# Council Work Session - January 15, 2013 > Auto-transcribed civic record · January 15, 2013 - **Permalink**: https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/meeting/2826 - **Source video**: https://lfucg.granicus.com/player/clip/2826?view_id=14&redirect=true - **Date**: 2013-01-15 - **Last revised**: January 15, 2013 - **Length**: 21,536 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 Government held a meeting on January 15, 2013, at 3:00 PM in the Council Chamber located at 200 E. Main St, Lexington, KY 40507. Mayor Jim Gray presided over the session. The meeting included two informational agenda items: a Fire Staffing Presentation and a Planning and Public Works Committee Summary. During the meeting, the body took four motions to a vote and heard one public comment. The session focused on receiving information and updates rather than taking substantive legislative action on the presented topics. ## Attendance **Present:** Jim Gray, Diane Lawless, Chuck Ellinger, Chris Ford, Bill Farmer, Kevin Stinnett, KC Crosbie, Jay McChord, Steve Kay, Tom Blues, Harry Clark, Jennifer Massadi, Jennifer Scutchfield, Siobhan Akers, and Susan Lamb. **Absent:** CM McChord. ## Votes and Decisions The council took four votes during this meeting, all of which passed by voice vote. **Special Council Meeting for Police Disciplinary Hearing** [timestamp: 0:16:24] Vice Mayor Gordon moved to schedule a special council meeting for a police disciplinary hearing, seconded by Council Member Henson. The motion passed by voice vote. The special meeting was scheduled for February 4th at 3 PM. **Approval of the Docket** [timestamp: 0:25:10] Council Member Beard moved to approve the docket, seconded by Council Member Ellinger. The motion passed by voice vote. **Resolution to Lower Speed Limit on Belafonte Drive** [timestamp: 0:25:43] Council Member Beard moved to place on the docket a resolution to lower the speed limit on Belafonte Drive, seconded by the Vice Mayor. The motion passed by voice vote. The resolution proposes lowering the speed limit from 35 mph to 25 mph. **Approval of New Business Items** [timestamp: 1:01:23] Council Member Stennett moved to approve new business items with the exception of item K, seconded by Council Member Myers. The motion passed by voice vote. ## Budget and Financial Actions The meeting addressed two significant financial actions: **Claims Payment Agreement with Humana Insurance Company** The body approved a Claims Payment Agreement (L0003-13) with Humana Insurance Company for health insurance plans in the amount of $802,796. This contract establishes the terms for claims payments related to the organization's health insurance coverage. **Agreed Order with Environmental & Energy Cabinet** An Agreed Order (L0020-13) was approved with the Environmental & Energy Cabinet for $35,000 to resolve water quality violations. This settlement addresses compliance issues and establishes corrective measures with the state environmental agency. ## Public Comment Walt Whitlaw addressed the board regarding public hearing scheduling [timestamp: 0:21:29]. He expressed concern about the short time frame allocated for preparing for a public hearing on a zoning issue. ## Appointments Susan Lamb resigned from her position as Fayette County Clerk. ## Contested Items **Acceptance of Private Streets as Public** A heated discussion arose regarding the acceptance of private streets as public infrastructure in the Lochmere Estates development. The primary concerns centered on two technical issues: the width of the streets and fire service access capabilities. Participants raised questions about whether the street dimensions met the standards required for public acceptance and whether emergency vehicles, particularly fire services, could adequately access all areas of the development. These infrastructure specifications are critical for public safety and the long-term maintenance responsibilities of the municipality. The discussion reflected disagreement over whether the development's street design met the necessary criteria for the local government to assume ownership and maintenance of these roads. ## Fire Staffing Presentation Chief Keith Jackson and Commissioner Clay Mason presented on the staffing levels, challenges, and future plans for the fire department [timestamp: 1:19:37]. The presentation focused on current personnel levels and the operational challenges facing the department. A primary concern highlighted during the discussion was the need for additional staff to prevent service brownouts—periods when fire stations or units would be unable to respond to calls due to insufficient personnel. The presenters outlined the department's staffing situation and discussed future plans to address identified gaps. The presentation was informational in nature, providing the governing body with an overview of the fire department's personnel needs and operational constraints. No formal action or decision was recorded as an outcome of this agenda item. ## Planning and Public Works Committee Summary Council Member Farmer presented a summary of Planning and Public Works Committee matters [timestamp: 1:06:26]. **Topics Discussed:** - **Repaving Program:** Council Member Farmer discussed the status and details of the repaving program. - **Utility Poles in Right-of-Way:** The committee addressed the issue of erecting large utility poles in the right-of-way, raising concerns about their placement and impact. **Outcome:** This item was presented for informational purposes. --- ## Decisions - **Motion** — passed (0-0): schedule a special Council Meeting on February 4th, 2013 at 3:00pm for a police disciplinary hearing - **Motion** — passed (0-0): approve the docket - **Motion** — passed (0-0): schedule a Public Hearing on an Ordinance creating a Neighborhood Design Character Overlay (ND‐1) zone for 52.68 net acres, to preserve existing neighborhood character for properties located at 1200‐1280 Colonial Drive; 4009‐4021 John Alden Lane; 4004‐ 4025 Mayflower Lane; 1228‐1273 and 1290 Standish Way; and 2492‐2516 Versailles Road (even addresses only) for March 5th, 2013 at 6:00pm - **Motion** — passed (0-0): amend the motion to schedule a special Council Meeting to hold a Public Hearing on Ordinance 2 for March 5th, 2013 - **Motion** — passed (0-0): add to the docket for the January 17th, 2013 Council Meeting, a resolution authorizing and directing the Division of Traffic Engineering, pursuant to code of Ordinances Section 18, to lower the speed limit on Bellefonte Drive between Malabu Drive and Albany Road from 35 MPH to 25 MPH - **Motion** — passed (0-0): approve the summary - **Motion** — passed (0-0): approve the budget amendments - **Motion** — passed (0-0): approve all new business except item K - **Motion** — passed (0-0): approve item K - **Motion** — passed (0-0): place on the docket for the January 17th, 2013 Council Meeting, an Ordinance amending sections 14‐85(a) thru 14‐95 of the Code of Ordinances - **Motion** — passed (0-0): schedule a Confirmation Hearing for January 31st, 2013 at 4:30pm - **Motion** — passed (0-0): approve the Mayor’s Report - **Motion** — passed (0-0): approve the nominee for the Ethics Commission pending the Confirmation Hearing - **Motion** — passed (0-0): adjourn --- ## Full transcript I'll be on your side forevermore That's my friends of home Yeah Only for sure I don't live with you, I don't live with you It's all for you shining, shining There's something sacred when you're 17 Bout a football jacket and a high school ring It sure looked nice when you wore mine That late October at the homecoming dance We slipped outside and we took a chance In the middle of the night, it sure felt right. We let go right then and then. We were loved and we were scared. For the first time, I've been blind, we dove right in. For the first time, we gave everything. And then graduation came and our dreams called our name The broken hearts we moved on with our lives for the first time I heard the other day you're a Sunday school teacher, got the PTA, got a real good life You're a real good wife I'm living in this circus world, no I ain't married but I got a girl and I'm her man We're making plans. But I still smile when I think of us. Together we learn how to love. For the first time, love and love, we dove right in. For the first time, we gave everything. And then graduation came. Had our dreams called our name Broken hearts we moved on with our love For the first time Now graduation came Had our dreams called our name Broken hearts we moved on with our life For the first time For the first time Loving bond we know right in For the first time We gave everything in them For the first time We moved on with our life For the first time you need Thank you. I'm just ready to get going. Oh, good on. Well, greetings, everyone, and welcome to the work session, the January 15th work session of the council, and this is a welcome back to all of our council members after the holidays. They've had a busy day already today and a lot of work going on, even while not in session. You can count on that. I guess first things first, before we follow our typical, our routine agenda, I want to start the meeting by welcoming our four new council members, beginning, now this is going to be in alphabetical order instead of district order, Siobhan Akers, 2nd District, Harry Clark, 10th District, Jennifer Massadi, the 9th District, and Jennifer for Scotchfield, the 7th District. Welcome to each and every one of you. And just as a quick announcement, before we start, I think it's appropriate that I mentioned Before we start, I think it's appropriate that I mention that our clerk, Susan Lamb, has notified us after 27 years of service to our government, starting when she was 16. Susan is also notified the Fayette County Clerk, Don Blevins, that she will be retiring on July 31st. Now, of course, over the next six months, she will be working toward a smooth transition for her successor, but we have all been richly blessed by your service, Susan. And there will be plenty of time for us to share that with you over and over in the next six months. All right. First on our routine agenda is the public comment for issues on the agenda. The floor is open for public comment for issues on the agenda. Has anyone signed up for issues on the agenda? Mr. Mundy, thank you. All right, before we get to the docket approval, we will need to schedule a disciplinary hearing, and Keith Horn from our law department will explain more of the details. Mr. Horn, thank you, sir. Thank you, Mayor. The ones who were here, we'll recall last, I think it was August, you gave us a date on a police disciplinary hearing, but that police officer also had criminal charges pending, and it was agreed to delay the hearing until after those were concluded at district court. In December, they had the criminal trial, and so now I'm back to get a hearing for discipline on this officer. The last communication I had with his attorney was that she would be here today. I do not yet see her for scheduling this, but my recommendation to you is to schedule this hearing within 30 days. the last couple of times we've done this, and it doesn't happen often, you've scheduled a hearing for a Monday at 3 p.m. I would recommend that you do the same thing. It's hard for me to judge how long this one will be, but I'm going to guess it will be at least six hours. I would recommend to you on the outside of that, if you could do February the 11th, I think that's a Monday that you consider being available for that hearing on the 11th at 3. But obviously it's up to you to decide when you may want to have a hearing. All right. We're about to take a motion to that effect or just a show of hands, Vice Mayor. How many could be here on that? What was that date again, Keith? February the 11th. February 11th time. At 3. At 3. That's a Monday afternoon. How many, show of hands, how many could be, how many could attend? February. All right, let's try it another way. How many cannot attend that day? All right. All right, Keith, it doesn't look like that's going to work. One, two. All right. Council Member Lawless. Do we have a deadline? They had waived prior to the last time we scheduled this hearing any time frame that would relate to this. But now that the criminal charges are over, you probably need to proceed, I would say, as quickly as you can. Okay, I didn't know if we had like a 60-day or whatever. That's why I'm recommending that you do it within a 30-day window. It doesn't have to be a Monday. After you have a regular work session or a meeting, it's going to put you late into the evening, but certainly you can schedule it for whatever day you would like. Vice Mayor. Mayor, since there were several who held their hands up on the 11th, could we do it the 4th of February? Would that work better? the Super Bowl is the day before okay I yeah oh well how many said who could not be here on the fourth hold up real high three all right well you All right, then that might be the day. All right, let's ink it in then. Is there a motion? Vice Mayor Gordon. I move to schedule a special council meeting on February the 4th at 3 o'clock p.m. for a police disciplinary hearing. It's a motion. There's a second by Council Member Henson. Is there any discussion on the motion? All right. Hearing none, then let's take a vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. All right. