping us in designing the software piece. So some of the benefits that we get out of this are involving citizens, not just in voicing the problems they notice, but in actually creating the solutions. I think one of the key realizations that Jamie Emmons has kind of taken a twist on a JFK quote is to ask not what your city can do for you, but ask what you can do for your city and how. And that's really what we're building here with Citizen Lex. It's a way to improve the quality of life in our city in a very efficient way without a lot of additional government burden. And one of the key pieces in winning this grant application is that it's something that's easy to replicate in other cities. and I'm really excited to see some of the impacts as we've met with a few citizen groups that this is already having and looking forward to bringing home that $5 million check to Lexington. Thank you. Quickly, knock on wood there. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Thanks, Nick. Real quick, we're going to let Jane Driscoll come up and speak a little bit about the New York trip as well. I kind of shut her out real quick. By the way, just parenthetically, you all might mention that Bloomberg Philanthropy sponsored the trip fully for Lexington and 19 other cities, a total of 20 cities. That's correct. And really, I just quickly wanted to add, I sent Mayor Gray a follow-up email. Because as you talk about this, some of it's a little abstract. That was one of my issues. We wanted to go to New York, make this a much more concrete idea. This conference really allowed us to do that by making us go, not making us, allowing us to go through a process using tools to make it more concrete so that we could reshape really the idea, our initial idea that we had, that we went up there. But I really just wanted to comment because I had sent Mayor Gray an e-mail, and I think after 26 years in government, sometimes you get a little jaded about things and I've been to a lot of conferences and national board meetings, but this was the most extraordinary meeting and opportunity that I have ever done in all those years and I sent Mayor Gray that note to tell him that just to say what a big deal this was that Lexington is in this group, that Citizen Lex, which is what we were calling our idea, is already a winner in terms of the exposure and the tools that we can use in budgeting and how we can apply it to finance and other ways as we move forward. But just wanted to comment on one thing. Mayor Bloomberg met with us for an hour, talked very candidly about challenges in government, and thought that the one significant thing he said, and we've all heard this, but change really will come from local government and continue to come from local government, and this is just another opportunity to do so. So I just wanted to add those comments, and Derek's going to wrap up. Thanks, Jay. The last bit I'm going to talk to you about is kind of where we are supposed to go now. At this point, we have come away from New York. The Bloomberg philanthropy folks actually gave each city a coach. We are teamed with some folks from Bennett Midland, which is a management consulting firm out of New York City. And we have exercised. We have different projects we were supposed to do over the next few weeks, wrapping up somewhere around the 15th of January with our final project. Our initial one we turned in last week. It was to refine our concept a little more and do what they call horizon scan, which was to really look at what we perceive as our competitors, as those things that have come before us in the research and everything about that. We, throughout this process, will also be talking with our coaches, which we'll be doing in the next couple weeks. And again, there are some other steps we go through, including looking at how we will measure success, how will we implement it, and how we will sustain it. And our final application is due on the 31st of January. Unfortunately, at this time, we do not know what that application looks like. Whereas before we had an idea of what the application is, At this point, they are still working on the application. We assume it will involve all the things we have done. We know from what they've told us that it will involve a video because they had, again, at length, pretty much everyone who had reviewed the applications came up to us and just said the video was great. Even if they hadn't seen it, they said, I heard your video was great. So we're really hoping to be able to play on that and kind of do another great video and, again, bring home the, I won't even say it again, but really do well. We know we've already in many ways won already, but we'd like to keep continuing on. We'd also like to see if we can get you guys involved as well. So as we get closer to that 15th or so of January when we think we've got pretty much everything done in terms of our assignments and our feedback, we'd like to possibly have a work group with you to get your feedback as well so that we can then add that in to our final submission due at the end of January. At this point, I guess I'll just leave it open for anyone who has any questions. Council Member Farmer had asked for the status report. He may have some questions or comments, but Council Member Beard had already signed up. Council Member Beard. Thank you, Mayor. Derek, a few of the other cities that we're competing against, who are they? There are the 20. If you want, I'll kind of go through some of the bigger ones. It was Boston, Chicago, Cincinnati, Houston, Indianapolis, Knoxville, Milwaukee, Philadelphia, Phoenix, San Francisco, Providence, Rhode Island, Santa Monica, California. There were a couple smaller ones from Oregon and a couple small cities from North Carolina as well. And Lafayette, Louisiana. Very heavy duty. They are. The first day we were seated at a table with Boston and talked to them extensively. We also were in various different times. We were in breakout groups with a lot of these other cities, including San Francisco, Houston, I believe Providence, Rhode Island as well, and Phoenix at various times. And I really learned a lot from them and actually got a lot of good feedback from the other cities on our idea, which is what gives us such a good hope for our submission. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Mayor. Councilman Farmer. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you for including us in today's program. I appreciate it. We did talk about it a while back, and I appreciate, gosh, just some of the facts that you said. So we submitted more ideas than anybody else in the whole group? Is that what you said? Is that what I got out of that? There were around 330 cities that submitted an application to Bloomberg, and we ourselves generated over 400 ideas. So when we actually, one of the interesting things was in talking to the other cities in some of these breakouts about how our process worked, a lot of them were quite amazed. Again, the telephone town hall, the social media town halls, the meetups we did. And again, having over 400 ideas, they were just amazed by that. Again, knowing that some of these cities are trying to do things like this already, trying to get their citizens engaged and the difficulty they are having currently in doing that. And again, some of the ideas, when we discussed some of the ideas that we had received from our citizenry, they were, again, kind of amazed. They just sort of figured we would get the usual, you know, improve this, complaining about this. Well, it seems like we've seen a great team, and you all did a great job. You've represented us very, very well. And just as an early Christmas gift, Mayor, I mean, it just... Not yet. Well, I mean, after our 6 o'clock meeting, we won't be around, but we haven't had a whole lot of resources, but you've given us hope and the opportunity to do things and to think differently. And I think that's materialized in here. And the fact that we were picked as one of the top 20 innovative style people, I think that's why I wanted to hear more about it. Because just to be in this room where you all were, where Charlie Rose is interviewing Mayor Bloomberg and Arianna Hummington's there, and these people were there too. Eric Schmidt, is that right? Eric Schmidt. Chairman of Google? I mean, it's tremendous, and it's tremendous for them personally, but for us in a much larger sense. Where it is vicariously we were represented, right? Or we experienced it vicariously, I guess. Yes, sir. Yes, sir. Your wordsmith, you and Dr. Blues. Yes, Dr. Blues, indeed. It's great that we're a part of this, and I appreciate that you brought it to us today, because it signals a great opportunity in Lexington right now, and we're taking advantage of it because of your leadership. You encouraged it, and sometimes we're a little awkward maybe sometimes or we're not always enthusiastic as much as we should be. You have illustrated well that the talents that pulled all this together, I wish I could claim credit, I can't. The talents that pulled this all together and imagined it really are here. And then what was realized was as the project emerged and developed, it really was about the community and the extraordinary talents and ideas that are represented in this city. and somehow or another they worked it through the magic wand sort of process and new technologies that are available and came up with something that is viewed by others as pretty unique right now. We'll see where it goes. We will. Thank you, sir. Thank you very much. Thank you, Derek. Thank you. All right. Mr. Mundy, we're down to public comment for issues not on the agenda. No one here today? All right, sir. Well, then, thank you very much. I will ask for a motion to adjourn. Second. Motion by Council Member Lawless and second by Vice Mayor Gordon. Unless there's objection, we will stand adjourned. Thank you all. Thank you.