# Urban County Council Work Session - February 26, 2013 > Auto-transcribed civic record · February 26, 2013 - **Permalink**: https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/meeting/2890 - **Source video**: https://lfucg.granicus.com/player/clip/2890?view_id=14&redirect=true - **Date**: 2013-02-26 - **Last revised**: February 26, 2013 - **Length**: 24,840 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 February 26, 2013, at 3:00 PM in the Council Chamber located at 200 E. Main Street, Lexington, Kentucky 40507. Mayor Jim Gray presided over the session, which included three agenda items and three public comments from citizens. During the meeting, the body took three motions to a vote, with one resolution approved. The agenda addressed public comment on items before the council, a Resolution on Voting Rights Restoration that was approved, and an informational presentation on Senior Center Site Evaluation. ## Attendance **Present:** - Linda Gorton - Chuck Ellinger - Steve Kay - Chris Ford - Diane Lawless - Julian Beard - Bill Farmer Jr. - Kevin Stinnett - Jennifer Scutchfield - Jennifer Mossotti - Harry Clarke - Peggy Henson - Ed Lane **Absent:** - Shevawn Akers - George Myers **Late:** None reported ## Votes and Decisions The meeting included three votes, all of which passed. **Ordinance Number Five** [0:07:21] A motion to place ordinance number five on the docket without a public hearing was made by Diane Lawless and seconded by Chuck Ellinger. The motion passed by voice vote. **Ordinance Number Four** [0:07:54] A motion to place ordinance number four on the docket without a public hearing was made by Kevin Stinnett and seconded by Linda Gorton. The motion passed by voice vote. **Resolution on Voting Rights for Former Felons** [0:15:10] A resolution expressing support for automatic restoration of voting rights for former felons was moved by Chris Ford and seconded by Diane Lawless. The resolution passed unanimously. ## Budget and Financial Actions The meeting included authorization for the following financial actions: **Facility Management Services Amendment** The body authorized an amendment to Resolution No. 692-2012 (Item 0042-13) for facility management services provided by Meridian Management Corporation. No specific dollar amount was identified for this amendment. **AT&T Enterprise Mobility Solutions Purchase** The body authorized certification of AT&T Advanced Enterprise Mobility Solutions as a sole source provider (Item 0163-13) for a purchase amount of $66,799.25. ## Public Comment Three speakers addressed the meeting to voice support for voting rights restoration for former felons. **Undine Quinn** [0:18:06] advocated for the restoration of voting rights for former felons, emphasizing the importance of democracy. **Reverend Jim Thurman** [0:18:40] supported the resolution for voting rights restoration, highlighting the impact on African Americans. **Judy Johnson** [0:21:27] represented the Lexington League of Women Voters in support of the resolution, citing disenfranchisement statistics. ## Contested Items **Senior Center Site Evaluation** Council members engaged in a heated discussion regarding the proposed Senior Center site at the Continental Inn location. The debate centered on the suitability of this venue for the senior center project. Concerns raised during the discussion included: * Crime statistics associated with the Continental Inn area * Traffic safety issues related to the proposed location The discussion reflected disagreement among council members about whether the Continental Inn site met the necessary criteria for housing the senior center, with particular focus on public safety and accessibility factors. ## Public Comment - Issues on Agenda [timestamp: 00:05:06] The council opened the floor for public comments on issues related to the agenda. Mayor Jim Gray presided over this portion of the meeting, which was designated for community members to address matters under consideration by the council. The public comment period specifically focused on Councilmember Ford's resolution. This agenda item provided an opportunity for residents and other stakeholders to voice their perspectives on the proposed resolution before the council proceeded with further discussion or action. The outcome of this public comment period was informational in nature, allowing the council to receive input from the public prior to deliberation on the agenda items. ## Resolution on Voting Rights Restoration Councilmember Chris Ford introduced a resolution supporting the automatic restoration of voting rights for former felons [0:15:10]. The resolution was approved unanimously by the council. ## Senior Center Site Evaluation Lifespan Design Studio presented evaluations of potential sites for a new senior center during this agenda item [2:14:56]. The presentation was delivered by Doug Gallow and Ellen Gallow. The evaluation focused on two primary sites under consideration: the Continental Inn and Turflin Mall. The presenters provided analysis of these locations as potential homes for the proposed senior center facility. This agenda item was presented for informational purposes, allowing the governing body to review the site evaluation findings without a formal decision or vote at this time. --- ## Decisions - **Motion** — passed (0-0): add to the docket for the February 28th, 2013 Council meeting without a public hearing an ordinance changing the zone from a wholesale and warehouse business zone to a Lexington Center Business zone, for 0.057 net acres, for property located at 430 West Maxwell Street - **Motion** — passed (0-0): add to the docket for the February 28th, 2013 Council meeting without a public hearing an ordinance changing the zone from a Two Family Residential zone to a High Density Apartment zone for 0.144 acres, for property located at 1577 Martha Court - **Motion** — passed (0-0): place on the docket for the February 28th, 2013 Council meeting a resolution accepting the response of Dr. Ryan Stanton to RFP No. 1‐2013 Medical Director Services, and authorizing the Mayor, to execute a Professional Services Agreement with Dr. Ryan Stanton - **Motion** — passed (0-0): place on the docket for the February 28th, 2013 Council meeting a resolution authorizing the advertisement for bids and the distribution of a preliminary official statement for the purchase of the principal amount of its one, Various Purpose General Obligation Bond Series 2013A in an amount not to exceed $14 MM, and two, Various Purpose Obligation Refunding Bonds Series 2013B in a principal amount not to exceed $10 MM, and the appropriate ordinances for the issuance of such bonds - **Motion** — passed (0-0): place on the docket for the February 28th, 2013 Council meeting an ordinance creating sections 15‐11.1 through 15‐11.4 of the Code of Ordinances, pertaining to the regulation of mobile food truck vendors - **Motion** — passed (0-0): approve the summary - **Motion** — passed (0-0): approve the budget amendments - **Motion** — passed (0-0): amend the budget amendment list on pages 8‐11 of the Work Session packet to remove budget journal 65452 relating to Division of Fire overtime - **Motion** — passed (0-0): approve the new business - **Motion** — passed (0-0): approve the Neighborhood Development Funds list - **Motion** — passed (0-0): approve the Planning and Public Works minutes as amended - **Motion** — passed (0-0): adjourn --- ## Full transcript ! Thank you. Thank you. I'm out. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Greetings. Greetings. And Mr. Mundy asked me to ask everyone if you would tighten up as much as possible because we have many folks who are still trying to find a seat. All right. Thank you all for being here today. I will call the meeting to order. This is the meeting of the work session of the Council. and first on our agenda is issues is public comment for issues on the agenda i know many of you are here to speak to issues on the agenda and we will be providing an opportunity for that as it relates to um as it relates to Councilmember Ford's walk-on resolution. So does anyone wish to speak to issues on the agenda that are not related to Councilmember Ford's resolution or to... Actually, does anyone here wish to speak to an issue on the agenda that is not related to Council Member Ford's resolution? All right. Okay, then we can, we're then able to move on to, well, let me say before we move on, let me say one thing. We do have a fairly full agenda today, and we will be having a number of public comments. and we'll just ask as the protocol for the council in public comments is not unlike in a judicial proceeding where in order to maintain order, we discourage sort of clapping and things like that. So we'll just ask you all, if you would, to please follow the council rules on that. Thank you very much. All right. So first on our second on our agenda, actually, is the docket approval. And I believe we have a couple of motions related to the docket approval. Council Member Stennett? No, I don't. You don't? All right. Council Member Lawless, do you have a motion related to public hearing regarding ordinance number, item number five? Not requesting a public hearing. I move to put it on the docket without a public hearing. Second. All right. There's a motion by Council Member Lawless to place ordinance number five on the docket without a public hearing, the second by Council Member Ellinger. Is there any discussion on the motion? All right. Hearing none, then we can take a vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. The motion carries. Council Member Stenet. Thank you, Ma'am. Ready. Motion to put number four on the docket without a public hearing. Second. Motion by Council Member Stennett. Put number four on the docket without a public hearing. Second by Vice Mayor Gordon. Is there any discussion on the motion? All right. Hearing none, then we can take a vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Thank you, Mayor. All right. Chair recognizes Council Member Ford. Thank you, Mayor. I want to bring forward a motion for the issue of voting rights. Council members, I delivered a proposed motion to you guys last week, and I hope you've had time to review it. Mayor, if I can, before I make my motion, I'd like to just lead into an intro of the issue. The issue is to support the automatic restoration of voting rights for former felons, with the exceptions that are displayed in House Bill 70 as sponsored by Representative Jesse Crenshaw here of Lexington. As it stands right now, Section 145 of the Kentucky Constitution prohibits any person convicted of a felony from voting in the Commonwealth of Kentucky. Presently, there are close to a quarter of a million citizens in Kentucky who have been disenfranchised by the conviction of a felony. That represents one in fourteen adults in the state of Kentucky being without the right to vote, the third highest disenfranchised rate in the nation. For minorities, it represents one in five African Americans who are unable to vote. Representative Crenshaw has brought forth House Bill 70, which has passed the House of Representatives seven times, including as most recently as last week on a bipartisan effort which will basically call for a constitutional amendment to be placed on the ballot for for the vote of Kentuckians to allow for the automatic restoration of voting rights. I also provided you guys a memo that explains my motive and my intent for bringing this forward and I want to quickly share that with you guys. My intent is one that I believe that this is an issue of social justice and I do support it. And it's in response to a lobbying of many ally organizations, particularly the Kentuckians for the Commonwealth, of which many have met with Council members here. Secondly, I believe automatic restoration of voting rights will guarantee inequity and fairness for all parties, the disenfranchised as well as the Commonwealth. Again, I alluded to Representative Crenshaw being the legislative basis for this. There's also an element of redemption, as I believe that all human beings are imperfect, and we've all made mistakes, but for those who have completed their sentence, satisfied all parole and probationary requirements, and who have come back into society as contributors, they should be allowed to vote. There is no economic impact or burden to the taxpayers of Kentucky to implement this. There is no economic incentive for the disenfranchised to receive the right to vote. But I do believe that there is an immeasurable value of self-dignity, distinctively and uniquely derived by the civic exercise of casting a vote. Lastly, I believe it represents the current disenfranchisement, taxation without representation, and that kind of goes against what our country is founded on. Council members, the resolution has 14 recitals in an attempt to provide background information, and it has seven sections to its body. I want to list just a few of the recitals, Mayor, before I bring forward my motion. The third recital, whereas for the purposes of this resolution, a former felon is a citizen convicted of a felony who has paid his or her debt to society by completing service of sentence, including expiration of probation or final discharge from parole. Recital number six, whereas the Commonwealth of Kentucky is currently one of only four states in the nation, which does not allow for the automatic restoration of voting rights for former felons. Joining Florida, Iowa, and Virginia. Recital number seven, whereas approximately 181 former felons, or 74% of the total disenfranchised population in Kentucky, are still unable to register and vote. Recital number 10, whereas