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Horne. Yes, ma'am. All right. We can move on now with our agenda. The next item on our agenda, number two, rezonings, docket approvals. Is there a motion by Council Member Beard? Is there a second? Second. Second by Council Member Ellinger. Is there any discussion on the motion? Council Member Henson. Yeah. Council Member Henson. Thank you, Vice Mayor. According to item ordinance number two on the docket, I will request a public hearing for March 5th. Second. At six o'clock, sorry. All right, let's do that again. So, Council Member Henson, this is a motion for a public hearing on ordinance number two, which is required, which is ND1 zone. All right. Is there a second? Did we get a second? A second, I think. A second by Council Member Ellinger. All right. Okay. All right. Now we're available then for discussion on the motion by Council Member Henson. Let's look and see how many cannot attend on that date. Time again? Six o'clock. Six o'clock, March 5th. All right. If you cannot attend 6 o'clock on March 5th, hold up your hand. All right. All right. All right. Then it looks pretty good. All right. Is there any further discussion on the motion? We do have some folks here who have signed up to speak on this issue. and unless there's objection, we can do that now. Mr. Whitlow, Frank Cassidy, Ms. Bostic, and Mr. Strecker. Mayor? We have a point of order. Just a point of order? Right. My understanding would be it would be appropriate to speak about whether to schedule it or not, but not to speak on the merits of the issue at this time. Is that correct? I'd like guidance from legal, from commission or legal. Yeah, I will accept the point of order. So we'll take the comments as to the, restate the point of order, if you would, Council Member Kaye. I believe the question is whether to schedule a hearing, but it's not to speak to the merits of the issue. I think it's in a, again, I would like guidance from either planning staff or legal. They're shaking their heads yes. It's inappropriate to comment on the substance of the question at this time, that that needs to be done at the hearing. So those who are, it looks like Director King is saying yes to that. So as Chair, I'll accept that, except a point of order offered by Council Member Kay. So what that represents, folks, those of you who have come to speak to this today, is that we are today, the Council is voting on actually holding this meeting to discuss it. And according to protocol, it's not appropriate then to speak to the issue itself. That's what we do at the meeting. I hate to disappoint. You're not disappointing. That's fine. All right, sir. I just want to make a brief statement. My name is Walt Whitlaw. I live at 1249 Sandwich Way in the Old Colony Subdivision. I came here today anticipating that we could get a public hearing scheduled on this. and and would would like to speak to you to make sure that that happened the only thing that i would like to speak to is the time frame on this the people who proposed this at 1460 days to work on it four years from the listening to the motion that's just made we're supposed to put we're supposed to dissect it look at it understand it and and and and and and and come back here with some type of presentation to you that that that makes sense everybody that works we've got a bunch of people that work we're not it's none of this is a full-time job for us and we've got what a month and a half that's not fair we need adequate time to put this together so that we can come back and make our case to the council. All right. We have a restriction. There is a, the council is required, has a limitation of 90 days. That's by ordinance. Chris, you might want to speak to this for the benefit of Mr. Whitlow and those who are here. Yes. So you all know This is Chris King, who is our Director of Planning with a long career. We all know each other well. Okay, I thought so, right. Yes, just for clarification, state statute, not local ordinance, governs the law in this matter and states that the Council must conduct a public hearing within 90 days of the date of the Planning Commission action, which occurred on December 12th last year. It was when the Planning Commission held its hearing and made a recommendation on this to the Council. So March 12th would be the last date by which the Council could hold a hearing of their own and make a different action. I think as Council has learned, if that does not occur by March 12th, the action of the Planning Commission will pass as operation of law and the zone change will have been approved. So Mr. Whitlow and some of his neighbors who are objectors, it is in their interest that this hearing be conducted prior to March the 12th. Thank you. They will give them the opportunity to make their case. Thank you. So, Mr. Whitlow. I understand the statute. I understand what he said. Needless to say, we don't want it to be passed without a hearing on the thing. It's still not fair. Okay. All right. Thank you so much. Mayor Council Member Henson I've been told by our council clerk that I need to amend the motion to include that this would be a special council meeting to hold a hearing regarding an ND1 overlay Alright Motion to amend, second by Council Member Farmer Is there any discussion on the motion to amend? All right. Hearing none, then we can take a vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. All opposed, no. Motion carries. All right. Now we can vote on the original motion as amended. Without further discussion, all in favor. Does anybody want to speak? No, I don't think so. All in favor of the motion as amended, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. All right, now we can move back to the original motion to approve the docket. Is there any further discussion on the motion to approve? Hearing none, then we can take a vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Council Member Beard. Yes, sir. I do have a walk-on early. for the January 17th Council meeting. I move to place on the docket for the January 17th, 2013 Council meeting a resolution authorizing and directing the Division of Traffic Engineering pursuant to Code of Ordinances Section 18 to lower the speed limit on Belafonte Drive between Malibu Drive and Albany Road from 35 miles an hour to 25 miles an hour. Second. Motion by Council Member Beard. Second by Vice Mayor. Is there any discussion on the motion? Hearing none, then we can take a vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Thank you, Council Member Beard. Next on our agenda is the summary. Is there a motion? Second. Motion by Council Member Farmer, second by Vice Mayor Gordon. Is there any discussion on the motion? Any discussion on the motion? Hearing none, then we can take a vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Next on our agenda, budget amendments. Is there a motion? Move approval. Motion by Vice Mayor. Second by Council Member Myers. Is there any discussion on the motion? Any discussion on the motion? All right, then. We can take a vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed? No. Motion carries. Next on our agenda. We're moving quite handily today. I know. Don't get ahead of yourself, Mayor. Thank you, Council Member Farmer. Well, next on our agenda is continuing business and presentations. And first on our presentations is the presentation. Oh, what have I forgotten here? Oh, budget. That's what I was confused about. New business went so quickly. Couldn't have happened. Is there a motion? New business. Motion by Council Member Beard, seconded by Council Member Farmer. Is there any discussion on the motion? Council Member Gordon. Thank you, Mayor. I do have a question about item K. This is the item which accepts into a public street, transferring Lockmere Estate Street right of way from private to public. And I guess Mr. Wente is the point person. specifically on page 33 is the memo from our Division of Engineering to Mr. Wente about this. And for those of you who've been on the council for a while, you know we've had multiple discussions about accepting private streets which don't meet our public standards. And in this memo, the very first paragraph, it says, The Division of Engineering does not recommend acceptance of the street due to substandard right-of-way width, incomplete status of existing pavement, and existing gates on the street. And then as you read through the whole memo, it details why some of the problems with those items. and including the bottom of that, page 33, the recommendation that before we do this, the sanitary sewer laterals be televised. There are many questions I have about why this is being recommended when it appears by the memo that it is a substandard street according to our standards. I had actually sent that information back to Reena Wiseman, who's here today, to speak on behalf of all homes. And subsequently, we put all that communication into the packet as well to show that all homes would address each of those, such as televising the stormwater, having final surface on the development, as well as certain issues related to access easement widths that I think everybody was in favor of once we agreed to that. In addition to that, I think there was a component with regard to homeowner association responsibility to green space, maintenance, and issues that pertain to that as well. So I believe those issues have since been resolved. Okay, there's not a memo to that effect in here. There's some maps. I apologize. That should have been a part of that package as well. Now, does that include widening the right-of-way so that the street is standard? Existing right-of-way, as I understand, would remain the same, but we would have additional access easement space if we had to do any construction within the existing right-of-way. So I guess I would wonder if, and I'd like to hear from Ms. Wiseman on this, but I'd wonder from particularly FIRE if this presents any problem. I don't know if we have anyone who's prepared to answer it from Division of FIRE. We did have a response and FIRE. The only notification that fire had sent to our office was the fact that there would be limitations to parking in areas where there are some cul-de-sac or bulb outs that would impede a truck from being able to gain access, and that was the only comment that they had made. So then how does that affect our fire service? Is someone from fire, can someone from fire speak to that? And are you meaning that the fire apparatus can't necessarily get close to the end of the cul-de-sac? No, as far as existing right-of-way, that wasn't an issue. It was for the ends where there were certain bulb outs. If you look at the picture of the aerial, the points where it almost looks like a square, at each corner there's a bulb out to where they said parking should be restricted on the side streets so that there wouldn't be any means of impeding trucks from gaining access to those bulk-out areas. Okay. So then does the – have you addressed, and maybe Ms. Wiseman is the one to answer, the third from the last paragraph, the responsibilities in the median where it was recommended they be the homeowners association and then TVing the storm sewer as well as the sanitary sewer laterals. Thank you for being here. Thank you. I'm Rena Wiseman for Ball Homes. This is a subdivision that was built several years ago by a different developer. So these streets are in. There have never been any houses built. It was returned to the bank, was a nice way to put it, and we have subsequently purchased it, and we have filed amended plats with the Planning Commission that have been approved. So this was originally done as a gated community with private streets, so we're asking that it become private. The gates will be removed, so that will not block any ingress or egress. So that is one thing that usually the fire department's concerned about is gating. With respect to the width of the pavement, that will not be widened, but we are providing 20 feet of access easement outside the pavement to provide additional land should this closed system ever need to be widened. This is a special design area. There's a 60% requirement of open space, so we're trying to keep the open space and pave as little as possible. This is in the expansion area, so that's one of the requirements we have to do. I did send an email out that went through each of these points, but if you want, I'll go through them quickly. Again, the answer to the first one is that we cannot widen the street today because we'll run afoul of the open space requirement in that zone, but we do provide an additional easement should there need to be right-of-way in the future. uh we are uh providing a walkway throughout the subdivision that's been approved by the planning commission in lieu of the standard sidewalk that goes in front of the house uh the side the the street has been paid but the final service course has not been added we will do that but we will bond that in the normal course and it's important to understand with the private street they don't necessarily meet the width requirements of a public street, but they do have to meet the construction requirements as to depth of pavement. So in terms of the durability of the surface, that has to meet public standards per your regulations. The existing gates will be removed, but the medians and the gatehouse and those sorts of things will be maintained by the homeowners association, as will the open space that's throughout this subdivision. We have agreed to TVing the storm system to ensure that that's functioning before that's turned over to the government. We are working with engineering on where to put the sewer laterals so that that's not a concern. So we have spoken with the two, there are two lot owners in this development, and they're aware of this proposal and are in agreement with it as well. Mayor, I know my time is up, but could we still hear from fire? If there's parking on both sides of the street, can one of our large engines get through? We are restricting the parking. On both sides? Chief, I believe our concern on that was the parking on the street. The street was real narrow. Some of the cul-de-sacs were real small. I'm not sure that we can make a swing in those cul-de-sac if any car is a park, period. So we had a real issue with the street width and the cul-de-sac widths. Were you asked to sign off on this? It was a while ago. I'd have to refresh my notes on that project. I wasn't prepared to speak on that today. Okay, thank you. I think it's pretty much in the shadows. We were really concerned about the width of the streets because they're very narrow. I don't remember what they were. Okay, thank you. I think it says 18 to 31 feet, correct? The main street that runs through there is 31 feet wide. Then these loops that have maybe three or four houses on them, they go down to, I think, 21 feet. And then there's a split entry in and out, and I think those are 18 feet. Again, the main street is 31 feet wide, which is a local street in any subdivision in this area. The loops are just, you know, you're only talking about three or four houses. So they are accessible. And, again, this is an existing design that's already there. We aren't, you know, it's physically there, and we would expect to be served by the fire department in any case. Thank you, to both of you. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Thank you. Thank you. facility to the sanitary sewer system as a supplemental environmental project. So we have been fined, but we have to use the fines to do something constructive. Is that it? That is a negotiated settlement of an outstanding enforcement action, and we do get to spend $35,000 fine on the supplemental environmental project. Stipulation was it had to benefit water quality. And certainly this project will do that. Will this then gain the successful closure? Is this the last piece? It will close out this enforcement case. Okay. And as you know, the landfill is under physical closure as well. But that's a separate process. I just wanted to make sure. Thank you very much. You're welcome. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Director Bush. Thank you, Council Member Farmer. Council Member Massadi. Thank you, Mayor. If memory serves me correctly, and I couldn't be wrong on this, I thought we were not allowing acceptance of private streets anymore. I'm unfamiliar with that. So the question, would that be a question to the? I guess planning, or if someone can address that. I think Chris King has left the chambers. So Mr. Wente, you want to, maybe, Council Member Masati, would you ask the question again? Yes, please. I had a hard time hearing what you were saying, Council Member. Again, if Member serves me correctly, at one time we had discussed no longer having private streets and having only public streets just because of these type of issues coming up. So I didn't know if that was still the issue or not. That is correct. And then in 2000, there was a CAO policy drafted as basically a framework to where that process could still come before. Well, actually, it would start within our Department of Public Works, Environmental Quality and Public Works. We circulate those requests to all division directors that would have direct impact. For example, everyone in the Department of Environmental Quality and Public Works has signed off, as do police and fire. Occasionally, Parks is involved in that. So any division that would be impacted by this particular request similar to what we see here today with Lockmere States, I believe, as I stated before, the policy was drafted as a CAO policy in 2000 to allow this process to come before Council. Is this a new subdivision? It's not a newly developed subdivision. I'm not exactly sure, and perhaps I'm not exactly sure when that development began. The prior developer developed it in 2007, 2008. So the streets are there, and never a house was built. So it was foreclosed on by the bank. So it's basically, if this is a little different than a situation where the homeowners are there and petition the street, we're just now beginning to build homes there. So that's why we're at this point asking to do it. So it's a little different than some of those other social issues. Okay, I appreciate the information. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Massadi. Council Member Lane. Ms. Wiseman, I have another question for you. Welcome aboard. Sure. On the Locomere Estates, can you give me an idea of what the price range of the houses are in that subdivision? We're just doing our price list right now, but they're in the $300,000. They're the upper end of our product. Okay, and approximately how many homes would be in the subdivision? I think it's 52 lots, not including the existing structures that are there today. Okay. And do you know what the density per acre is on that, by chance? It's under three units per acre because this is EAR1 and it's special design. So that's why of this whole site, 60% has to be in open space. That means no homes, no structures. Okay. I just was trying to see how many houses there were and how dense it was and what impact that might have on the needs of the roads. But it doesn't sound like it's very dense. Yeah, it's low density because of just the zoning and the open space restrictions. Okay. All right. Thank you very much. House Member Akers. Thank you, Mayor. I just had a quick question about letter I on the docket that's requesting an extension of the project timeline, and I just wondered why there's a need for an extension. All right. This is Charlie Martin, who is our director, coming to the microphone. This is a non-civil service position. It was hired as a project manager for a software development. Subsequent to completing that is we've started down the consent decree road with developing capital projects, and I felt like it was good to recommend retaining this person and transferring them over to those capital project management. This person is the only certified project manager that we have on staff. He was instrumental in putting together items P and Q that you find on your agenda today. So we feel like this person has a good skill set. They're a non-civil service person, so it's not an infinite gig. It's one that the council and the administration can control. But when you've got a good performer and you can move them to another place that you have a need, that's the basis of my recommendation. And this is the Sanitary Sewer Cleaning Program project? No. That's what I was talking about. Sorry, Charlie. Yeah, I think we've got two different. I'm sorry. I was back there having a sideline conversation, so my apologies. In the sewer cleaning, my apologies. I was on C instead of I, so my apologies. Okay, well, now that you know what C is, I'm going to go on the I. You were very persuasive. I was thinking all along. And I was like, wow, really, a whole position to clean the sewer. Basically, we're under an obligation with the EPA to clean a certain number of feet a year. So when we put that contract together, we had a specific time frame for them. Weather and some other issues have come up. It doesn't harm us to extend it, and it doesn't cost us anymore. But clearly we're interested in having that contract retain a certain footage level within the duration of the contract. So we felt like it was fine to recommend an extension. Okay. Thank you. Sorry about that. Thank you. Director Martin, thank you. Thank you, Councilmember Akers. Vice Mayor? Thank you, Mayor. I just have to make a statement about Kay. And Councilmember Kay and I were having a sidebar and conversation. Whether this street is private or public, of course, our police and fire have to be able to get down that street. and I respect the work that Ball Homes does in our community and I see John Bird here also with Ms. Wiseman but the principle of us accepting private streets that aren't as wide as we need them to be and are not as wide as we would build them. I mean, I heard fire say the problem is in the cul-de-sacs and it concerns me that if there is a fire in the point of that cul-de-sac, can we get there? We don't know. And I appreciate that you're fixing all those other problems, but the width of the street to me is a problem, and I guess really out of principle I'm going to need to vote no. I realize if we accept it, we need to service it. and I just, that was all me. All right. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Council Member Farmer. I wanted to roll in behind her, too. So do you think we would benefit from not docketing this today and having some further discussion about it? I mean, there are some policy issues that we're going to have to take up separately from this particular issue. So I think first up is do we want to not docket this today or have a presentation about it or some more? I mean, sometimes you can't fix everything when you get the car up on the rack. You've got to take it down and get a piece apart and then go back to it. There's more parts to this that I think we've been able to kind of get squared around on. So maybe it would be one of those things we might docket it and have a presentation between now and the second reading or something. I don't know. But I think after talking with Council Member Mazzotti and Council Member Stenet, I think there's some policy issues that we want to send into the planning committee about accepting things into the right-of-way that are not wide enough or that we don't have the money to pay for the street lights for or that we're not sure about the sewering forum yet. And I think we'll take that up at a separate time in a policy-making situation. But back to today's gig, I share your concern. I'm just not sure which way to turn or what the best answer for the community is. Thank you, Council Member Palmer. I was going to suggest, I think, especially for the new Council members, I'm just dialing back a few years ago when I first came on Council, and some of the proceedings seemed a little Byzantine and abstract. And what in the world are we doing right now? Well, for clarification, what is before us in terms of new business are these items, and then they would either pass on to be placed on the docket for discussion or not, at which time then a vote is often taken. So I wanted to say that I think that's a part of what Council Member Farmer was just Just discussing. All right. Is there any? We have a motion. Council Member Stennett. Council Member Lane is before me. All right. Yeah, that's right. Council Member Lane. Thank you, Mayor. I would like to invite Ms. Wiseman. Oh, she's already come up there. To comment on these points. You know, my only concern is we've got a piece of property that's distressed and we have top home builders trying to work it out. So I'd like to see it. Do you have some more information? I just wanted to clarify. The width is not the issue with the private street, and I'm talking about the main loop. It's 31 feet. That is an acceptable local street width for public streets. So it's not that it's too narrow. It was designed as an estate with a gate. You can't have a public street that is gated. We're removing that because we have a different development concept than the original developer. The depth of pavement, the ability of the street to take the traffic and to prevent repairs happening in the next few years, meets the standards of every local street that's built today. So it's not an issue of it's too narrow or it's not built to standard. We have to do that. The sewers are public, regardless of the street being private or not, so capacity is not an issue. The storm sewers are public, regardless of the streets. This could have streetlights if it's public, but we pay a tax for the streetlights. uh the our concern about the delay is that we filed this request in november we've been working on this project for the past several months we filed the request in november for the council to consider it and we're now here in january we're at the beginning of the building season we have a lot of interest in this subdivision from people who want to buy here and they need to know how much of the, what is this going to be? Is it going to be a private street that is part of our HOA? Is it going to be a private public street? And we're trying to get the answer to them. So I don't deny that maybe you want to talk about your process or procedures for private streets, which are allowed in the subdivision regulations, but I would ask that this project be allowed to go forward again it is a unique situation because it's it is there those loops are there whether you have uh if there's a fire there the fire department's going to have to serve those homes today whether it's private or public we're trying to go in and fix something that is has been sitting there for nearly four years we think it is best to do as a public street and the divisions have reviewed it. We responded to all of engineering's concerns. None others have been raised to our attention. So we'd ask to let this go forward and that we approve it so we can go ahead and finish out this neighborhood. Council Member Stennett. Thank you, Mayor. Ms. Wiseman, could you tell us what's the current density? How many lots are zoned currently for the news? Again, I don't know. The maximum in this zone is three units per acre. So we're at three or under three. And what is the plan? You said you have a plan for it. How much density ultimately will be there? It's 52 lots total, 52 lots. And where are the 18-foot width? Are they just in courts or cul-de-sacs? No, I think the – let me get my flat. Wait, wait. We have three different sections. The entry is one way in, one way out. Those are 18 feet wide. The main street that circulates is 31 feet. And these loops are 22 feet in width. So there are no 18 feet? I thought you said there were some 18. The 18 feet is the entryway. That's it, okay. Two separate lanes divided by median. But the rest are 22? Well, no, just the loops on your aerial that's in your packet. All right. All right, so what is the minimum our subdivision regs say a street has to be minimum width? Isn't it 20? Private street, I think, varies from 27 to 31. The public streets? Public streets, yes. It's 20? 27 to 31. Is the minimum? Yes, this is 31. But the other ones are 22, right? There are different requirements for loops for these kinds of. I'm just trying to help you. I'm just trying to see what is the minimum for those cul-de-sacs and those type of streets. We are at the minimum. I can get you the chart from the subdivision regulation. I don't see anyone from engineering. I'd ask them here or planning, but I think that's a big issue. If you're already at our minimum that we're required for other neighborhoods, I don't see the point and the issue with going with private versus public from our standpoint. My issue is maintenance. When we pave these and take these over, as long as they're up to our standards, Obviously, we've got to start incorporating them into our road resurfacing program that, as Kevin knows and everyone on this council, we're already $30 million behind trying to get all our roads paved. So that's my concern, but it's not going to hold me up if the current streets are meeting our public minimum requirements when someone builds a new neighborhood. And I'm hearing they are. Yes. Yes. A private street today has to meet the same construction in terms of how much base and rock you put in, whether it's private or public. That's in terms of maintenance and durability. But width? Width? Are these streets the same as our public streets in terms of width? Public street, loop cul-de-sac 27 to 30 feet from the subregs. That's the continuous street. That doesn't apply to those single loops. So what is our standard then for those loops? That's what I'm trying to find out. And that's what the question is. So if you can share it with us. It's my understanding, when we met with the plan, the only waiver that we would need on this plat because we'd have to take it back is the fact that we don't have a sidewalk adjacent to the street. Everything else meets standards. We have to get a waiver because we have a walkway throughout the open space, a paved walkway. I'm not aware of any other waivers or variances that we need other than that, which means that whatever the loops are, they meet the standards. I can't quote you what that number is. You're fine. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. All right. Thank you. I'm sure, Commissioner Paulson, you're probably checking with Chris King. who left us early thinking that he might not have something else come up and got back to some real business that was probably on his desk. And I, for one, I don't expect you to have an answer on the tip of your tongue. I'm trying to pull up the subdivision regulations as well and have asked engineering if they can come over as well. I told Brad Frazier he didn't have to be here today. He said, are you sure you don't want me to come? I should have told him just come on over. I'm trying to pull up the same subdivision regulations as well. I'll try to get them as quickly as possible. Okay. Council Member Senate, you've complete. All right. Vice Mayor. Thank you, Mayor. I wanted to ask, my only concern is to be sure, I think you've answered all the problem questions. My only concern at this point is the width. So I want to go back to what... Are you an assistant chief, Rick Jordan? I don't want to call you the wrong thing, but you mentioned the cul-de-sacs. And my concern was to find out what your concern is from FIRE's perspective about getting into those cul-de-sacs. Does it have anything to do with the width of the street? The width of the street would be relevant to the approach angle of the truck. The turning apparatus takes up a lot more room than a straight apparatus, an apparatus traveling straight, the back end swings. I talked with Chuck Bowen, who's dealt with a lot of these in the past. This has been consistent with some of what we have allowed in the past as long as parking is restricted. As soon as somebody parks on that street, we're out of business, and we can't respond appropriately. he also stated that these street regulations are being looked at to be re-evaluated to be rewritten currently what's going to come out of the new standard i don't know um we just we're just not comfortable providing a level of protection that we're used to and you're used to we won't be able to provide in those in those cul-de-sacs and those turnarounds if they build as those streets are we were on the feeling of recommendation that they could redo those that portion the main street's fine. The three or four cul-de-sacs are the real issue. I don't see why those can't be reconfigured to allow access. I appreciate that. And Ms. Wiseman, did you say there will not be any parking on any of the streets? Yes, we are restricting parking on the streets. Can those cul-de-sacs be reconfigured? No, they're built. And we're, again, we will get in. This is a sensitive area because there's a significant area of trees and the open space. So we are limited to what we physically can do with the