House Bill 70 has ultimately secured passage in the Kentucky House of Representatives seven times. Most recently, during the current 2013 session of the General Assembly, Recital number 13, whereas political debate and deliberation in the Kentucky State Senate is a democratically expected and desired action, and thus in the best interest of all Lexington Fayette County residents. the last recital, whereas the Council of the Lexington Fayette-Urman County Government recognizes and endorses efforts which will make more accessible the opportunity for citizens to become civically engaged in government and the democratic process, primarily by voting in free and open elections of candidates for local, state, and federal offices. Just a minute longer, Mayor and Councilmembers. Sections 4 and Sections 5 of the body represent the true intent of this resolution. Section 4 reads that the Council of the Lexington Fayette Urban County Government believes fundamental fairness mandates that former felons not be penalized in perpetuity and that the automatic restoration of voting rights serve as reconciliation for the debt paid to society by the service of sentence of incarceration in compliance with probationary and parole conditions. Lastly, Section 5, that the Council of the Lexington Fayette-Urban County Government hereby supports and requests that the Kentucky General Assembly place before the voters of the Commonwealth an amendment to Section 145 of the Kentucky Constitution to grant automatic restoration of voting rights to citizens convicted of a felony. other than treason, intentional killing, a sex crime, or bribery, after expiration of probation, final discharge from parole, or maximum expiration of sentence. May I bring forth my motion. I move to place on the docket for the February 28th Council meeting a resolution expressing support for and requesting the Kentucky General Assembly place before the voters of the Commonwealth an amendment to Section 145 of the Kentucky Constitution to grant automatic restoration of voting rights to persons convicted of a felony other than treason, intentional killing, a sex crime or robbery, after the expiration of probation, final discharge from parole, or maximum expiration of sentence. Kindly move, Mayor. Motion by Council Member Ford, second by Council Member Lawless. Is there any discussion on the motion among council members? All right. Hearing none, then we can take a vote, and then we will ask for public comments. All right. And I'll just ask everyone to vote electronically, please. All in favor of the motion, please say yea and vote electronically. Vote aye. Vote aye. All opposed, no. The motion carries unanimously. All right. Now, for those who wish to speak to this issue, I have several pages of, three pages of those who wish to speak to the issue. And some of you may know our protocol on this, but if you don't, let me share it, that a citizen who is at the podium speaking is allowed three minutes for comments. And if you wish to speak longer than three minutes, then someone else may yield their time to you. For example, if you wish to speak for six minutes instead of three minutes, then someone may yield their time who is here, present, and then you would be able to speak for six minutes. All right? With a 15-minute maximum. Thank you, Councilman Rehlinger. All right. And I would like for you, please, as I call your name and as you come to the podium, if you will please identify yourself, your name, and your address. Thank you. All right. So first on my list is Undine Quinn. Undine. Undine, rather. Thank you. for states that has such draconian laws on the books. If we are serious about creating a vibrant and healthy democracy, then we're going to do the right thing, and we're going to pass this resolution, and we're going to give people their voting rights back. So thank you. Thank you, Ms. Quinn. Next is Reverend Jim Thurman. Hi, my name is Jim Thurman. I live at 3033 Tuscaloosa Lane. Sometimes it's a bad deal to give a Baptist preacher a microphone, an audience, and a podium, but I'll keep it to three minutes. Thank you for this opportunity to speak on behalf of Councilman Ford's resolution, which is currently before you. I know I wear many hats in this community, but tonight I'm here on behalf of the NAACP and its membership to say that we emphatically, unequivocally, without hesitation or reservation, support this resolution. Currently there are over 650,000 men and women that are released from our prisons here in this country each year, and as has been noted, there's over a quarter of a million right here in the state of Kentucky. A lot of these people committed crimes as 18 to 19-year-olds where they perhaps had a child out of wedlock or got caught in a felony conviction of a nonpayment of child support, never committed a serious crime in their life, but they should not have to pay for the rest of their life for a youthful mistake. So, therefore, we are supporting this resolution. No matter what the issue, if their debt has been paid to society, you give them an opportunity to do what you ask of them, and that is to become productive citizens within the community. My question is, how in the hallelujah can you do that if you continue to hold their past mistakes and keep charging them with that? We all know that it's hard to find gainful employment and housing, et cetera, once you become a convicted felon. and then you take away their voting rights, you have totally disenfranchised an individual. There's no wonder why we have a revolving door in our prison system. So we have an opportunity to take some of those obstacles away that would impede their progress to becoming productive citizens and participating in the full democratic process. So we urge you this evening to vote for and pass this resolution. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Thurman. Thank you, Reverend Thurman. Next on the list is Judy Johnson. I am Judy Johnson. I live at 3563 Julian Circle, 40503, and I am here representing the Lexington League of Women Voters. As an organization, we have been working for a long time at national, state, and local levels to end felony disenfranchisement. So we are very pleased and excited to support Councilman Ford's resolution. The statistics he has already cited, a powerful one I think is that Kentucky has the second-highest African American disenfranchisement rate. That's more than one of every five African Americans are ineligible to vote, and that is triple the national rate. A source that we used in our recent study, a felony disenfranchisement professor from the University of Missouri named David Mitchell, says it pretty succinctly, I think. By alienating ex-felons and treating them as non-citizens, felon disenfranchisement laws merely contribute to the difficult process of reintegration for the ex-felon. Mitchell notes that the impact extends beyond the individual. When ex-felons are denied the right to vote, their communities lose voting power. The loss of such power denies the community from having its full voice at the ballot box when trying to mobilize their power and resources to encourage a positive action or prevent an adverse one by politicians. I would point out, then, that in Kentucky, the African-American community has lost substantial voting power. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Johnson. Tanya Vogel. Tanya. Good afternoon. Tana Fogle, 2324 Shannon Drive, 40505. And I had several people yield time for me. I'm glad you said 15 minutes because I was already up to 30 and I would have used them. I am a member of the Kentuckians for the Commonwealth. I'm also one of these people that you'll be voting on today. I'm an ex-University of Kentucky basketball player. I received a B.A. degree in 1984. I played basketball for Kentucky 1978 through 82, but somehow along the way I lost my path. I made a mistake, but I'm not a mistake. My family stood by me. They saw me through my ordeal. I am now the director of Step Into a New Beat under the Workforce Investment Act. And so several of my participants are in the audience. They are taxpaying citizens, and that's what I want to talk about. When Judge Overstreet sentenced me to 10 years in 1991, I served out that time, six years, nine months. At that time, I thought I was done. But I found out that when I came back to my community that I had lost my right to vote. One of the most powerful things that my mom taught me and to be proud of to be able to vote and make decisions. It is about voting for my president, but it's also about voting for who's going to sit on this council and who's going to sit on my school board. And I'm a mother of two and a grandmother of seven. And so I'm here proudly to say that the mistakes I made, I've already worked through those things. and God has saw fit to sit me back on the path that he had designed for me in the first place. And so now I work with other people just like me. I'm going to tell you something. If a person has law and has nothing else to hold on to, they will go back to what they know, the familiar, and that's where they will go back and forth inside and outside our county jails and our prisons. So if you look at House Bill 463 that was introduced, passed at an enormous rate, I don't even know. I went to sleep and woke up, and the bill had passed, so I know they can move. And so House Bill 463 allows people to come out of prison at an earlier time. It does a lot of things, and I'm sure you guys are aware of what it does. But if you ask the person to come back in a holistic manner to get a job, maintain that job, get housing, maintain that housing, Pay your child support. Jump all through the hoops that this penal system has set in front of them. If you ask that person to do that stuff and they become taxpaying citizens like me and we pay our taxes, then pay your taxes, you're a citizen. If you're a citizen, you should be able to vote. See, right now is that time that everybody knows. It's tax time. I'm either going to get a refund or I'm going to owe Uncle Sam. So if Uncle Sam recognizes me as a citizen, then why can't Lexington, Kentucky recognize me as a citizen? Now, I'm going to take my seat, but I need to tell you something. What has happened to me, I'm the poster child for House Bill 70. Governor Patton gave me my first pardon, partial pardon, to vote. However, he missed an indictment number. and I had to pay a $2 fee and sign a short form, which my parole officer helped me do that process. And then the Board of Elections wrote me a nice, nasty letter saying, you better not go to the polls because you still are under the umbrella of being a felon. And so I freaked out, called the Kentuckians for the Commonwealth. What should I do? What should I do? So being a law-abiding citizen now, I followed their instruction. And so I fell under Governor Fletcher. At that time, Governor Fletcher asked for a fee, an essay, and three character references. Now, I've got some nice people in my family, and I won't embarrass her and say her name, but I'm sure she's proud of me, and I'm proud of her. Priscilla Johnson. But anyway, I just want to say that I fell under two governors. What House Bill 70 will allow us to do is just go by one rule and one rule only. I'm here to speak on behalf of the people who don't have a voice. They are voiceless, and I'm here to stand in the shoes for them. I'm asking you all to please seriously consider sending this to the General Assembly and let us become taxpaying citizens, holistic citizens. Isn't it far better for us to be a part of the community instead of keep taking from the community? Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Ms. Tanya Fogle. And, Tanya, I meant to ask who yielded time to you. Okay, I got your names. Would the Senate to be brief, where would you stand? So it's like a seat. Do you want to call the names? Let me ask you. There we go. It's clear. Did any of you all sign up? They did sign up. Okay, so when I call your name. Oh, hey. Thank you, ma'am. Council members. Council members, Stenet. I think it's clear, too. Just so you know, we've already passed it. So you don't have to convince us, but we want to hear from you. But we've already passed it. It's on the docket for Thursday night. So we've already put it on the docket unanimously. To put it on the docket, right. All right, yes. All right, okay, so if I call your name and you stood up and you yielded your time then to Ms. Fogle, you'll not need to come up to the podium then perhaps. Antoine Clark? All right. Stephen Groves? James Parks, Mr. Walker, Mr. Shanks, Mr. Lewis. Oh, Mr. Shanks. Okay. All right. How you doing there, sir? I'm the city council. My name is Emmanuel Shanks. I live at 1053 Winburn Drive, apartment 141. And I'm one of the people that Ms. Fogle spoke about, the ones who has no voice and spoke. Recently, I just came from being incarcerated. And, yeah, I feel like the right to vote is a very significant thing in the African-American community. In fact, in the whole felon population, you all have almost a quarter million people who's not, who's disfranchised by not being allowed to vote. That's a large segment of the state. You know, there's a lot of changes that could be made, and we are not able to speak on behalf of that. You know, and I feel like while I got this three minutes, that I would like to voice that opinion. You know, where a lot of decisions that's made by some of us will not be able to be made. You know, saying that we have the right to vote, you know, saying housing rights, certain things that is missing for the fact that we already paid our debt to society. And I appreciate this time to speak, and I thank you very much. Right. Thank you, Mr. Shanks. Mr. Lewis. Mr. Lewis. All right. Thank you, Mr. Lewis. Mr. Coleman. All right, yielded. Mr. Coleman, you wish to speak or did you yield? All right. All right, sir. All right. I'm having trouble reading this. Forgive me. Janet Turbel? Tucker. Okay. Yes, Janet Tucker. Ms. Tucker, you wish to speak. Thank you, Ms. Tucker. I apologize for my handwriting. My name is Jana Tucker. I live at 417 Johnson Avenue. I'm proud to be in the 1st District and want to thank Representative Ford for, Councilman Farrell Ford for moving this forward. This is a good day and an important move. I'm a member, I'm a retired nurse and a member of Kentuckians for the Commonwealth, and I've I've been doing voter registration here in Lexington for years now. Every election season, going out and going through communities, going in front of stores, etc., trying to get as many people involved in our democratic process as possible here. And what has struck me since the beginning is that when you come across a former felon, so often there's this look of just guilt or shame on their face. They're embarrassed, and they shouldn't be embarrassed. If they've paid their debt to society and are full citizens, they're just other people that have made mistakes like all of us. And when you talk to these people, it's just very hard for them. One woman I talked to said she got into some silly stuff when she was a young girl and was going with the wrong guy and got mixed up and ended up with a felony, and now she's a grandmother, and she's applied several times to get her rights back and doesn't get them back and doesn't know what she's done wrong, so she doesn't know how to correct the process. and it's heartbreaking to talk to a young mother whose kids are asking her why she doesn't vote. When an election's coming up, they're seeing it on TV, and this particular woman actually got tears in her eyes, and it hurt her very deeply. And it not only hurts her, it hurts our whole community because we know that when parents don't vote, it's less likely that the kids will grow up in that tradition and they won't vote. So it hurts every single one of us, and it hurts our democracy. And I just want to thank you for moving this important issue forward. Thank you, Ms. Tucker. Mr. Everett, Anthony Everett? Good afternoon. My name is Anthony Everett. I am a Human Rights Commissioner at Lexington-Fayette Urban County. I don't come here in that capacity today. My address is 2312 Golden Oak Drive in Lexington, Kentucky. I have to put on my glasses for this if you don't mind. I am a member of the Interdenominational Pastors Fellowship of Lexington and Vicinity. I would ask if there are any members if you would stand up at this time. I see Dr. Owens is here. I know others are on their way. We had a meeting this morning. I'm also with NIA Community of Faith, United Methodist Faith Community here in Lexington. We wish to express our support, both organizations, for Councilmember Chris Ford's proposed resolution that urges the Urban County Council to support returning citizens, also what the rest of you calls former felons, we call them returning citizens, their allowance to participate in the democratic process of voting once all criminals sentenced obligations to society are completed. We also support House Bill 70 of the 2013 Kentucky Legislature, which Councilmember Ford's resolution fully supports. Nearly 129,000 adults have completed obligations of the criminal sentences, but are still barred from voting in Kentucky. The overall disenfranchisement rate among African Americans is a little bit higher than what was mentioned. in the nation's highest here in Kentucky, with nearly one in four, not one in five, 23.7% adults barred from voting. I'm getting this information from Carl Wickland, Executive Director of the American Probation and Parole Association. That means more than 10,000 Lexington residents alone who are predominantly African American are affected. That keeps it real. As the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. once stated, the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice. As people of faith who seek to restore justice for returning citizens, we ask you to join the movement to free democracy and restore the vote. I just want to say also I'm a member of the Kentuckians for the Commonwealth as well. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Everett. Mr. Cello, did I pronounce it correctly? Carilla. All right. Yielded. All right. Carilla. Okay. Great. I'm sorry. Oh, Capilla. Capilla. Listen, y'all. Excuse my handwriting, y'all. My name's Greg Capilla. I live at 144 North Hanover. And I just want to tell y'all a story. When I first got involved with Kentucky into the Commonwealth, it was in the 2008 presidential election. It was the first presidential election I could vote in. And my friends and I were very, very excited to get involved. We registered over 750 voters on our campus. And it was really just kind of a whole group of us that were doing this. You know, we were eating lunch together, hanging out all the time. But one of us didn't feel like he could participate, and that was my friend Joey. The system had worked for Joey. You know, Joey was making a lot of mistakes and not really getting caught for it. And then one day he was shoplifting from Rite Aid, and a security guard was chasing him. And so what would have been a misdemeanor became a felony when the security guard went to tackle him, and he brushed him off to prevent him from falling and hitting his head on the curb, and that became strong-armed robbery. He became a felon. He went in for a few years. He got out. He completed his probation. He was in school with us. He had a job. He was doing everything right, but he couldn't participate by voting. And even though he could have totally legally registered folks to vote and participated in that way, that rejection stayed with him. And you could see it in his eyes. You could see him feeling like he was less than the rest of us. And the look that Joey gave us when we would go out into the west side of Bowling Green and knock on doors and register voters has stuck with me. Five years later, I'm in Frankfurt as often as I can be trying to talk to legislators and tell them about Joey and tell them about us. And I really appreciate you all unanimously putting this on the docket, and I hope you all unanimously pass this and send a message to Senate leadership that this is something we need to do and it's the right thing to do. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Capillo. Mr. Halsey. Mr. Roger Halsey. Yield. All right. Thanks, Michelle. All right, sir. Susan Baker-Williams. Thank you all for giving me the opportunity to speak today. I want to make sure everybody knows this. My name is Susan Baker-Williams. I live at 206 Bluegrass Avenue here in Lexington. The zip code is 40505. I, too, am a member of Kentuckians for the Commonwealth and have been so for over nine years. What I have done, well, I'm going to tell you all the reason why I vote. This is not pertinent so much, but I vote for all the veterans who have gone before me. Both my parents were veterans, and I vote for them. So anyway, I'm sorry. But anyway, I have worked for over four years at the Division for Probation and Parole on Main and Mill down here. And then subsequent to that, I worked two and a half years in a maximum security prison in Tennessee. As soon as I moved to Tennessee in August of 2010, I registered to vote. As soon as I moved back here, about two weeks ago, I registered to vote because it's an opportunity I have. However, by working with all the felons and the probationers and the parolees, first of all, you get to use the demeanor and what they believe and what they want. Then working and walking amongst the felons in the prison, you get to see and hear what they want. Again, a lot of them, like the normal society, they don't have any interest in voting, but a lot of them do. And they want to do this. And when they get out of prison, they want to acclimate to society as quickly as possible. And my main thing today is please allow them to vote as much as they want to, for whatever reason they want to, for whichever party. We just want people to vote. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Williams. Jerry Moody. Jerry Moody at 365 North Martin Luther King Boulevard, Apartment A. I know a lot of you pretty well. I've known you for a while. But I don't know if you know why this issue is important to me. After I graduated from UK, I decided to either go to law school or run for office. I ended up running for office, ran against Kathy Stein in the Democratic primary. I won't go into that. But my brother had just moved into town, and he helped me with that campaign. He was there every day helping me out. Mike, I don't know if you remember Mike Moody or not. But he helped me with it. But when it came time to vote, he said, Jerry, I can't vote. I can't vote. And I said, Mike, I will change that law. Mike's passed away now. But thank you for helping me keep that promise to my brother Mike. Thank you. Thanks, Jerry. Teddy Smith Robillard? My name is Teddy Smith Robillard. I live, I forgot, 180 Codell Drive, apartment 203, 40509. I want to thank the mayor and the council for supporting Mr. Ford's resolution and passing it. I'm very grateful to all of you. I first came to Lexington as a preteen, and I was sexually assaulted over that summer. I lost my mind. When I turned 18, I immediately started drinking. And every time I came to Kentucky, I would go on a drunk, and I'd end up in jail and finally in prison. Today, I have been out since 1983. I've done a lot of things to try to help people. I go anywhere, talk about my past. There's things I should be ashamed of, but I'm not because I didn't have control over my mind at some point in time. And I, too, am a member of Kentuckians for the Commonwealth. And it's very important that people be allowed to assimilate back into society. When you go in and out of jail, after a while, you get to a point where you lose hope. Without hope, you will not change. And I had a lot of support from my family and other people that cared about me. So I was able to go to college and do a lot of things to move myself along. I have represented the Commonwealth of Kentucky and the federal government in conferences and on panels and things of that nature. And I have helped to register 400 or 500 people in Kentucky, and I could not vote. And I was very torn up about it. But March last year, I petitioned the governor to get my rights back, and I got them back. And at 6.05 on November the 6th, I was calling people to tell them that I just voted. And I'm here to tell you that it makes a difference to a person. When you pay your debt and you're through, you shouldn't be held down. If you allow people to become human beings again, they will get away from the criminal activity. But as long as you are disenfranchised, people treat you like an animal. you react like an animal. And I just want to add one other thing. Most of the people that re-offend, it is not for new crimes. It's for such things as not having a job, not paying child support, and all these, oh, I almost cursed, excuse me, all these dumb things. But I am grateful to all of you. I am 73 years old until the day I die. I am going to work to see that people get equal rights, equal justice, equal everything under the law because we have paid and we shouldn't be penalized any further. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Robillard. Sarah Thomas. There we go. Hello. My name is Sarah Thomas. I live at 1075 Armstrong Mill Road, 40517, and I am a member of Kentucky and for the Commonwealth. I want to thank Councilmember Ford for bringing this resolution forward, and thank you all for unanimously passing this. I, like Greg, hope that this will unanimously pass through on Thursday as well. I moved to Lexington in 2003, and I began working in restaurants to pay my way through school. I got to know a lot of felons that way. Nobody is doing a background check for somebody to wash dishes. And these are hardworking people who are often working several jobs in order to pay for their children and pay for the mistakes that they have made. And when you are left out of the system, you have little hope. So I urge you all to continue to work towards this resolution, and I urge you to pressure Senate leadership to listen to this resolution and listen to the bill and give people a hope. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Thomas. Abigail Doherty. Hello, my name is Abigail Doherty. I live at 1135 Richmond Road, Lexington, Kentucky, 40502. I'm a member of Kentuckians for the Commonwealth as well. We've already heard from several former felons who have turned their lives around, and they were courageous enough to stay in the state and fight to get their rights back. But that's certainly not the case with everyone. I'm here today to share my family's story. My brother is also a former felon. He got into some trouble as a youth. He was arrested and convicted as a 17-year-old for a felony. But when he got out and found that he could no longer vote and could no longer be an active part of his community, he left the state. He went to Wisconsin where he can vote and he can be involved. Since then, he's gotten a college degree. He is very active in his community through volunteering. He's very politically active, and he started a very successful, very lucrative business. He has multiple employees, and he's contributing in ways that many citizens who have the opportunity don't. I often ask him if he would ever consider coming back to Kentucky, and he always asks me why he would consider coming back to a state when after 10 years of working to put his mistakes behind him, will forever view him as a criminal. I know my brother is not the only felon that has turned his life around, that has left Kentucky for this reason, but hopefully with your continued support and the passage of this resolution, he'll be one of the last. Thank you. Thank you, Abigail. John Littleton. Thank you, Mr. Littleton. Christian Torp. Good afternoon. Christian Torp, 328 Ohio Street in Lexington. Council Member Forge District and very proud of it. I come here today because the restoration of voting rights for former felons is very important to me, both as an attorney and as a Christian. Because if our criminal justice system is to be restorative, then we must allow people to be restored. As a society, we can either work to create the beloved community that Dr. Martin Luther King talked of and gave his life for, or we can destroy the lives of those accused of a crime and give them no hope. As an attorney, I work with people in the criminal justice system almost daily. And I see firsthand what individuals are facing and what they have to go through and contend with. And I am not saying that they're all innocent. The vast majority of them are clearly not. But I've seen so many people who've made some youthful indiscretion, some regular stupidity. I'm sure I'm not accusing anyone of anything, but all of us have made mistakes, some worse than others. But we all do that. And they have paid for that. I've seen people who have made something of their lives, been tax-paying citizens, had children, have a family, and after 40 years they still can't be productive members, and it's crushing on them. I've seen parents who religiously paid their child support, who had it taken out of their paycheck, and yet because the state wasn't taking enough, they find themselves prosecuted for a felony. As a society, do we really want to keep our parents who are doing everything they can to make a living for their children and pay their child support, lose the right to vote, and be members of that society? I've never met a felon who was thinking about that they'd lose the right to vote when they committed their crime. But I have met plenty who have no interest in government, who have no interest in making better, and don't feel represented because, frankly, they're not. Even after jumping all through all the hoops that the criminal justice system puts them through, they need to be allowed to become productive members again, to find restoration. As a Christian, I believe that all people have a chance of redemption and that we all make mistakes, but we need the chance to do better. We can't expect better of people if we're forever holding them down because of their past failure. We have to look to the future and allow them the chance to be better. Without the freedom to make mistakes, there is no freedom at all. And in closing, I'd like to quote Luke 962, No one who puts his hand to the plow and looks back is fit for the kingdom of God. Thank you, and thank you very much for your leadership, and I think Lysondon will be a shining example for all of Kentucky and will gladly follow us. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Torp. Penny Kidd. Sorry. All right. Chandra Mulder? Ms. Mulder here? Thank you for this opportunity. When I was signing that sheet, I thought you had to sign in when you come, so I didn't know what I was signing up for. However, I believe in divine intervention, so if I have an opportunity to speak, I will speak. I'm the education chair for the state for the NAACP. I'm an educational person, and I'm also a psychologist. And in terms of this issue, I think that you do damage to the psyche of people when you say to them that you're a child. Decisions are being made about you that affect you that you don't have a say-so about. And so in the African-American community, if your parents say, we're moving to Texas, and you say, why? They say, because I said so. And that's essentially what we're saying to people. We're saying, you don't have a say. Now, sure, you can go to someone and say, you know, can you vote this way for me? I really believe in this person. However, when that person goes in the booth, you don't know what they're going to do. So you want the opportunity to know for sure that your voice is being heard so you can go in the booth. And since I have two minutes, I don't have anything more to say. I would like for this young man in blue to speak, because I think he had something to say earlier. Thank you. Yes, ma'am. Excuse me. I'm here unexpectedly, but foremost, I'm a former felony. Ms. Fogle, she basically has saved my life as far as getting me back on the right track and knowing that there's people out there that can help you if you just reach out. Because like I heard before, if you do lose hope, you will repeat the same crimes over and over again. And I think this is a big issue with the black community because without a chance to vote, we don't have a chance to speak our mind. And so, you know, as being a felony, it's hard to come back to society knowing that about the job situation, living situation. And so, you know, if you don't have those things, you tend to hang with the wrong people and be in the wrong environment. So I think it would be a good idea for you all to look at that situation as far as giving us our right backs. Thank you. And can you give us your, I'm sorry, I don't think we got your name, sir. Did we get it? Norman Haddix. Mr. Haddix. Yes. Right. Thank you. Thanks very much. And you. Sir? And address, did you give that to him? I just got a new home today. All right. That's fine. Okay. Thanks, Tanya. And one more thing I want to say to John Larson, I seen you somewhere, and I thank you for representing me. You're the reason why I'm free. Yes, sir. All right. The judge is here. All right. Thank you. Mr. James Lewis Thunderbolt Mason, Jr. I know he's here. My name is James Lewis Thunderbolt Mason, Jr. I live at 1748 Jennifer Road, apartment E1. I would like to say this. I think that it's a great thing that this has been passed. Now, I think we need to go a step further in that. When I say that, I'm saying this. A lot of times when a person commits a felony, they don't know what they're doing. And when they do so, I feel and think and believe if they knew what they were doing, they wouldn't do it. On top of that, a lot of times when they have committed that, they are young. They are just coming out. And we have a problem nowadays of parenting our youngs to do the right things. But once they go outside their door, no matter what their ages are, there's no telling what they will get into. And a lot of times, circumstances will kill you more than anything else. And myself, I really feel sorry for all of them. And what we need to do as far as the felony is concerned, we, everybody, irregardless of who it is, they need to be up on what a felony is. How a young person goes out and step into it and they don't know what they're doing. and when we get these people back, we need to try to educate them. We need to try to help them because of the simple fact that they don't know. And with the things that we are, that's out there for us, there's a lot of things that's definitely not right. And another thing, when they walk around here with their pants down to their knees and stuff like that, that's definitely not a norm. That's definitely not what people want to see. And we have an obligation to our young people. And if they are doing something wrong, try to help them in some way. Because if you do it or something like that, somebody's going to be after you. So I'm really proud of this. and after today, I would love to get with Chris Ford and talk to him closely about things because there are some things that I'm definitely trying to do in the community, with the community, as far as the young people are concerned. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mason. April Browning? Yes, Browning. Yeah. Hi, I'm April Browning, 2175 Santa Anita Drive. And I just want to say a little bit about myself because I, too, am a former felon. I'm currently a student of environmental science. I'm a mother. I am a local activist and community organizer. I try to do as much for my community as often as possible that I can. And yet I don't have a voice. I don't have representation. and I think there comes a point when you've changed and you deserve a second chance and you deserve to be heard and with that, that's all I've got thank you thank you April Pastor Joe Owen my name is Joseph L. Owens live at 1205 Hickory Creek Circle 40515 Mayor Gray, Councilpersons thank you so much for this opportunity to speak and thank you Councilman Ford for putting forth this document we want to say thank you for this public input time we're not here to convince you to put it on the docket you've already done that our desire is to be sure that between this time and when the council meets, that other people of power don't change your minds about what you've already decided to do today. You represent us. As you speak to other power people, we're counting upon you to represent us. It is not unusual for the Constitution of the Commonwealth to be amended. through the hundreds of years that have gone by, occasions have presented that the Constitution has been amended to be sure that it represents the political, social, and economic conditions of the times that we live in. It is our prayer and our desire that you help us to do that. This affects members of my family, my friends, and my parishioners. And I stand with others today to say that we're counting on you to do the right thing. Thank you. Thank you, Pastor Owens. Samantha Rodart. Hello. My name is Samantha Rodart. I live at 1079 Kelsey Drive, Lexington, Kentucky 40504. I just want to say thank you for allowing me to speak. And I also want to say it speaks volumes about who you are as council members on the fact that you voted yay for people who couldn't even vote for you. You still stand firm in taking care of the communities, and that includes everyone. That includes all of our former felons and the ones that are not. And that means so very much to us. it goes so deep because it's not just as simple as a former felon. There's a history that comes behind that. And the fact that you're willing to look past that and help these people back into a community that we've already welcomed them back into. I just want to say that you're appreciated by all of us and we're all listening. So thank you. Thank you, Ms. Rodarte. That represents everyone that I have and Mr. Mundy has given me that wishes to speak. We want to thank you all for being here and sharing your thoughts and comments and points of view with us. Thank you very much. This allows us to move on then to continue with motions regarding the docket. So I'll call on Vice Mayor Gordon. Vice Mayor. Thank you, Mayor. I do have a motion to place on the docket something that I was asked to do by public safety, and so I'll be wanting Commissioner Mason to explain a little bit to Council about this. I move to place on the docket for the February 28, 2013, Council meeting a resolution accepting the response of Dr. Ryan Stanton to RFP No. 1-2013 Medical Director Services and authorizing the mayor to execute a professional services agreement with Dr. Ryan Stanton. So move. Second. And I just would ask Commissioner Mason to explain just briefly what this is. Let me acknowledge that we do have a motion and a second. Commissioner Mason. Yes, ma'am. Thank you very much. The emergency medical director position is mandated by KRS for us to run our ambulance service. Dr. Joe Richardson, who had been the emergency medical director for 10 or more years, has decided not to continue going forward and gave us notice that his time would be up February 28th. we had just enough time to get an RFP done to find suitable candidates and conduct the selection process and get a person selected, but we need two readings on Thursday so that we have the medical director under contract starting on March 1st. Thank you, Commissioner. Thank you, Vice Mayor. We have a motion and a second. Is there any discussion on the motion? All right. Hearing none, then we can take a vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. All right. Is anyone? Oops. All right. Council Member Stennett. Thank you, Mayor. Colleagues, as you know, we are currently undertaking our $13 million repaving bond. It's now come time to actually issue that bond and do our normal advertising procedure. And I also want to take an opportunity to remind my colleagues your list is due Friday. March 1st is already here, and I know Public Works would like to have it by Friday so they can proceed with spending the money. But this motion is to place on the docket for February 28th, Council meeting, a resolution authorizing the advertisement for bids and the distribution of a preliminary official statement for the purchase of the principal amount of its one various purpose general obligation bond, series 2013A in amount not to exceed $14 million, and number two, various purpose general obligation refunding bonds series 2013B in a principal amount not to exceed $10 million, and the appropriate ordinances for the issuance of such bonds. So moved. Second. Motion by Council Member Stennett, seconded by Council Member Massadi. Is there any discussion on the motion? All right. Hearing none, then we can take a vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Thank you, Mayor. Yes, sir. Council Member Akers. Thank you, Mayor. I move to place on the docket for the February 28, 2013 Council meeting an ordinance creating sections 1511.1 through 1511.4 of the Code of Ordinances pertaining to the regulation of mobile food unit vendors. Second. It's a motion by Council Member Akers. Second by Council Member Farmer. 