street layout. Again, it is sitting there right now. Thank you. And, again, we sent this request in November, and we were told that all the divisions, including fire, approved this. So this is news to us today, what we're hearing. Okay. Thank you for that, Mayor. I don't know how soon the commissioner can get those subdivision regulations, but that would answer our width question. All right. Commissioner's coming up. I was just going to inform you, Brad Frazier is on his way. He will hopefully be able to answer that question. I have a very slow Internet connection at this point. Vice Mayor, I just wanted to add that with every request, we did get that authorization and approval from fire as long as parking restrictions were made and were enforced on the circular loops. And according to Ms. Wiseman, that is the case. there will be restrictions to park. All right. All right. On new business, are there any other comments or questions? All right. Council Member Massadi? Thank you, Mayor. I need to recuse myself on item number N. All right. We'll note that. Thank you, Council Member Massadi. All right. So do we, all right, what's the pleasure of the council? Do you wish to vote on new business or accept item K and come back to it? All right, then Council Member Akers. I have to recuse myself from letter O. All right, we have two recusals on N and O. They'll be duly noted. All right. Then is there a motion then to accept item K? Motion to set it aside. Vote on all except item K. E-X-C-E-P-T. Move approval of all. I heard, yeah. Move approval of all except item K. All right. There's a motion to approve all items of new business except E-X-C-E-P-T, item K. Is there a second? Second by Council Member Hanson. Is there any discussion on this motion? All right. And if not, we can take a vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. So we can come back then when we get more information from Commissioner Paulson on item K. All right. Moving on then, we now can move to continuing business and presentations. The first item on our agenda today is a Public Safety Committee summary, December 4th meeting. Council Member Lawless. Thank you, Mayor. On December 4th, the Public Safety Committee met. The summary of the motions are included in today's work session packet on pages 43 to 44 for your reference. The first item of discussion was the infill and redevelopment steering committee recommendations. Council Member Kaye presented this item to the committee. He shared that the mission of the infill and redevelopment committee is to recognize and improve an effective, efficient, and rational process that allows our program to address the infill and redevelopment challenges that face Lexington. which I give great applause. That's a side note. Council Member Kay shared the infill and redevelopment recommendations for code enforcement, law department, and council. Some recommendations are policy level and some are policy and funding. Committee members asked questions following the presentation on the international property maintenance code compliance, committee make-up, and some inquiries about details of use of wording in the recommendations. A motion was made to have code enforcement and the law department report back to the committee in six months on their implementation of the recommendations. They are expected to report back in May so that if funding requests accompany the implementation, there will be ample time to include this in the FYI 14 budget. The towing ordinance section 14-85 through 14-95 was also presented to the committee with amendments. Commissioner Mason requested this item be discussed in committee. The express goal and intention of the amendments were to try to create consistency and a clearer, better regulation. Commissioner Mason said that the new ordinance was, with its tighter language, had approval of all the towing companies in Fayette County. The changes include the private impound tow truck service lien holder is ultimately responsible for all actions of the impound tow truck. If the vehicle has been physically raised to a normal transport height, The tow truck operator may charge a fee not to exceed one-half of the posted maximum towing fee before releasing the vehicle. Requirement that the private impound tow truck license holder attempt to notify the registered owner. Maximum charge for a vehicle based on its weight. requirement for private impound tow truck service operators to maintain current and accurate log containing information on towed vehicle. The ordinance section 14-85 through 14-95 amendments passed without dissent. We scrubbed our items, referred to the committee list, and adjourned. I'd like to make a motion that the changes, the amendments to Section 14-85 through 1495, passed out of committee, be placed on the docket for the full council's consideration. Second. Motion by Council Member Lawless. Is there a second? Second. Second by Council Member Scotchfield. Is there any discussion on the motion? Hearing none, then we can take a vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. All right. Thank you, Council Member Lawless. Next on our agenda is the summary of the Planning and Public Works Committee meeting on December 11th by Council Member Farmer. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Mayor. First, we took up the approval of our summary from the November meeting, which ended up having some commentary about it. So we returned that to committee for further grooming, which we took up at our meeting earlier today, and it will come forward to the council shortly. Next, we took up the issue of the repaving program, which mainly was a discussion of the work we have done to use some of our funds to do some paving in this coming year, using some MAP funds, trying to get kind of squirted away on when the bonding would be done, when lists need to be in, and what needs to take place. And I think that new and returning council members need to sit down rather quickly and begin coming up with your lists of streets to be paved because the quicker we all turn our lists in and get things squared away, the more they can actually be done for this city relatively quickly because we've put ourselves in a position to bond $13 million and pave a lot of streets. So I think there were no motions attached to this during the discussion, but that's just something that would be germane to us right now, is to know specifically district by district what our number is going to be and start filling in the blank, because the quicker we get our list turned in, the quicker that the mobilization can begin to take place. Our third item was about erecting large utility poles in the right-of-way, which is an issue that had been placed in committee previously. And it really was a very good discussion that brought about three or four different items that we're going to keep in committee and try to work forward on. But, again, there were no items, no motions here at this time. And then we went over the committee list and took one thing out, and we adjourned shortly thereafter. There was no motions to bring forward to the council, and that would complete my report, Mayor. Thank you. Thank you. Council Member Farmer. Next on our agenda is the mayor. The port. Who was it? Me. Council Member Beard, sorry. Thank you. I wanted to ask Mr. Farmer a question. Yes, Council Member. Have we been supplied with new lists of streets within our districts? We would have the, I mean, they inspect part of the streets each year. I don't know that there's been the new one for this year yet, but we'd have. It's kind of hard to pick out some if we don't want to. I'm going to do it with a legal pad and a pencil. Well, I mean, I don't want you to neglect the opportunity to drive the district. But I would just say to you that, you know, yes, there would be a list available, I'm sure if you wanted one updated or there would be one updated shortly. Mr. Wente, he's got everything in his system anyway. All he's got to do is run over there and push a button. Mr. Kevin Wente. He recognizes Mr. Wente. Thank you, Mayor. I'm actually currently updating the list that we had submitted to Council back in August from our last or previous rating with the updates to what we've currently resurfaced beginning, say, well, effectively January for this fiscal year. So that revised list will be passed to each council member this week. Okay. Hopefully by tomorrow to show what you had requested in our previous resurfacing and then what we would have recommended for this next round. That's fine. Just need the information so we can do that promptly. Yes, sir. I'm awfully slow, longhand. I'm sorry? I'm awfully slow doing it in longhand. Understood. Okay. I think, Kevin, there may be a couple other questions. Council Member Farmer, then Council Member Myers. So you're getting ready to give us a list that's kind of the net of what has been done and what's still in the pipeline through the end of 2013. That is correct. Our recommendation is based on current ratings that would be applicable for moving forward with the $13 million bond. And then in a perfect world, you would want our lists to you by when? Tomorrow. I was going to ask you to sit closer. Now I don't want you to. Well, there's a number of factors. Ideally, we're not going to be seeing the asphalt plants open until probably the first or second week of April. Okay. We're going to have this information to you this week. Okay. The quicker we can have that information returned to our office, we can coordinate with the likes of Kentucky American, Columbia Gas, our folks at Water Quality, for planning future projects moving forward with this allotment of money we're looking to move forward in resurfacing. So as soon as we can get that back, I can generate that report to the utility companies, to our right-of-way division, other divisions that would be. Okay, perfect. Then the last part of this is we would need the individual district numbers because it's not going to be a 15 or a 12-way split. Oh, correct. I will renew the numbers as far as percentages towards allotment for greatest need. We'll need that to. As we've done in the past three years. Yes, sir. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mayor. Council Member Myers. Thank you, Mayor. Mr. Winke, can you talk a little bit about the process for having a street rated so that we understand, particularly for the new council members, how you guys arrive at what should be repaved and what doesn't need to be repaved? Absolutely. Every year, typically we would hire engineering interns to evaluate effectively at one point it was one-third of the county, and then every fourth year we would do a full assessment of all Fayette County. We came to determine that that information wasn't as up-to-date as it needed to be because we were seeing quicker road degradation over time. So we have since changed that policy within the last two years, where every year we will evaluate half of the county. We divide the county into a north-south dividing line, which is effectively Tate's Creek up through Newtown Pike. So we would evaluate east and west halves of the county. The assessment effectively looks at conditional ratings with how much it's degraded with respect to alligator cracking. There's a whole series of, a whole formula that plays into this. and we assess that on a per-road basis. This affects every council district, also not only within the urban service area but also the county roads so that we can effectively turn the monies that are allotted each budget cycle into the roads with the greatest need to resurface that coming fiscal year. Okay, thank you. Because in our district last year we experienced on our rating list some roads that were rated that needed to be repaved, but then it turned out they didn't need to be and then vice versa. So I think your new system should take care of that. Correct. And one of the things we're looking into is a GIS-based application. So you're seeing all of this from a council perspective graphically as opposed to tabular forms that we typically report out to you, which I think will be a lot more convenient both from our standpoint as well as from yours. Sure. When you give us that list, you're going to update how much money we have. Will you also update what was paid last year? Yes, sir. That's our intent. Thank you so much. Absolutely. Council Member Wallace. Thank you. There's been a lot of discussion about the paving issue and the conditions of the streets as well as the usage of the streets. I know Council Member Stenitz talked a great deal about Sir Barton Way, which is utilized a lot. And then most of the streets in the 3rd District are where everybody comes in and out of the city. So are you all going to address that in your formula? Because the 3rd District has gotten the lowest amount every year since I've been on council. In presentations past, it was actually a question of similar fashion that I believe Council Member Beard had asked. And so far as doing a rating of streets based on volume of traffic that that's received, and absolutely I think that's something that we do as opposed to rating each street on a one-to-one basis, you do have to make consideration for those that carry a greater traffic volume. So that is something we will weigh. Also the age of the street. Well, the age in the street, but that also plays into our resurfacing program or resurfacing patterns of the past, you know, weighing that in. Like a street that was built in 1800 and 80 is going to have different needs than maybe a street that was built in the manual. Correct, because it was not built to our current standards that we currently have in our engineering manual. So that is a factor, too, that we're weighing and trying to be more aware of as we write. Thank you very much. You've made me so happy. Happy New Year. All right. All right. Thank you, Mr. Winton. Sure. All right. No further comments or questions, and we can move on to the next report. Council Member Myers. Thank you, Mayor. The Social Services and Community Development Committee met on December 4th, 2012, at 11 a.m. and received an update from the students of the UK College of Social Work about its progress on the needs assessment. The team of students and faculty reported that they have interviewed representatives of 21 current partner agencies. The next step in the process of developing a needs assessment for funding LFCCG social services partner agencies will include collaborating with the UK Martin School to complete a quantitative survey for service providers and utilizing existing data to identify and map trends. The College of Social Work will also be identifying key stakeholders and conducting more in-depth interviews and have asked for help from Council in identifying key stakeholders in the community. Council members, would you please email Commissioner Beth Mills with any ideas or thoughts about community stakeholders that should be interviewed during the process of developing a comprehensive needs assessment for Lexington Fayette County. Then secondly, we had Mr. Ron Crouch from the Kentucky Education and Workforce Development Cabinet provided a presentation on changing trends in employment and discussed the occupational outlook for the Bluegrass area in the coming decade. Ms. Irene Gooding provided an update on the Emergency Solutions Grant, which included $23,174 for use by the Salvation Army. Ms. Gooding discussed that the Salvation Army indicated in writing its decision to decline funds because of federal regulations regarding the data that tracks the homeless population. Based on conversations about this situation with members of the Salvation Army and its board, Ms. Gooding agreed to meet with the Salvation Army personnel to see if the compliance issue could be resolved. Ms. Gooding will be providing an update at the next Social Services and Community Development meeting on January 22, 2013, at 1 o'clock. And I think that's already been resolved, and I think we've got something in our docket today that is the outcome of those conversations. And then there was no action taken during this meeting. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Council Member Myers. Next on our agenda is a report on Environmental Equality Committee. Council Member Stennett. Thank you, Mayor. The Environmental Equality held its last meeting of the year on December the 11th. This was a follow-up meeting from the conversation on November the 27th in regards to the Blue Sky Treatment Plant. Once again, the three options for Blue Sky Sanitary Sewer Plant were reviewed and discussed. There was some public comment in regards to the Blue Sky Treatment Plant. This will stay on our docket and be part of the new Environmental Quality Committee when it reconvenes at the end of the month. The third item of business was the distillery district discussion. and that has also been postponed to our next meeting here in January, and we adjourned at 10.40 p.m. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Council Member Stennett. All right, next on our agenda is a presentation on fire staffing by Chief Jackson and Commissioner Clay Mason. I don't know what that was. Commissioner? Thank you. Yes, sir. Welcome back. This is a presentation that was asked for several times before the break about some individual instances as well as some comprehensive information about the staffing at the Division of Fire and some of the plans we have going forward. I'm going to turn it over here in a moment to Chief Jackson. He's got a good group of support here with him today. He's going to introduce them, I think, especially some of the new faces that have moved up as a result of some of the attrition in retirement to some senior staff at FIRE. But I want to first touch on a couple of highlights that I think merit repeating throughout this presentation. First off, as you will see on a couple of the slides, overtime spending is drastically down over the past few years. when we came in to this administration that was one of the keynote circumstances that we were asked to address and we feel like we have very successfully addressed that with regard to numbers of staffing at the division of fire during 2012 we graduated a class of 23 currently there's a class of 20 recruits that are in training and then already in process to bring on the Safer Grant class sometime this spring. In addition, some of the accomplishments that FIRE has met during the past year, they put 18 new paramedics on the buggies, and that was conducted in an on-duty training environment, which was a very innovative approach to dealing with the shortages they were incurring amongst their paramedic staff. The retooling and realignment of fire has continued. There are tweaks here and there that have been conducted. And as you'll hear more in detail coming up about the SAPA plan, there are ongoing efforts to maintain as many apparatus as we can on every given day. There are many days that there is no apparatus browned out. That's a positive sign. Many communities have closed fire stations. They have laid off firefighters. and this community has found a way to respond in a very fiscally responsible manner, but also in maintaining the protection this community deserves. Keep in mind throughout, there are no instances where an ambulance is browned out. There are no instances where a ladder truck is browned out. So those are some key things to keep in mind. throughout. This Division of Fire and Emergency Medical Services is looked at around the country as one of the leading organizations. They have been asked to participate in several national studies involving their EMS service and how they give medicines on runs and things like that. We have an agreement, a partnership with every hospital in town that the paramedics, upon certain signals and signs, can take patients straight to the operating room for stints as opposed to going through the emergency room door. In one instance, there was a gentleman who was finished with having a stint placed in 35 minutes after the paramedics arrived at his door. So, you know, this is a remarkable organization, and I think much of it is a testament to the folks right here. So with that said, I'll turn it over to Chief Keith Jackson. Let me, just before the chief comes up, Commissioner, especially for new council members, I just want to dial back a little bit for context. In this context, Keith Jackson, who is about to speak, was appointed interim fire chief in February of 2011. He has been a career service member of our fire department. He also has a distinguished record in the military, retired colonel. The reason I'm saying these things is that he won't say them himself. And he entered a condition which, in my view, represents a remarkable turnaround and transformation, not in just terms of financial terms, which Commissioner Mason just described, but also in terms of operations management and morale. And I want to say that with a punctuation mark attached to it. Thank you. Chief, you're up. Thank you, Mayor. First of all, Happy New Year to everyone. Back again, 2013, I guess it's the beginning of a new term. All the new council members, thank you, those that I haven't met. I will begin with introducing my staff, the new assistants and the new one assistant and two that have been with me for the entire tenure. Harold Hoskins, who is our operations chief. Richard Jordan, who is over planning and prevention. And the newly appointed Kristen Chilton, who is over our administration. So with these individuals, we look to bring the Division of Fire up to a new and innovative standard for the City of Lexington. I will begin the presentation and I'll walk you through our staff and our numbers and our day-to-day operations, the program and how we deal with brownouts through our SAPA program. And SAPA, as I sent you in the email, stands for Service and Personnel Adjustments that we make on a daily basis. Then I will turn it over to Assistant Chief Hoskins, who will walk you through a day-to-day operation. And I turn it over to him because of what he represents as our operations chief. He walked through his career as a district major, became a shift commander for eight years, I believe. And then he's become our most senior operations chief, which is the director of the shift commanders and our day-to-day operations. So as we move through, we'll talk about how we deal with our reduced staffing, and then I will summarize at the end. Adjustments have been made to deal with the overtime issues that started in 2008 where we used about $2.2 million to, when I took over in 2011, about $30,000 for late runs and another $39,000 for a paramedic class. So we had $69,000 that we worked with. We have asked for and received about $200,000 this past summer to put a surge EC unit on to help reduce the amount of stress that it placed on our paramedics. Of that $200,000, we used about $180,000. And with that $20,000 that remained, we put on the paramedic class that it's currently in. So I say that to show you how fiscally responsible we've been with the Division of Fire. We talk about when the mayor, and the only point that I'll talk about in reference to myself is the mayor said that when he appointed me that I used 5% less, 5% of the $2.2 million from 2008, which we not only graduate the paramedics, but we still protected the city with $69,000. So I give kudos to this staff daily because of the work that they've done. We managed through the SAPA process and the SAPA program to provide a service to the community, not at the level that we want, but we did our best with what we had. So as we move forward, as I did in the letter, I ask for your support. I ask for you to give us the opportunity to manage with a proper budget to get this city and get this division and get this department where it needs to be. As I stated, we're the largest fire department in the state of Kentucky. We are. We cover more ground. We provide more services. We are the best. and I want to be able to show you we're the best by sitting here today and asking for your support. So as we move into the presentation, am I supposed to control the slide there? Chris, can you give us some help here? Give the chief some help. Thank you. Okay. I'm going to get rid of that thing there. All right. Once he fixes, we'll get going. I'm usually not this. I'm not computer savvy, as you see. All right. Oh, shit. All right. Me and you are playing Abin Costello here. All right. So as we look at our staffing, 22 engines, and this is an education for some and a review for others. 22 engines, seven ladders, nine EC units, one heavy rescue, one hazard material team leader. Our daily operation, what the shift commander walks in, and that's what he has. And particularly this is Sunday with first shift, and I don't think Jeff is here, but that's how many firefighters and officers he has on this shift. assigned as 137. What he needs to make it happen is 124. And to just kind of give you an overview of our numbers of that 499 that are currently assigned to us, one chief, 33 majors, and the majors are then appointed up the ladder to the battalion chief and assistant chief. So that's how our rank structure goes. But we have 33 majors, 60 captains, 66 lieutenants, and 322 firefighters, which gives us our 499 that are currently assigned, 482 plus we have the 17 recruits that are in training. But this is what the shift commander comes in and he manages on a daily basis. With that, what we have, we develop what's called a magic number. And in that magic number, these are the personnel on his particular shift that he can't utilize because they're on disability leave, FMLA, military leave, or light duty of some sort. So also he has to deal with the fact that, according to the contract, he has to let up to 24 personnel off, 21 firefighter lieutenant captains, and then three benefits slots for the major and the battalion chief. So then we come to how we dealt with it. The number one objective of mine was not to close any fire stations, as the Commissioner pointed out earlier. We didn't want to close fire stations because we don't want to lose those fire stations. It's important that we provide the citizens of this community the most protection we can with what we have. So what we developed in that process was the SAPA plan, which is the service and personnel adjustments to deal with the brownouts. Initially, we started out with nine because our numbers were so low at 482. Then we've managed, we've hired some personnel, we've made some moves in the retooling process, and now we only brown out three trucks a day. and that's based upon who's working that day and what shift is working. And so it varies from three trucks to sometimes no trucks during this period. But during this SAPPA process or during every day of us providing service, there are 19 engines available, seven ladder trucks, and nine EC units along with the district majors to make first responder runs. So we've been aggressive and proactive in ensuring that the citizens feel protected. So when we look at the engines and the SAPA plan, as I said in the email, we rotate this to ensure that no district is affected any differently than any other district. no socioeconomic genre. No district is affected any more than any other district. So going into the planning process, we wanted to be positive. We wanted to ensure that the citizens understood that we were about them. We looked forward to protecting them. My number one job is to protect the members of the Lexington Fire Department, and that's why we're here today. and we want to ensure that you know and you understand that we need personnel. As we walk through this presentation, the bottom line up front is what I learned in the military, and I should have did it when I first walked up here, but I didn't want to stun you all. But the bottom line up front is that we need personnel. We can continue to throw money and we'll show how throwing money at it can fix, but it doesn't fix the problem. What it does is, and I've got to be consistent as I've been for the last 22 months, is that we can't put a Band-Aid on a laceration. We have to fix the problem. And personnel is the key to us fixing the problem. So as we move forward in the presentation, and I turn it over to Chief Hoskins, understand that the citizens come first as far as our service and our professionalism, but my job is to ensure that the members of the Lexington Fire Department are protected. And we need the numbers to ensure that these guys and gals are not overworked and overburdened. And when we add the personnel, and I think that as you've seen and as we've proven, not only are we fiscally responsible, we're administratively responsible. And through being administratively responsible, I think that, as the mayor pointed out, some of the issues with morale and some of the issues with our esprit de corps are starting to wade and not be an issue with the Lexington Fire Department. So as we move to the next slide and the next three or four slides, I'll bring Chief Hoskins up and allow him to explain to you how we function on a day-to-day basis. Thank you. And then we'll open it up for questions at the end of the presentation if that's the will of the body. Okay, thank you. Thank you. Chief Jackson mentioned that we rotate our companies on a day-to-day basis. Our intent when we rotate them is that in a group of four engines that we would take out of service, we would not lose two companies that would respond to a particular address. So obviously we can't have companies downtown. We can't take two of those companies out of service because that would make too big of an impact upon our service. We came up with a rotation order that's on the screen. The colors simply mean the shift. We work in three colors. It's a good visual representation for us to see when a company was out of service. This particular sheet ran from, you can see, it looks like about the 21st of July through the 15th of August. And what that tells you is that in that period of time, every engine company in Fayette County was out of service for three days. Now, it may not have been out of service the entire day. It may have been out of service for the first 12. If you look right off the bat, I see one that's out from 1600 to 4 o'clock in the afternoon to shift change. Some are out for the first 12. I ask you to note that on the far right-hand column about midway down in the green blocks for the 8th of August, we see Engine 9, Engine 10, and Engine 15 were all removed from service, and Engine 9 being from 7 to midnight. And in a second, I want to show you just exactly what that did when we took those companies out of service. 