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. Are there any other motions? All right. All right. Then that allows us to move on to the summary. Is there a motion to approve the summary of the work session? Second. Motion by Council Member Beard, second by Council Member Myers. 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. We move on to budget amendments. Is there a motion to approve budget amendments? Where was the motion by Council Member Farmer, second by Council Member Akers. Is there any discussion regarding the motion? I have a motion. Okay. All right. Vice Mayor Gordon, I'm sorry. Thank you, Mayor. I have a motion to amend the budget amendment list. And the CAO is here to explain this if anyone has questions. Council members, if you look at your budget amendments on page 8 of the packet, the very first one, I move to amend the list of budget amendments on page 8 through 11 of the work session packet to remove Budget Journal 65452 for fire overtime. Second. Motion by Vice Mayor Gordon, second by Council Member Farmer. Is there any discussion on the motion? 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, so we're back to the original motion. Is there any discussion on the motion? I have one. I have a couple, Mayor. Council Member Farmer. Mine was going to be on the one that we just took off and the one below it, Just for clarity, since we talked about overtime-related things last week, I just wondered about, I guess, the one that is left, 66928. Commissioner Mason, can you help us, please, sir? Thank you. Yes, that was for some overtime funding that actually we incurred some overtime over the holidays, past Christmas and New Year's time frame, and we were plugging in some gaps on that. That was what that's for. and we're going to bring forth a consolidated picture of overtime here in the very near future. So it was budgeted because it doesn't affect the fund balance, it looks like to me. Well, this one came out of the general fund. Funds for overtime. Perfect. Yes. Very good. And then one more, Mayor, or one more set. It's the two about the Sanitary Sewer Fund on page 10 to do with blue sky, and I'm just wondering. This is about a little over or close to half a million dollars. I'm just wanting to make sure of its source and use. That's all. And Mr. Charlie Martin is at the podium. These are excess revenue from us operating the facility for the last 10 years. So before, when it was in bankruptcy, they were keeping the revenue that came from those customers separate. Okay. Because we still had to resolve the bankruptcy, but now that it's resolved and we own the facility, those funds are now available. And so what we're recommending that we do is that we move that into the construction fund to build the pump station and the horseman that we need to build that we've been talking about over the last couple of months. So in a way... You could have clued us in on this. Well, I didn't know about it. If I would have known about it, I would have told you about it in January. This is one of those good news kind of things. It is, it is. One is that our employees were able to operate the system for a lengthy period of time and make money. Yes. And then secondly is that there's been this question about what contribution the customers out there are making to that. This is their money. Thank you, sir. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Council Member Farmer. All right. Is there any further discussion? and if hearing none then we can take a vote all in favor of the motion please indicate by saying aye aye opposed no motion carries this allows us to move on to new business is there a motion approval motion by vice mayor gordon second by council member myers is there any discussion on the motion. Council Member Sadi. Thank you, Mayor. This would be on... I guess it's... I'm trying to get the page. I'm sorry. It's the first one, A, under the... about the Fayette County Courthouse. Commissioner Reed, I have a few questions, if you don't mind. I'm sorry. This was on which... The first, A. I'm sorry. A. On A, okay, I think Commissioner Reed is not here, so John. Oh, he is? But he is assigned Mr. Roderick. It makes a difference. I just have a couple of questions. This is to keep the facility operational. Is that correct? That is providing facilities management, day-to-day services. That's correct. So a total of five years, we've got a cost of over $4 million to keep this just functional. No big capital improvement costs are in. No, that does not include any CIP investments. Do you have any idea what kind of revenue we generate off that property at this time? You get that to me? I'd just be curious what our attendance is like as far as the courthouse. I mean, I know we've got a couple of groups that are housed there. Oh, no, this is the two new courthouses. Oh, my mistake. I was thinking of the older part. Okay, my mistake. Thank you. All right. All right, thank you, Councilman Versadi. Does anyone else wish to speak to new business? All right. Then we can take a vote on the motion. All in favor of the motion, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Allows us to move on to presentations and continuing business. Is there a motion regarding the NDS? So moved. Second. Motion by Council Member Beard, second by Council Member Stennett. 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 next on our continuing business agenda is a report by Council Member Stennett on the Environmental Quality Committees. Thank you, Mayor. We met on February the 12th. The committee first item up for business was the distillery district update. Just a couple points on this update. This is a TIF project. The bond in 2009 for the project was $2.2 million. Of that, $501,000 was spent on a feasibility study and $1.7 million remains. There was a lot of discussion about the future of that area, and I think a lot of people have reserved comment until we have the feasibility study back. which hopefully will be at our April meeting for the distillery district. So there's more dialogue to be had in regards to that area of town. I think there was unanimous support at the meeting in support of that project moving forward. I think there are also some agreements coming forward with that developer in response to the TIF developer agreement. The second item on our agenda was capital projects update. I want to thank our new commissioner, Maloney, for a thorough update on our capital projects with each of your divisions. I really appreciate that. We heard updates from Division of Water Quality on the remedial measure and stormwater plans, as well as traffic engineering in response to several traffic engineering projects. I won't go through the list of all of them, but you can see it in our minutes. Last but not least, our next meeting, we will have the Environmental Policy Public Education on the agenda. The Distillery District will not be on the agenda as it states here in the summary. It will actually be in the April meeting, as well as the GPS project in the Division of Waste Management. will also be at the April meeting tentatively right now. And we adjourned at 1225 p.m. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Council Member Stinnett. And now I'll ask Council Member Farmer for a report on Planning and Public Works Committee. Mayor, thank you. We met on February 12th, and the minutes are in the packet. The vice mayor has alerted me she has some technical changes she'd like to make, so I was going to approach those first before I made commentary. Thank you, Mr. Farmer. There were three technical changes. The first one is on the first page under number two. Just where it starts, Gorton said that she was concerned just to remove the additional. There are two additionals. And then on the next page, just in the third paragraph, the word asked in that first sentence. Say it again one more time. Vorton asked. Vorton asked how? I got you. All right. And then the last page, I think that the third paragraph was a rogue, third paragraph, third line, a rogue program. So last page, Mr. Farmer, third paragraph, third line, rather than rouge. spell checker wouldn't find that oh i do see rouge versus rogue r-o-g-u-e uh-huh yes that's a spell checker doesn't find this i may not have read these in the light of day yeah thank you so and you don't wear rouge thank you vice thank you um so when i ask for approval the minutes it will include those three technical changes um during our meeting we talked about our cultivating relationship with the fave county public schools over salt services which i think we understand we can't really so to speak bill them if you will for additional salt that we would use around any of their facilities but I think the opportunity for us to work together with them in procuring salt and having salt for each other's disposal is something we're going to continue to work on in our committee work. Next, we had kind of a follow-up presentation by the tree board, which they've made several suggestions, and the best of which the outcome was that Council Member Clark has become a member of the tree board, which I think is very helpful for our liaison opportunities there. And certainly there's just some follow-up things. We're going to keep, again, this issue in committee because there's, as you can tell from the length of the minutes, a whole lot of discussion in this area. And then we're following up on some right-of-entry things that was something we began and did some work on originally and got down to a certain part of it where we had, I guess, kind of an in-house discussion between ourselves and the Planning Commission about certain verbiage that we need to enact in order to give our folks the complete right of entry, especially as it relates to things, what I would call water or stormwater or sump pump-related issues. And that is something that we'll have to take back up in committee and make a decision on. We'll bring that forward to the Council at a later time. We talked a few minutes about committee items, and we adjourned without any substantive motions, and so that would be the report. And I would move approval of the minutes as amended. Thank you, Mayor. Motion by Council Member Farmer, second by Council Member Clark. Is there any discussion on the motion? All right. Hearing none, we can take a vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Thank you, Council Member Farmer. Yes, sir. All right. That allows us to move on to we have two presentations today. One regarding the Cisco Road Project, and it will be presented by Commissioner Clay Mason and guests. Thank you, Mayor. This presentation has been a while in coming along. It involves a project with many moving parts and many partner agencies. As we all know, the Chemical Stockpile Emergency Preparedness Program envelops part of Fayette County with what's going on down in Richmond. And for the past year or so, we've been dealing with the prospect of creating a new emergency operations center and combining several other governmental entities within that space. and we are happy today to present some of the preliminary information. This is the work of a number of people here in the city, Pat Duggars folks, David Lucas, Pat Tatum, Rick Curtis, folks from Police and Fire. In addition, this project has gotten the attention of some relatively high levels of the federal government. The administrator of FEMA has approved what we're doing here. Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army Carmen Spencer has also been involved with some of the approvals. State Emergency Management Director General John Hetzel, Wayne Byrd is here for him today, has been intimately involved with this as we go forward. And basically what we're doing is taking a concept that had come up here, as you can see on the screen, starting in 2005 as a public safety operations center, progressing from a 23,000-square-foot building to a 48,000-square-foot building in February of 2009, which did not fit the needs, did not get funded. And so we've re-envisioned that program. We have re-engineered the idea. We have repurposed an existing Lexington building. The Cisco Road facility used to be the juvenile justice facility. We've looked at it. We've also got significant assistance from these state and federal partners to the tune of $3 million committed. So it's with great pleasure I introduce today a couple of folks. Dave Schrader is an architect with Schrader Group. He's got over 20 years in the industry and worked on about 50 emergency operations center projects. Mission Critical Partners is Kevin Murray, and they have an entire staff. He's got about 30 years in the industry working on programs from the technical side of working up emergency operations centers. These folks come to us with this presentation today at no cost to Lexington. Their costs are paid by the CSEP program, by FEMA and the Department of the Army. And I'm just real excited with what they're going to show us here today about the mission and the technology and the footprint of what that building will provide as we go forward in the next couple of years. Well, thank you, Commissioner Mason. David Schrader. Good afternoon, Council members. What we're going to talk to you about is the mission of the project, and our goal here was to develop some kind of consolidated project whereby we could group all the public safety agencies into one group, or all the communications agencies. And the end of the project here that you're going to see is a project at 115 Cisco Road, the former Youth Services Center. The goal is to bring together the CSEP functions for the project, for the area, the local emergency management, Lex Call 311, and your local 911 and public safety dispatch. We're going to talk quickly about two phases in the project as well, and we'll start with where we picked up. This programming document is from back at the end of 2011. We started to work with the various agencies, various organizations in Lexington, and came up with a series of square footages. Now, Commissioner Mason showed you a couple of slides ago that demonstrated where the project had been in total square footage. After having worked with the various agencies, you can see that the square footage program that we came up with was somewhere in the neighborhood of 32,600 square feet. Now, that was prior to having a building to put all of that into. So we came up with what are your actual basic needs, what do you need for the near future. And, again, that was done in a workshop program with the various agencies. It was actually after that that we started to talk about a specific project. And just to give you a little orientation there, that's for Sal's Road. Excuse me just a second. We have a question, I believe, that needs to be asked now by the farmers for context. Yes. And it is context. Context. What is ECC? I know I should know what ECC stands for. Oh, Emergency Communications Center. Sorry, I didn't go through that in specifics. So you're right. You're looking at the Emergency Communications Center, Department of Emergency Management, the Emergency Operations Center is the EOC. Which is different in what capacity? One is the operational group that functions when you have an emergency in Lexington. The other is your call center, your 911 emergency call center. All right. So the ECC is the call center when you call 911. The EOC is what's activated when you have an emergency in the area. And then LexCall goes there, too, it looks like. LexCall 311 is your informational lines. Okay, thank you. Thank you, Mayor. Yes, I'm sorry we didn't go through that specifics. Any other questions before I go on with the program? Okay, so again, it's all of your communications groups consolidated into one. That's really what the crux of this document shows. There's a whole book behind this. This is the very consolidated slide to try to simplify. This is just a little bit of a footnote to Council Member Farmer's comments. I think context is really relevant. This is being presented to, especially to council members who have recently been elected and joined our council. This is pretty much brand new. And the timeline that Commissioner Mason introduced earlier is helpful. Yes. But I think as you go through this, it would be worthwhile to refer to that history. I know you weren't a full part of that, but, for example, right out of the gate, it's moving in February 2009 from almost 50,000 square feet today, 32,000 square feet. So that's part of what a reengineering of this project has represented, and it has been a fairly substantial reengineering exercise or value engineering exercise. Is that a fair statement? That's a very fair statement. Okay. Because at one time this was almost a $50 million project. And we'll demonstrate the number comparison at the end of the presentation. Okay. Thank you. No, we did kick into this without a good context, thinking that the context had already been established. So I appreciate that. This is a democratic body which has entries and exits to it. So we're always learning and acquiring new information. We had a little bit more involvement back to the footnotes, as the mayor noted. That original project back in the almost 50,000 square foot version, we were not involved with the design. We were, however, called in as a reviewer to actually take a look at the project as a whole and determine where there could be some cost-cutting measures, making sure that things were being done in accordance with what a lot of emergency operation centers and 911 centers do. And just a little bit more in context, that was a brand new building on a new site, and it contained a few more functions, but probably the bigger comparison is that when we went back through and did the analysis on that following slide of square footages, you can see you're talking about 32,000 square feet versus that 49,000 demonstrated there. So it's at least 35% less square footage. That's what we found as we went through and did the analysis. And I will actually take questions as we go so we can make sure the context is continued here. So back to this concept again, trying to bring the public safety, emergency communications, and emergency operation functions into one consolidated facility. That was the mission and that was the goal. And obviously CSEP plays a role in this. We actually are working for CSEP as part of establishing these communication centers in the counties surrounding Lexington. And again, if anybody has more questions about the actual acronyms here, we tend to work in acronyms, and that may not be correct. That's a little tough for people to grab. Say that. I didn't hear you. Yeah. So as I had tried to establish here, this was done in a workshop format with all of the departments and agencies, all of the folks that you see up there, or at least representatives from each of those agencies, trying to establish what the square footage they have is today that they need, what their growth patterns might be over a 10- to 15-year period, and what that means in terms of real square footage for the future. So now that's what each of those gross square footage areas shows. Now, this is where we got to originally here. there was a question about where this function might go in the future, and it was proposed that this site, the existing youth services facility at Cisco Road, was an opportunity. Those of you who have not been out to the facility, it's a long, linear building. The facility, though, does have a lot of what we look at for emergency operations centers and 911 centers in terms of building hardening, And that means the ability for the facility to withstand severe weather conditions and things like that. So because it was a youth services facility, it had the capability of accommodating those needs. However, the systems were defunct in the building. They're partially functioning today, but they're not set for future use. And obviously the layout of the facility, this is a closer up of the site, and just kind of a show of how we might begin to view the building. there is a current entry right where the laser pointer is going for the council, for the public, the areas right there on the screen. And that would be proposed as the new public entry to the building. More important to 911 centers and emergency operations centers, though, are a staff entry and a secondary entry with a secure parking area. So the proposal was that a new area go over here. And then really all that we're noting for the rest of the site is a proposed fence line. And I guess the other part of this presentation to tell you is that all we were doing was developing a program, test fitting it into the facility, and figuring out what it might cost in a budgetary means to get that into that facility. So we're not the architects designing the building. We haven't taken any further steps towards that at this point. If this was to establish, does it fit in the building, and what would the budget be to potentially do that? So you have a groundwork to work on if you decide to pursue the project. Now that is... One more time. Yes. Back up one more time. Yes. Okay, so the dotted line is the fence. That's the proposed fence line. Some of that is already fenced, correct? What's the dashed line? Thank you. So the red area that you see in the center, when you work with emergency operations center designs, Typically what they're looking for is a standoff, meaning an area beyond which people can't penetrate with a car or something like that that could create a car bomb and take an emergency operations center or a 911 center offline. So there are some federal guidelines for standoffs, and while they're not codes or laws, they're guidelines for how to develop these kinds of facilities. So the orange line is representing from the potential EOC location in where we thought it might fit in the building. That's showing the standoff, and around that is where you would locate a fence line to make sure that only secure vehicles could get into that area. So that's secondary to the other fence. That's correct. Thank you, sir. Thank you, Mayor. Yes, sir. Now what you're seeing in this plan is the existing floor plan of the Youth Services Center. And so the center of the building has a lot of small pods. Those are basically the youth detention rooms in the facility. And then there are a variety of operational spaces around that, including a gymnasium on the left-hand side of your screen, some of the office-type spaces. And then these are actually courtyards, and I'll demonstrate that for the public as well. Courtyards right in the middle of these areas of the detention spaces, and then that's a very large open courtyard. So this drawing in a larger form would show an awful lot of dashed lines because the dashed lines represent what we would intend to demolish in the space. The great thing about the building is it's not a building where you'd ever worry about bearing walls or anything like that. It's a concrete structure. The concrete structure is set up on columns, and you can see one of those columns here. That's basically the distance between columns supporting the roof structure. Very solid building. Exteriors, several width masonry structures, so it's a very solid structure. And on the roof of that building are a couple of penthouses that hold the current heating, ventilating, and air conditioning system. So that's kind of what we had to work with, and the assumption was you could take all of those interior partitions out and start with almost a warehouse-type space inside. In using that, we took that program that I showed you a little bit earlier here. We took the square footages for each of those, and you can kind of see here, and this is in the handouts that council members have, the various areas that we've assigned from that program. So the green is lobby and building entry. The light blue is ECC, which was 911 center or communication center administration. ECC dispatch was the communication dispatch. Dave, we've got a question from council members. Not a question. Their time has expired, so I'll make a motion to extend it by 10 minutes so we can complete the presentation. Just keeping in accordance with our rules. We're here within five minutes of the end of this. All right. So 10 should be adequate. Yeah, we had a 15-minute setup. And there have been some questions, so it's understandable. So we've got a motion and a second. Unless there's objection, we'll move ahead with the presentation. Thank you for your time. I know it's been a long day. So essentially what you're seeing in the dark blue in the center is the whole emergency operations center support area. So, again, this is the area that goes into activation when you hear about tornadoes, thunderstorms, snowstorms, things like that. The upper right-hand corner, the yellow area, is LexCall 311 area. And, again, these are the square footages from the program and how they fit in the building. Lower right-hand corner, the brown area, is basically your emergency management administration. I'm going to move to the top of the drawing there. You've got an orange area and a red area. That's all data systems and data support. Emergency operation centers, 911 centers, and 311 centers take an awful lot of computer operations and communications. So that's essentially the area laid out for that. The gray area to the upper right of that would be all of the building systems operations, electrical systems, heating, ventilating, air conditioning systems. And the left-hand side of that are the potential 911 or emergency communication center areas and all of the administration for that. Now, if showing a phase one and phase two, I'm going to talk quickly about the phase one and phase two after Kevin talks very briefly about communication systems because they all fit in there. So I'll come right back up for schedule and budget and how that fits in after this, and Kevin's going to talk briefly about communications. Hi, Kevin Murray with Mission Critical Partners. Thank you again for this opportunity. Like Dave, our company focuses on the technology and the integration of technology into facilities like this. Again, we are here on behalf of FEMA. We are hired to do consulting for them in the Army on these projects throughout the country. So really, again, Dave talked about the phases of technology. We did a similar study, very similar to what David did, to where we met with the and toward your technologies that are related to these systems, did some evaluations of where they are, how we can move them. Again, we can't turn 911 off and move it, so we have to figure out how to move it and keep the risks low. So there are some mix of moving of the equipment, some replacement where we need to bring some systems up at the same time. But again, the Phase 1 technology budget that's represented in your handouts really takes a look at the systems through interview and through our engineers being on site of what is needed for EOC operations, your 311, and also shared support, which includes your