2012, we had 13,738 hours where we had engine companies out of service because we didn't have enough staff to keep them on the road. So that averages out to be 37 1⁄2 hours per day, or when you figure a 24-hour day, about 1 1⁄2 companies every day. As we've said, we will take up to three. Some days it's only one. This 1 1⁄2 may be three companies for the first 12. It may be a 24-hour company and then a last 12 company. It just depends on how the staffing lays out as to what we have available. these two maps i think will show you what happens when we we take a company out of service the map on the left shows the green dots are our engine company houses and the shaded areas on the map are areas that are within a four minute response time of a fire engine now that was calculated through a standard gis process where they use the size of the street the speed limit those type of things to get that four-minute travel time. I mentioned to you that on the 10th day of August, we took Engine 15, Engine 9, and Engine 10 out of service for part of the day. The lowest red dot you see on the right-hand map there about kind of the southwest side of town, that's Engine 15 at Chillitoe Park. It was out of service all day. If you look at the difference of the unshaded part of the map on the right versus the left, that's who is no longer within four minutes of a response time. So when we take a company out of service, their entire response district doesn't go unprotected because our distribution of companies throughout town helped fill some of that in. But areas around that station will be more than four minutes away. As you move kind of counterclockwise up, you see Engine 9 there. The area, which is, it looks like Lakeshore Drive, Idle Hour, that particular area, fell outside of a four-minute response time. Then you go up to the top of the map. If you look at the left, you'll see that Engine 10 can make almost all the way out to Georgetown Road and I-75 when they're on duty. This particular day, we lost a considerable amount of that property that was outside of New Circle Road, was greater than four minutes in a response time. Now, we use four minutes because the national standards for the fire service sets a standard of a four-minute response time for your first company and then the balance of your response for eight minutes. What we have found is usually even in the white areas on that right side of the map, we will get people there within that eight minutes, but we're not meeting that four minutes. So we're not totally unprotected when we run out of station, but, yes, there are places that do have less than an adequate service. As a side note, when you look at the distribution of those companies, just last week on Thursday night going into early Friday morning, we had three pretty major incidents, one on New Circle on North Broadway, one on Eddy Street, one on Ohio Terrace. It all happened within a couple of hours. Having the companies that we had downtown still allowed us to reach all of those incidents in less than eight minutes. That's a pretty good accomplishment. Of course, when we were doing some things, we were moving some companies from the south side of town up into the downtown area to help cover those. But it's important to note that the distribution of our companies help us manage the effect of our brownouts. we've talked a little bit about overtime this shows you that in 2008 we spent almost two and a quarter million dollars just to staff fire trucks just to keep trucks on duty 2008 we didn't brown out companies we paid overtime to keep all of our 22 engine companies on duty as we progress through chief jackson's mentioned the numbers that we have last year we spent a total of 110 thousand dollars to staff fire trucks. Now, it's an inverse relationship. Without paying overtime, we don't have the people, means we brown out stations. It's just pretty easy math. This is our number of employees over the same period of time. You'll see that in January of 2008, we were at 521. As we moved through there, we bottomed out. Actually, we bottomed out a couple of times. January of last year and January of this year, we are pretty low. We're at about 2001 levels. Now, that 482 number for January of this year does not include those people that are out in the training academy right now, the recruit firefighters. They're not riding fighter trucks yet. They're a part of that upward climb that we're projecting on into 2013. Once again, think about we had 521 people in 2008. We still spent $2.2 million to keep all of our fire trucks on duty. here's that side by side just kind of give you that that relationship of of the people in the amount of overtime that we paid over that year so how do we get people on fire trucks do we pay them overtime or do we hire more firefighters in doing some research we we looked at what would it cost us to staff by overtime a fire company for an entire year. And that is obviously nine people, three officers, six firefighters. And that comes out to be about $1.1 million. As many of you know, we applied and were awarded a SAFER grant last year. With that, we had to present an estimate of our salaries and benefits for entry-level firefighters. That salary and benefit number is about $45,000. And what that tells us is that for what we would pay one firefighter on overtime for a year's time to staff a fire truck, we could hire three firefighters. And that, I think, is going to be the clue or the key to us doing away with brownouts. It's going to be a very aggressive hiring policy. We have to have numbers. Whether we buy these people on overtime, which is not, it's a good deal for those that are making the overtime, but it's not a very cost-effective way for us to do that. or we hire new firefighters right off the bat. So, been a little bit of speaking about the retooling. When Chief Jackson came on, was appointed as interim chief in February of 2011, the first thing we did was we sat down with our organization chart and we said, where do we have sworn people who are not riding fire trucks that we can take away from those positions and put back on the line? That comes with a cost. You know, we don't, at the time our fire investigators, we had two investigators on duty every day for 24 hours at a time. Now we only have one. Our fire inspections have suffered because, just because we no longer have as many people capable or available to do fire inspections does not mean that the number of occupancies that we have to look at every year has gone down. That stays constant. Building maintenance, we had some sworn people in our building maintenance division who took care of issues. We have 44 buildings within the Division of Fire. And so sometimes doors break, overhead doors break, and they typically break 2 or 3 o'clock in the morning. We had people who were on duty on a 24-hour basis that could address these building maintenance issues in our stations. We took those people out. Now, if we have a problem after hours, we either have to fix it ourselves, we have to call, you know, overhead door comes out at night sometimes and has to repair doors, which is quite, I think, We're one of their favorite customers, and we just have to make do with it until the morning comes up. You know, overhead door doesn't sound like much, but we can't run out of the door and run out of a fire station and leave it unsecured. So, you know, those come up to us. Emergency response units, the only way we do our business is to have people to do it. We can't shed that responsibility off on anybody else. We have to be able to do that. I think we've proven fairly well that trying to sustain staffing by overtime is just expensive, terribly expensive, and that the way that we're going to get away from, let's say, browning out companies is simply to get enough people that we don't have to. Thank you, Chief. All right, with that, we'll open the door for questions from Council. That works. Council Member Stennett. Thank you, Mayor. Chief, as you know, when we asked for this presentation back in December, when I made the motion, we cast it in the form of how can the council help come here today and tell us how we can be part of the solution because we are, too, the ones getting the calls and getting the responses from individuals in our community that they want to know what's going on as well as what are we working on up here to fix it. And I appreciate you coming today, and kudos to you and the men and women on your staff that are here today and all ranks and files throughout the fire department for what you've presented today and the job you've done to not only curb the overtime but work on levels that goes back to 2001. And I don't think people really understood that, but you're working on staffing levels from 2001. Yes, sir. With no overtime, basically, and that's incredible. And just a few short years ago, five years ago, we had over, it was actually $3 million of overtime at one point. I know we don't want to put that up, but it was. So it makes your story even more remarkable. And now we're doing with no overtime and staffing levels of 2001. So thank you for what you're doing and continue the good work because it's really enlightening. One thing I'd like to leave here today with and emphasize because of this presentation is communication. I would encourage you to talk to each council member. Your staff talk to council members. Let us know what's going on because that only helps us when it comes to budget process and budget timing because there's no mayor up here in our community who ever has been mayor or council member that wants to see brownouts. But we all are working with our constrained budgets, and you made the statement earlier, doing the best with what we have. I think you've demonstrated we've done that. But I think we can do better. And I think by communicating what your long-term visions are, what we need today in this budget, and that's my first question, to solve the brownouts, what dollar amount do we need to come up with the last four months of our budget, is what we need to know and leave it up to us to make those decisions because in our last budget and finance meeting we did have money in there to work with. And if there's an opportunity at the will of the council, and that would be our number one priority, we want to shift funds, let's do it because we deserve to have the biggest and the best fire department, as you demonstrated, we already have, but we deserve to continue that process. and I appreciate you leading that example. So my first question is, what is the dollar amount? You said $1.1 million. Is that for annually, or is that just for the next four or five months to curb some of the brownouts? I want to be careful. I think we want to be cautious here about doing budgeting in a council meeting this way. I just want to urge that. the Chief has done a remarkable job of dealing with not just the Chief, but as Council Member Stenet just said, the full staff, of dealing with the constraints that are presented with an economy, and not just an economy, but with a condition that he inherited. And what we saw was the result of very intentional planning. And Council Member Stenet, you just mentioned that important word, the plan going forward. And what you saw with those numbers going back up was that plan that has been not just planned but actually implemented. And the overtime that the Chief asked for, which was implemented. it chief since i was a part of that i felt like it was worthwhile to share thank you oh thank you for that i was wondering where that came from so now i know good that's the role of the chair go ahead chief yeah i'm just curious let me read the question very simple is the 1.1 million is what you're asking the council for help today or is that an annual number and there's a different number for the rest of the year yeah that that would be an annual number to man one truck for a year. Okay. And that's, like I said, that to me is putting the laceration on the band-aid on the laceration because three trucks times 1.1 million, you do the math. That's not the fix that I think Lexington wants. Yeah, I don't think anyone in this council or the administration wants to spend more overtime dollars when you clearly gave us an example of it's not necessarily dollars well spent, but at the same time we want to have a safe community. Commissioner, you're staying up there. Are we on track on the two classes that we put in the budget this year, and can you kind of give us an update on when one's going to graduate now and when the next one's going to begin? Graduation date, March 1st for the class that's in right now. Okay. And the other process is in background stage that will bring on the Safer Grant group. so that would be sometime this spring that would put them out in early summer. As I mentioned when these requests came in late last year, there's also a component out there with the ISO survey to be looking at the community run times. We've got some run time numbers today that show very solid numbers in terms of response times of even working with the staffing we've had, they have still done a remarkable job of getting on scene in a very quick time and have performed admirably. The ISO survey, when it comes back, will present us with the information we're going to need to analyze staffing numbers a little closer to look at station placement and some of those kind of things to go forward. And so, you know, right now we're at 482 with about 20 people in the academy and then a certain number coming on in the spring. Okay. Well, thank you all. And in closing, my time's up. But in closing, again, I want to reiterate communication. You know, this is part of why I asked for this today to help council stay in the loop because it's our role too to help fund this operation and keep us being the best in our community. and I want to add a caveat to some of the comments I made as well as some of the issues and kind of give the community the whole picture. Not only are we talking about staffing and personnel dollars, but we have an apparatus, equipment issue, that we need to address at some point in our budgets as well as continuing on the pension because every time you add a new hire, obviously it has impact. So trying to balance all those three things, personnel, the equipment, and the pension issue, is delicate. And so I thank you, Commissioner and Mayor, for trying to balance that because it's not easy just to go out and say, hire the class. We're done. Now, we have other dollar amounts that they need for equipment, and they need to help on their pension issues. So thank you for that balance, and we look forward to all three discussions as we enter the budget year. Thank you, sir. Thank you, Council Member Stenet. Council Member Massadi. Thank you, Mayor, and thank you, Chief Jackson. You've done a remarkable job considering the circumstances and what you're dealing with. I just have a few questions. When you say that you take these engines out on a rotating basis, what kind of criteria do you use and how do you determine that? We rotate them. I mean, that's just the way the plan is. And I'll have, like I said, he's a shift commander, so I'll have. When we approach this issue, and I'm not sure if I can back this up. Let me just see if I can walk through this again. we began with several different ideas. We went to Cincinnati. We talked about how did they take companies out of service and kind of explored other cities our size. But we came down to the idea that this is not a problem that is related to one neighborhood or one area. My bottom line thing is everybody's got to feel the pain, which means that if you go up and down that list, that is every engine company in the city. We just go down that list. So if it's your neighborhood station's day to be browned out and we're short of people, I'm sorry. And who makes that ultimate decision? It is the shift commander and the majors as they are planning for their next day of staffing. Okay. You know, I concur with what Council Member Stinnett said. I know many of us, especially some of the newer ones, Council Members that have come on, probably have heard the same thing I did when I was going door-to-doors. The constituency out there is real concerned about this. They're afraid of their fire stations being closed, services not being provided. I know there's been, especially even in the Shilato Park, Station 15 that was shut down a couple times that had consequences due to it being browned out. These citizens are paying for these services, and I think everyone agrees here should be entitled to have these services and not have to worry whether or not these stations are open or closed. And I think it's incumbent upon us to be able to provide these services. And by doing so, whether it means having to have another class, I know we're not talking about budget now, or whatever it takes, I think we have to really seriously consider the ramifications of not having these stations open or these engines closed because we've been lucky so far. We have. But I said the next time we may not be so lucky. So I would encourage all my fellow council members to support the fire department and their requests so we can better serve the community. Thank you. Council Member Ford. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Chief and Commissioner Mason and the leadership of the fire department. I do want to echo the good work that Chief Jackson and his team has done. When I came to Council two years ago, I think it's safe to say, and the mayor was here, it was a much different fire department. It was a fire department that was in turmoil, in my opinion. But it seems to have been stabilized. I'll keep my comments brief, and I will echo Council Member Masati, is that I will lend, being one of 15 council members, I will lend my support and leadership to providing the resources necessary to the fire department. I think that in the last two years, they've done a very admirable job, I'll say again, in doing more with less. But it is not, as we've heard today, it's not sustainable. and it's unfair to our citizens. And even more so, I think it has to be concerning to the men and women in the fire department because the citizens of Fayette County, as they are our political constituents, our neighbors and friends, they're the constituents of the fire department too. And I know it must pain them to not be able to provide that optimal service. I think that we agree that overtime is not the answer, but we've got to provide the personnel. This is truly a service, one of the most important services that we provide as a government. I have just two things that I want to highlight, and Chief, you can chime in to keep me on track if you wish. I know that a city that's growing such as ours, there are probably some areas that we have some expansion plans, some places where we would like to add additional fire stations. But it's very discouraging to me that we'll ever be able to get there because we're having such a challenge just taking care of the basic needs that we have now. So I want to encourage just to. Yes, sir. Please, Chief. One of the things that we've done is that Councilman Stenet made reference to communication. And one of the things that this administration has tried to do is reach out. And so we've asked Mr. Paulson to be a part of his planning commission. so that we learn and know. I mean, we already know how much growth is expected in the city. We've talked to him about the Masters and Station area, which is one of the critical points that will come out in the ISO, I believe, and then the Richmond Road area, what he made reference to as the nose. We want to be a part of those committees, and I've designated that the staff be a part of all these different commission meetings so that we are ahead of the game. We want to be proactive. So in that, we are at least coming to the table and asking and telling you or advising you from our office that we need a fire station here because the community is growing in these two areas. Masterson Station is its own little city. The Polo Club and all that area, I mean, that's a large percentage of our population. And so with that knowledge, we've already started to be proactive with that. So thank you for opening that door. And thank you, Chief. And, again, I support that. I think we do. We're going to have to respond to it. But I think we just have to close the personnel gap. And I know that us as leaders, we recognize we just can't throw monies at problems. But this is a problem that we cannot solve without money. we're going to need to fund what we need to fund, this personnel gaps. In closing, Mayor and Chief, when Chief came in, I was joking with him a little bit when him and his team walked up about some of the guys that are going to be leaving us. Had some leadership assistant chiefs that are going to be leaving because they put their time in, they've served the city well. And I say that to talk about, we're talking about new classes. And one of the chiefs, maybe Chief Hudson talked about an aggressive strategy for hiring, for ramping up. Because when you think about it, we're losing folks. Folks are retiring. So just as fast as we're bringing new folks into the system, we're losing folks with vast amount of experience. So we're getting, in a lot of cases, net gain. I really would like to hear, my time is almost up, but I would really like to hear and support how we talk about that aggressive strategy for additional classes and bringing on new firefighters. We've got to support the personnel. Thanks, Mayor. Thanks, Chief. Yes, sir. In reference to that, one of the things that I think I have spoken to Councilman Stenet about is that being aggressive would be designating a certain number. when we reach a certain number in our personnel that we automatically hire a class for that. So our authorized tent right now is 536. If we got to 520, if we got to 520 automatically, we would be required to hire another class. And one of the things that I would like to do this year in being aggressive is to start hiring that class prior to January. We all know we don't want to. This is a fire department secret, but nobody wants to say I'm retiring in January. They want to wait until November. But we know the number. You know, I think I told the mayor, prognosticated back in July that we were going to have between 12 and 15 retire. I was pretty close. And we had some other disabilities come along with that. And two years ago, an unexpected, how many? Forty. Forty. Right. Right. Which has influenced this full dynamic, and we don't need to forget that. Right. And that was, like I said, that's one of those things, those anomalies that occur. I don't know if we've ever had 40, but it was one of those anomalies that occur in every aspect, whether it's public service, whether it's council members, because I replaced how many? A lot. Four. And that's a big number. It's a lot of new minds, new changes. But in reference to being aggressive, we sit at the table and we work with Chris to come up with ideas that identify aggressive ways to be active. And I want to be able to communicate that to the whole council. Like I said, me and Councilman Stendard had talked about that once before, being aggressive and trying to hire ahead and being able to be above our authorized strength for that short period of time. Because we know that those numbers are going to return back to the authorized strength right after the retirements occur. So we need to think about that and talk about that type of stuff, sir. Thank you. Councilmember Lawless. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. First of all, Chief Jackson, thank you for your service and your leadership and to all our firefighters. I appreciate what you do beyond what you can imagine. I guess my question might be for Commissioner Mason. the council put in the budget funding for I believe it was 25 additional fire a class of 25 additional firefighters for this fiscal year which started last July one and then we got the safer grant right which was around that same time and I'm wondering what's keeping why is it you know taking almost this long to get these classes and what needs to happen to move that process forward so that they can be hired, trained and hired. That's just part of it. It is a process. The hiring has to be, there has to be advertising, testing, scoring of the testing, and then other parts of the process to include panel interviews, physical fitness testing, physicals, and polygraphs. All of that takes a protracted amount of time when you have five or six or seven hundred people show up to take a test. To filter through those people takes time. And we've worked very diligently with HR, who've done a fantastic job in working with fire. At the same time, police is going through the same process. So it just takes time to go through all of the steps to hire the folks that we need to get on board. So, well, may I ask a question just to clarify? I think it's worthwhile. Is it not on schedule or is it on schedule? It is on schedule in terms of we've got a class in right now that started, when did that last class? The ones that are in now started in September. September. Fiscal year was July. The money was put in. We got them hired in September, and then we're working now on a second group that's coming for the SAFER grant. Okay, so if they were hired in September, and they haven't graduated yet, how long from the time you hire them to completion of the training and ready to? 19 weeks is the academy. They'll graduate March 1st. November, December, January. Maybe they came on later. Was it later? So this has taken about 21, 22 weeks, which is? Yeah, they had the holiday in there. Oh, they had the holiday. Thanksgiving and Christmas. Okay, I was curious. So you've got a new class that you anticipate. Have they been hired and ready to start training? No. No, it's still in background stage. The process is underway. The process is underway. Okay. Because, I mean, we're in a situation where I agree, And you said, or somebody said, you know, the overtime is not good for the city. It might be a good deal for the firefighters. But in truth, it really takes a toll on our firefighters. I mean, you know, it's like it takes away from their, I mean, you know, the physical wear and tear, mental and emotional, their family time, et cetera. So, you know, people like me wear out with overuse just like a car or truck does. So I think examining what can be done to have people kind of in the chute ready to go so when we have money, we can get them in a class and trained quickly. And I talked with Director Maxwell yesterday about that, about for police and fire and corrections, coming up with an ongoing process that does keep that chute full of folks that are available and qualified and pass all of the testing. But that's an expensive venture in and of itself, to run physicals, to do polygraphs. You know, the police do the polygraphs for both police and fire. They've only got a handful of polygraphers, and to hire out at $300 to $400 per test if you're testing 100 people, it's pretty pricey in and of itself just for that part of it. Okay. Well, my time's out, but I'd like to hear more about that at some point. Thank you. Thank you. Councilman Myers. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Chief Jackson, for your report and for all the work that you and your crew are doing to keep our city safe. And I don't know if you or the commissioner would be the best person to ask, but our link last year asked for an analysis on sworn officers for both police and fire. Yes. And the commissioner has that report done. It's been submitted. So I have a question about that. It says in here that a total of 15 firefighters have been returned to line of duties and retooling. Yes. Can you talk a little bit about which positions those are? And is that going to be permanent, or was that because of the brownouts, so that when you hire a new class, some of those folks are going to go back to doing those other duties? Are these going to be changed and retooled permanently from sworn to civilian? The majority of those positions are permanent changes. Okay. But as we pointed out in the summary, our fire prevention bureau suffered. So we're looking, I was just talking with Chief Jordan about that yesterday, we're looking to refill those positions because we need fire inspectors. We need guys that are going to be on the front line to protect the citizens from those things that cause fires and accidents and incidents that we respond to. So some of those positions will be returned at the 15 or so in the retooling process. Do you know about how many of the 15 will be returned? I couldn't give you a specific number on that, but like our Chief Hoskins made reference to our maintenance bureau. So, I mean, it's all civilian now, and we have one person, one sworn that manages that, Captain King. So, as from the beginning, I said, we look at all programs, all processes, and we review to see what's best for, one, the Lexington Fire Department, and then most importantly for the citizens of this community. So we'll review it, and then we'll designate which spots will be returned. Okay. In the report, I couldn't tell, Commissioner, if there are three sworn firefighters that are working as mechanics in the garage, right? There's one who works as a shift. That's correct. It's my understanding that all they do is preventative maintenance on the smaller trucks and the buggies. They don't work on the big trucks. so i i don't think that's the correct answer i think chief oskins can answer that okay yeah uh our three sworn people uh have got a wide variety of experience and certifications and they are constantly moving forward in their certification process for mechanical uh you know be it the fuels the electronic systems on the on the apparatus or whatever However, the swarm mechanics of their 24 hours a day are very valuable because hundreds of times a year, they keep a company on duty that pulls up to that garage door at 2 or 3 o'clock in the morning and will say a siren is broken or a parking brake actuator that has failed. And in a half hour, they will put that truck back on duty versus having to go to reserve. And quite frankly, with the state of our fleet, we don't have enough reserves to do that. Here's my question. When I went over there and took a tour of the garage, they showed me the different positions that were licensed to work on trucks, and they actually said that those three did the preventative maintenance on the smaller trucks. My question is not do you have to have that position, but does that position need to be sworn? Because if they're changing brakes or fixing brake pedals and things like that, it doesn't take a sworn firefighter to do that job. If we're not sworn and we want to pay people 40 hours a week, it will take four people to do the work of that one firefighter because we have to have around-the-clock work. And why you see many of those people doing the PMs and those things on the smaller equipment is because our civilian mechanics are there throughout the week. If they're working on a job that may take three or four days to finish, if that sworn mechanic is working on it and he's got the plan, he knows what the problem is and knows how to remedy that problem, you're talking about 8 or 12 calendar days for him to fix that problem. A civilian mechanic will be there, come in Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, get the truck fixed and go. I think, Mayor, my time's up, so I'll talk to the commissioner offline. When I was over there on that tour, they gave me a couple ideas I think would remedy that issue, but we can do that offline. Sure. Thanks. Thank you, Commissioner. Thank you, Council Member. Thank you, Council Member Myers. Council Member Henson. Thank you, Mayor. Chief, I'll just echo what everyone else has said. I think we have come a long way as far as finances at the fire department. The overtime cost has been reduced considerably, and I really appreciate that. I commend you and staff for the work and the mayor for hiring you. Sometimes I wonder if he... But, you know, I guess my biggest concern is that making sure that, and as is yours, making sure that we respond to calls in an appropriate amount of time to save a life or put out a fire. And I know that that time is very precious if a person is not breathing. So our average response time across the board, is it five minutes? We just had a report, and from 2010 to present day, 2012, our response times have been around five minutes. and there it is. It was first on scene in 2010 was 4 minutes and 34 seconds. 