county IT of fiber and voice over IP telephony system. The second phase is the phase where the 911 call center, which is kind of the heartbeat, where everybody calls 24 by 7 again it's taking the police fire dispatch moving them into a centralized location and having a consolidated at least location for call centers and it's also all the related systems that have to do with traffic news data community alarms alert and warning systems radio systems recorders that go along with that it's also migrating these systems over onto your fiber ring and providing redundancy that allow the system to not have a single point of failure. Your community is in the middle and continues to be in the middle of updates to systems, so as we go, we're always evaluating systems relating to 911, your radio systems, and making changes as this project moves over. What's interesting about this project from a technology standpoint is that we try to look 18 months in the future on exactly what needs to be installed. So with that, I'll turn it back to Dave to talk about the phases. Okay, so technology is a central point to these kinds of buildings. Now, this is a cost estimate. This is a very brief takeoff of what was in your handout. You have a full page for each of these phases, and the phases that are shown in that handout document are combined here. Now, again, this is based on a series of budget cost estimates. This would be taken further as an architect and technology consultant got into your project. But they're also taken from 20-page takeoffs for all material takeoffs of the layouts that we showed you for the Youth Services Center conversion. If you did this project, you could estimate that the budget for the construction, the hard cost for building that building or fitting it out would be somewhere in the neighborhood of $7.9 million. Along with any fit-out costs come all of the design and some other soft cost approvals and things like that that go along with that. And those you would see somewhere in the neighborhood of $700,000 in permitting costs and the neighborhood of $60,000. Kevin just talked about a series of communication systems that would have to be integrated into the building to connect you to the rest of the region. The communication systems costs are somewhere in the neighborhood of $3.5 million. That would be about what that budget would be. In any building that you fit out, you have to add the costs of furniture, computers, and things like that. So you're seeing those two other costs. So a budget estimate at this point to make something like this happen would be in the neighborhood of $13.5 million. That comparison is compared to the first slide that we showed you, and we're going to show you a comparison of those two in a couple of moments here. Is this pretty clear? Okay. There's a schedule layout, and I won't get into this in depth. The phase one was the right-hand side of the drawing, and we had a design, procurement, construction, implementation phase. And phase two was the left-hand side of the drawing. We had a design, procurement, construction, and implementation phase. and the goal was to finish the first half or get the first half under construction with the Emergency Operations Center and the 311 Center and then kick into the design for the other portion so you had continuous construction in that facility and you could kind of occupy it in phases. So the reason that we did this was to demonstrate that this project could hypothetically start, if it hypothetically started immediately, it could all be completed by July of 2015 and you would have all of your emergency operations and communication systems moved into that facility by July 2015. And the reason that's important is because we also talked about cash flow. Commissioner Mason talked at the beginning about the federal funds that have been committed already to the project to the tune of $3 million in the second column. And that's important because we wanted to talk about the approximate cash flow over those next three years from 2013 to 2015, and within those phases what the cost breakout might be. So to do the things, if somebody started fairly soon on the design of this, through 2013 you might spend approximately $800,000 in design and the beginnings of site implementation. 2014 is the crux of the work where there's an awful lot of construction. That would be just shy of about $10 million worth of construction. And 2015 would be the closeout of the second phase, and the implementation of the rest of the technology to the tune of about 3.2. So that matches that 13.5 I showed you on the prior slide. Now, we know we have the committed FEMA funds of $3 million. We've discussed the opportunity to have the 311 apportion funds also to the project of about $1.5 million for fiscal years 2014 and 2015. And what that shows is over 2014 and 2015, then, there would be some additional general funds needed for the project of just shy of $5 million in 2014 and $1.7 million in 2015. So that's kind of how the cash flow might work out if you took that building, converted it with the budgets we just talked about, somebody carrying that project forward. Commissioner Mason, do you want to finish the comparison, and then we can go back to questions? Yeah, what button do you need for this? The right-hand button. Yeah. This is the last slide showing the comparison between 2009 and 2013. You can see it's a dramatic difference. There are also some economies of scale built into this project. We've already moved our Division of Emergency Management and EOC out of a lease in a building that was a very bad lease for us. They are already occupying this Cisco Road property. When the construction gets along to a certain point, the 311 folks will move out there, and that space right down here on Main Street is freed up to either take in another government agency that has a lease elsewhere or lease that out on the retail market. the 9-1-1 dispatch arena will create some opportunities for decreased staff because right now they're housed in in two buildings when we put them together we'll have less need for soup for some supervision and possibly some call takers and dispatchers the the building will be a LEED building, and we just feel like it's a wonderful project. So with that, we'll open up for questions. All right. We have Council Member Stenney, have you signed up for this already? Okay. I didn't know whether this was now or before. Chris, before, if we're holding on those numbers, I think the ones that David, the $13 million in terms of total capital, based on these hypothetical contributions. Yes. Right. So that number is, instead of $13.5, the total capital cost would be $13.5, but it could be offset in terms of cost to the city by the potential $6 million. So the net capital cost, at least hypothetically, the target would be in the neighborhood of $6.7 million, right? We have a commitment of the $3 million from FEMA. do have a commitment there and the other is the other is possible likely perhaps is that correct 311 apportion funds right all right and um yeah we're all also always looking for other grant opportunities there are some hazard mitigation grants that we might be able to utilize in the construction process with things like windows and things so in terms of just comparing if you go to Next slide. I think maybe keeping in mind that your target, instead of $13.5 million as a cost or capital cost to the city, would be $6.7 million would be the target. Yes. What you're trying to achieve. Okay. Council Member Stenet. Thank you, Mayor. Commissioner, thank you for on a project that you inherited when you were appointed as commissioner. Going way back to 2007, this has evolved tremendously. So thank you for your leadership going forward and presenting us with a new option for our new EOC center. I know that there's a lot of discussion that we probably need to have. We may not be able to have it all today, so I would recommend maybe a workshop. Sure. And it would be good to hear from the directors of those departments that we'll be moving to and get some of their feedback because some of them have been around since 2007. We've all started hearing about this. Those have been on the council. But I guess my biggest question, and, again, thank you for your effort and the consultants' work on this, But going back to 2007, we were presenting a much different plan. And obviously it evolved to 2009's ultimate number of 38 million, which a lot of us had a lot of sticker shock at the time. But I think I would like to hear from David Lucas on the differences between back then, because I think he was in its infancy an author of that plan, as to where we came from. I think it's good to know that and why we were even thinking about a $38 million facility at that time. I would ask you this question, but you weren't back there in 2007. I think he authored it back then. So I'd like to hear why we were even considering. I think the public should want to hear why a $38 million was even talked about. I kind of feel like Mark McGuire in front of Congress. I'm not here to talk about the past. I'm here to talk about going forward. I understand, but it's a good road map. Well, I'm serious because I will say this. that, and Wayne, if you'd like to come up and just speak for Kentucky Emergency Management, one of the first things that I did was really re-engage our state partners to join us with this venture. And their offer of $3 million of working with the federal folks and getting that $3 million going forward was not something that took one meeting. And so I think that the $13 million figure is really what we need to highlight because this plan encapsulates much of what was going to go into that building. I can say that when you lease a piece of property somewhere for an extended period of time and plan on building from the ground up a new building, it's obviously going to be more than $13 million. And that's why this was so intriguing for us to look at a concrete structure with a concrete roof to build that's going to be hardened already against weather. And, Commissioner, I'm ecstatic to hear that. I really am. But I think it's important to understand why the community was asked and this council was asked to vote on a $38 million plan, and gladly we didn't, because obviously this is a better option. It saves the taxpayer dollars. I don't dispute that. But I just want to know why we even considered it. What are we giving up back then? And I think that Mr. Lucas, I'd like to hear what we were thinking about from him. I didn't ask for anyone else. I asked for Mr. Lucas. All due respect. I just want to hear about why $38 million? Wait a minute. Excuse me. If I read Robert's rules correctly, then the chair does ask for someone to come to the podium. If the chair can't answer or who is at the podium. Now, I don't think anybody is trying to. Maybe you know something that I don't, Council Member Stennett. But I was there when we looked at this project. I challenged it. It was 43,000 square feet. It was $1,000 a square foot. It came down to $38 million from $43 million. That was after value engineering. And then it was moved to another level of value engineering when we did not endorse it. and did not authorize it moving forward. Now, maybe there's something that Mr. Lucas knows that we don't. Is that what this is designed to accomplish? No, I'm not trying to put it in. No, I just want to know why this council was asked to vote in 2009 on $38 million, and what are we giving up today now? What's the difference? And I thought he authored that and brought it to council, and I just want to hear the background. That's simply that. Okay. Dave was brought in to review based on looking at EOCs around the country. And his firm was brought in because at that time the CSEP program was getting closer and closer to the actual destruction of the chemical stockpile. And that's what has driven some of this is that the closer they get in Richmond to finishing that destruction factory, the further ahead we need to be to have our ducks in a row. And so he was brought in as a national expert to take a look at that project, and he can speak to some of that. Well, this isn't a comfortable position, but the – It rarely is here. What you did see a lot of after – or post-9-11, you did see a lot of communities go out and start from scratch and say, give me the piece of property, take all the federal guidelines and apply every federal guideline there is, which means stretching out that hardened line that I talked about as far as you could get it. It meant fully redundant buildings, completely redundant, which, by the way, our concept is fully redundant electrically, HVAC-wise as well. But it was different in that you were developing high-volume communication spaces with lots of space like the space we're in and things like that. Those are the kinds of things that you won't see in the U.S. Services Center. You're going to see a low ceiling height because that's all we have to work with in there. A new building would hypothetically be designed with high volumes, which that other building was. You did have some other communication functions in that building as well that did add something to that. So not speaking for the previous designers, but speaking as one of the people who reviewed the project, it was a good project. It was a big project. It's not unlike some of the other larger metropolitan areas that we see developing as well, and it was part of what was happening in the trends. If you make a decision and say that's beyond our means and let's revisit something, then you look at a building like this, and we can get the square