2011 was 4 minutes and 34 seconds, and now it's about 4 minutes and 44 seconds. Our fire, our EMS was 5-17 in 2010, 5-15 in 2011, and it's 5-17 in 2000. And a lot of times they'll dispatch an engine company. Right. First responders. Yes. Yes, ma'am. If EMS can't get there. How do you feel about it? I just think the communication, like Council Member Senate said, is good, you know, letting people know what to expect. And I guess I would like to look at things, and we've talked about this before strategically. Do we have more stations than we need? Are they just not planted in the right spots? Should we be like Walmart and close a store and open one somewhere? No. I used to work for Hills Department stores, and they tried that, and you see what Walmart did to Hills Department stores. No, we look at our strategic plan, and that's one of the things. We did an internal strategic plan, our initial one, and I think Chief Ronalds is going to take over that process for us. And he has been chartered to create a strategic plan that goes external now. So I've already approached a couple of council members, and I'm having lunch with one tomorrow, hopefully, and approach him and a couple of others to participate in our strategic plan so that you have a better understanding of why we put fire stations in specific areas and how we do our math to get what we need. And so with that, it also calls for the increased personnel and apparatus and trucks and things along that line. So we want to be open, open doors of communication with you. So our strategic plan will grow, and we'll want to include the council and some of the commissioners in and how we plan for the future. But the big thing with your question is we want to wait until we get this ISO report back so that we can build from that. I was just always thinking, is there a station that doesn't get very many calls? We're busy across the board. Even the stations out in the county are pretty busy now. So we used to call them retirement stations, but there are no such thing. Okay. We had over, I think, close to 45,000 runs last year. So we don't. Okay. EMS runs were up 6.8%. Pardon? EMS runs were up 6.8%. Okay. And that's what they were referring to earlier as a surge buggy. And during the middle of the day, for a good part of the year, they would put on a 10th ambulance because that's the times in doing the run counts when they were heaviest. Well, you know, and I would never, ever, just from seeing the fire department work and working with you guys and ladies, I would never question the integrity of any firefighter or, you know. I think we all have the same goal in mind to protect the citizens, and how do we do that as efficiently as we can? And I think you've done an excellent job, and I appreciate it. All right. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Henson. Chief, thank you. Commissioner, thank you. Chiefs, thank you. Command staff, thank you all for being here. Chris, thank you. You didn't hear that, did you? Mr. Bartley, I said thank you, too. All right. All right. We can. I know I've got an exit of about 35 minutes, and the vice mayor said she did, too. I don't know about others, but we've got still a pretty healthy amount on our agenda, including council reports, but if we can dial back to new business and item K and maybe we can either move it to the docket or if it is going to go on too long, we may have to look at moving it on to a Thursday night walk-on. But we do have some folks here who can address some questions. Commissioner? I'll bring Chris King up to be able to answer any questions about real widths in these types of things. Okay. The question that was on. Thank you. Who has the question or who wants to pick up on the question? Did you get the question, Mr. King? I was in the meeting. Okay. I'm sorry. I did hear a little bit of what the issue is generally about, but I did not hear what the specific questions that we needed to address were. I'm going to – the Vice Mayor is lined up to speak, so I'll call on the Vice Mayor. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Chris. And Commissioner, thank you for bringing in the entourage so quickly. This is the Lochmere Estates, converting the private street, accepting it as a public street. And most of my questions that I had were answered in terms of TVing the sewers, who would be responsible for the median and the gate. The only remaining question I have had to do with what we heard from Fire Chief Jordan regarding getting into the cul-de-sac for fire services, and he expressed concern about that. And so I wanted to know if you remember a discussion about fire service and getting in here to service all the homes. Well, this plan, as all plans are, were reviewed by the technical committee and included the fire division representatives. and they did agree we find nothing where they expressed objection or any inordinate concerns about serving this development as private. And we know that whether it's private or public, public safety and the ability to get to these structures would have been a concern either way. So I did not hear what they said, but the fire staff did review this plan as it went through the process, the normal processes. Do you have minutes of that technical review? We would not have minutes of the technical committee, no. We don't take full minutes of that, but we do have the records of what was brought by the, who would have been on the technical committee at that time, any comments they would have said, because those are in a public meeting. What Chief Jordan said today, he expressed concern about getting into the cul-de-sacs to serve them. Well, again, I'd be glad to sit down with them and talk about that, but the plan was approved as a private with review. And the street wits do meet, minimum wits that are contained in the subdivision regulations. It's an alternative design. You may recall that in the expansion area in particular, by law, as passed by council, developers are encouraged to do something other than cookie-cutter standard subdivisions and to do designs. And this was one of those designs that came forth that just a little different. I will call them the eyebrows are a little different than what we typically see. So the width of all the streets in this that we're considering accepting meet the public standard? Yes. Okay. That was one of the big questions. Now, some specifics on geometrics and natures of curves and things like that may be questionable. But you can have a 22-foot wide public street in a normal situation, even as long as it's no more than 15 units being served on that particular street and a couple of other conditions. And I took a quick look, and I understand the eyebrows are the narrowest, the 22 feet. But they still follow the subdivision regulations for a public street? Yes. Again, remember that in the expansionary in particular, it's a design where alternative designs and innovative designs are encouraged and reviewed. Our assessment on this when it came back to us is that had this been initially proposed as a public street, it is very likely that the Planning Commission would have approved this configuration, be it public or private. Okay. Thank you very much. All right. Council Member Myers. Thank you, Mayor. My questions have been answered, and the main thing I wanted to know was whether FIRE approved it beforehand, and I thought Kevin Wente said yes, and you've just confirmed that. So thank you very much. Thank you. All right. Thank you. All right. Then I'm going to ask if there is a motion on item K. Is there a motion on item K? Mr. Stennett? Thank you, Mayor. I move to place it on the docket for Thursday night. Second. Motion by Council Member Stennett, second by Council Member Myers. Is there any further 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. Next on our agenda, Council Reports. If Council Members will please sign on electronically for your Council Report, then I will happily call on you. Council Member Myers. Oh, that was number four. All right. Thank you, Mayor. Welcome, new Council Members. Yes. Welcome. Vice Mayor Gordon. Thank you, Mayor. Just before they leave, I wanted to thank Ms. Wiseman for making it through all these questions. And Mr. Byrd, thank you very much for your patience. A few meetings that I wanted to announce or reaffirm. The planning orientation for new council members is the 17th. That's this Thursday at 4.30. considering that we have our hearing on the 22nd. We wanted to get that in. There's a council workshop scheduled for January 22nd at 10 o'clock a.m. This is specifically to hear the recommendations of the Mayor's Commission on Homelessness, and those recommendations then will be brought forward January 29th to the work session. I'm looking at Council Member Kay, who co-chairs that commission. The council has a confirmation hearing scheduled for our ethics commission appointee, and, in fact, I'd like to go ahead and move to schedule that officially January 31st at 4.30 p.m. All right. Is the motion, is there a second for the scheduling? All right. On January 31st at what time, Vice Mayor? 4.30 p.m. 4.30, January 31st. 4.30, seconded by Council Member Kay. 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. And then finally, a couple things. We're in the process of electing our chairs for our standing committees, and we'll be finished with that in another couple of weeks. And then I want to again thank, I see Commissioner Driscoll here. I think it's your last day, isn't it, today? And so I thank you again for your service to our government and our community. Thank you. Best of luck. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Vice Mayor. All right. Council Member Henson. Thank you, Mayor. I wanted to announce the job club that is recently, I don't know if you've received an email or not, but Fayette County Extension Office has recently started a job club, and it does begin this coming Tuesday, and it will from 9 a.m. to 10, 15, and it would be every second and fourth Tuesday. I think this is a real good opportunity for there are people out there looking for jobs and maybe don't know how to look, haven't looked in years. Maybe they're looking at changing careers or for whatever reason. But I was just very appreciative of their efforts to do that. And also, I'll be bringing forward a public amendment to the current public nuisance ordinance. And I had sent an email, and Chief Bastin has set aside some time for us to meet with him for this Thursday morning and the following Thursday afternoon. So I would hope that you would take a few minutes to sit down and meet with the chief and myself and talk about the ordinance and any concerns you might have. But if you would get in touch with my aide, Melinda, and schedule that, that would be great. So thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Council Member Henson. Council Member Stennett. Thank you, Mayor. I, too, want to welcome our new colleagues to the horseshoe. Believe me, it gets more interesting than today has been, but I'm sure your first day has been kind of long, and we look forward to having your service to our community. I also want to echo Vice Mayor's sentiments to Commissioner Driscoll. Thank you for everything you've done, and it's not going to be very easy to replace you. For those of you who work with the commissioner on the budget and through our budget committees and a lot of work, we've come light years in the last two years on our financial accounting and systems, And I know Mr. O'Mara, too, is sad to see you leave, but you've been in this role before alone in the finance department. So thank you for keeping us going, too, Bill. We appreciate that. And, Jane, good luck in Frankfurt, and we hope you can bring more money back to us. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Council Member Stennett. All right. No one else has signed up for a council report, so that allows us to move on to the mayor's report. Is there a motion? Motion. Second. Motion by Council Member Stennett, seconded by Council Member Ellinger. Is there any discussion on the motion? Vice Mayor Gordon. Yes, Mayor. I move to remove the nominee for the Ethics Commission so that we can hold our confirmation hearing on January 31st as scheduled and then put this person, depending on the outcome of the hearing, back on for January 31st. All right. Is there a motion? Is there a second? Second. Second. Council Member Stennett? All right. Then that's certainly appropriate. Is there any discussion on the motion? All right. Hearing none, then we can take a vote. All in favor of the motion, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Okay. Back to the original motion. Is there any further discussion? All right. Hearing none, then we can take a vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Just by way of FYI, I was given a note that says that the council and working with the administration made 179 board and commission appointments in 2011 and 203 in 2012. Wow. So that represents significant work, not casual. All right. I want it before public comment. I want to put a punctuation, an exclamation mark to all the praise and thanks that we have given to, already been given to Jane Driscoll. I've said often in a commemorative commemoration yesterday, it was presented to Jane downstairs. It had lots of whereas's in it and lots of tributes. And when I think of her work, I think of example, two words, example and inspiration. And she will be sworn in tomorrow as in her promotion to this role of state budget director where she started her career. And what a wonderful tribute to Jane Driscoll this new role is. And we thank her enormously for her effort and work and success for our city. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you. Did you read all the whereases? I've read almost all of them. That is tribute to you, ma'am. Well done. Thank you, Council Member Farmer. She also got a sign from our Streets and Roads department that says, Jane's Way, and it's going in her new office. All right. Next on the agenda is public comment. Mr. Mundy, oh my goodness. Thank you, Mr. Mundy. All right. Is there then a motion to adjourn? Move adjourn. Well, without objection, we are adjourned. Thank you.