footages that we need in general out of there, and the function is going to be there. It's just not going to be the high-volume glitzy 911 space or emergency operations center. It's going to be very functional operational spaces. That's probably a little bit of the difference between the two. And that's what I wanted to hear, so thank you. I think it's important to understand what we're giving up for this facility. So my time's up. But, Commissioner, can you address my last question, what we're going to do with the land out there at Coldstream? I don't know that. We've had a few discussions, but we have really no. We still have a long-term lease that we've paid. But I would like to have Wayne Byrd has come in from State Emergency Management. I'd like to give him an opportunity to say a few words here today. Thank you, Commissioner. Mayor, distinguished commissioners, first of all, let me say I represent General, our Director of Kentucky Emergency Management, John Hetzel. He apologized he couldn't make today due to an exercise we're having. But General Hetzel is totally committed to this project. We cannot say enough for the job that Commissioner Mason, Rick Curtis, and the emergency management team have done. We're totally committed. This is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity with the funding we have from FEMA. We think it's a critically important project, not only to the Commonwealth, to the region, but to Fayette County. Just a year ago, if you remember, a year ago this Friday coming, we were sitting here, this community and communities throughout the Commonwealth, thinking about tornadoes going across our Commonwealth. So we are preparing for a CSEP exercise, and that's the chemical stockpile, as Commissioner Mason said, down in Madison County. But we have a regional response to that. We have FEMA's provided an opportunity to fund part of this project for us. I think the stewardship that Commissioner Mason, Rick Curtis, and their team have put together to lower the project down to a reasonable level of funding and to move forward through self-help. They've done an amazing job in the Cisco Road property to move that forward. Director Hetzel is very impressed with that, as everyone in Kentucky Emergency Management cannot applaud the job that Rick Curtis is doing on a day-to-day basis. while our emergency management team in Fayette County can concentrate on their day-to-day activities. So having a coordinated and public service, public safety, all your emergency services in one location, but the communications and the space they need is critically important, I think, not only to the Commonwealth but to this community. And we're fully behind what you're doing, Mayor and Commissioners. Thank you. Thanks, sir. We've got several council members that wish to speak. I think that Council Member Myers has to leave at 5, and I've suggested that it's okay for him to ask a question now, if that's all right with the rest of you, please. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. And I'm going upstairs for another meeting. I'll be back down if this don't change. But thank you, Mayor, very much, and thank you, Council, for letting me go ahead. Commissioner, I just have one question. I can ask it, and I can answer it on camera, and I can see it later. But when you look at page 14, I think it is, it has the budget and the cash flow. Could you have someone speak to, when you look at this building when it's done and the use that it's going to have, there's going to be probably homeland security usage in there maybe? If there's not, then tell me that. Because originally we were going to have homeland security, U911, everybody concentrated in this same building. So my question is if that's going to be the case in the future, and this will probably be something that the state uses for regional emergencies as well as what we do locally. I realize the state's here, and they've come in and they're working with the federal government with FEMA for that $3 million. But what else is the federal government going to put in from Homeland Security or other pots and monies if, in fact, we're going to use it for those purposes? If we're not, then I understand that. But if we are in the state regionally, if they're going to use this for a regional command center, what are they putting in because Fayette County shouldn't have to bear the cost for everybody's uses? Well, those conversations have occurred just to some general degree. The federal government is ahead of us on some of their budgeting in terms of programs. They budget about three years out with the CSEP program. And can I interrupt for a second? Is CSEP, is that Homeland Security, or what part is it? No, it's the FEMA Army program down in Richmond. Okay. To this point, there really isn't a Homeland Security component of what we're doing here. Okay. But we have had discussions, and we will continue to have discussions, to try and find other pots of money within the CSEP arena that might be able to get pushed in our direction if other localities do not need them. Okay. Thank you. All right. Thank you, Mayor. Let me try to give a perspective on where we are on this presentation and on the next one that's coming up and on the hard stop that we've got at 6 o'clock for the hearing for the zone change. There are four council members signed up on this issue, which we know is relevant and very important to ask a question. Council Member Stenet, I think it's also relevant that we, for the interests of those who are viewing this in the public, But Council Member Stennett was, and we were all discussing the history of this project going back to 2008, which you all illustrated, Commissioner. I think what he, what I, what others are wanting to ensure is that the public understands, that all our council members understand, that this project at one time was programmed at a very robust level. I think that's a fair way of describing it. Is that David? All right. I remember myself inquiring about it, why, for example, would Frankfurt spend $10 million on an emergency operations center, and Louisville spend $20 million, and we were going to spend $40 million at one time. And so that was the context of the conversation. What we were really doing was, you know, this was also, if you look at those dates, it was in the Halcyon days. It was in the salad days. 2008 was when the world changed. And if you'll notice, February of 2009 was when that chart stopped. Okay, that's when the world changed. And even all of the requirements, I think I heard you saying, Mr. Schrader, that FEMA requirements and other requirements, government requirements, have adapted and changed and adjusted since then. Is that a fair statement? I don't think they've adjusted. I think we've rationalized what we're doing. Okay, right. Rationalized what we were doing. Okay. That's a nice way of saying that value engineering, right? So what I translated you to say was that we are, through this model, through this program, we, the city, will still achieve the programming requirements that are expected. Yes. Okay. All right. Okay. I think that, Council Member Standard, is that helpful for what you were looking for? We would be glad to. Well, he asked for a workshop, and you all asked for a workshop, so we've got to dig into this some more. That's exactly what I was going to say. If you would like to let me work on a workshop date, and we can turn it over to the Senior Citizen Center if there's any other. I mean, whatever your pleasure is. Well, I know that council members are still, if they're cued and they wish to speak, So let's go ahead and try to do that with the goal of digging more into it in a workshop, into more granular detail, and even tracking the history once more time. Let's go back to that. Okay. Council Member Lane. Okay. I did have several questions, but personally, I think that when a council member asked a question that we should not say you can't have somebody come up and answer it. I don't think that's the appropriate way to treat a council member at the meeting. Because I would have liked to have heard what Mr. Lucas had to say also, because I also was involved in that in 2009, and I'm just curious what the differences were. Here again, I don't want to make a big deal. I pretty much agree that the cost was too high back then, and I didn't propose that we go forward with the project. And I do believe that when we started working on this, which I guess was around 2007, that was shortly after we'd had the attack of the World Trade Center, and there was a stronger emphasis of having a good emergency management center. And this particular facility, as I recall, is going to be backing up the state's emergency operations center and would maybe work with other counties in the area. But anyway, that's all I want to say. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Council Member Lane. And to the question of the, let me just say that I have no objection to Mr. Lucas speaking. the floor was being held by the commissioner and the presentation and the indication that I received was that the commissioner wished to deal with this question and I will ask him if Mr. Lucas can add to the discussion then we should not prevent him from doing that so if you think commissioner then Mr. Lucas And if Mr. Lucas, I mean, we are all about transparency, and we do not want to encourage anything other than that. So, David, if you wish to come up to the microphone, I think that would satisfy some concern that maybe we might not be sharing as much of the background as is appropriate. Well, I think I can now be more uncomfortable than when David Schrader was up here. Okay. I would like to say, what was the original question at the time? The original question was how did, I'm going to translate it. The original question would be, we are today talking about a $13 million project in an existing facility owned by the city, and at one time we were talking about a north of, I see, $38 million, but I remember very specifically it being $43 million at one time. And then we value engineered it down to $38.5 million. So that has to do with programming requirements, who was in the facility, a lot. Well, I'll try to be brief because if we're going to do a workshop, I think that would be the appropriate place to go into a lot of it. I believe Mr. Schrader gave a nice bird's-eye view of the difference between the two. They were two different concepts. The proposal you see now for the Cisco Road is more to what can we fit into the facility, and the other one was what is our need, and let's build a facility around that. Things have changed over the years, but in the proposal, the $38 million proposal had a lot of other things in there that were not in this one. A lot of it are related to the radio project, which we have moved forward with and done elsewhere. Those were embedded into the $38 million cost, including a tower at that site, and this Cisco Road does not. So there are a lot of differences. I think a workshop, we could outline those in much greater detail. But to compare the two side by side is not really fair to either location because they are two different concepts. All right. Council Member Lane. I just had one quick follow-up question. When we do own the property out at CoalStream for 100 years or 99 years or whatever, do we actually look at using that site and building a building from scratch rather than renovating it? Is there a huge savings by using the existing building? Do we have any numbers on that at all? We did not compare that because we had a building that was already mothballed that we could reconfigure that was already hardened with the concrete walls and concrete roof, so we didn't really look at the Coldstream facility. Well, as you may know, I've been in real estate a long time. Sometimes it costs more to renovate than to build from scratch, but I decided to ask that question because we do own other property also. Thank you. Council Member Massadi. Mayor, if Alex Trebek ever retires, you've got the job. Commissioner Mason, real quick, just the thing that jumps out on me, it says decreased staffing, And I know that's always been an issue with E911 and all that. Can you just give me a – We're not – I don't think – we're not going to slash positions. It's just a situation of when you put the 911 center at fire and the 911 center at police together. There are probably situations where we wouldn't have to bring somebody in on overtime. Some of those kind of things would go down. and some of those figures would smooth out when we get cross-trained and if we get to the point of getting one common dispatch system. So you're basically combining these? Yes, they're going to be combined in the same room. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Mossadi. Council Member Farmer. Thank you, Mayor. Commissioner, mine are really placeholders for the next discussion. It would benefit me from having been here and then not being here and coming back to see a really long T account of what all we've spent and what all we've committed to in relation to what we're talking about now. I know that you weren't here for some of that. I wasn't here for some of that. I would just, by way of the discussion, like to see that. And then secondarily, and I know that you know and others, and it's in the committee structure, I know that resources from FEMA are not limitless. And I continue to have interest in the tornado safety aspect of what FEMA can help us do. And when we're having a workshop discussion, I just want to make sure that we don't use up all of their resources on this when we might want to dedicate some of them somewhere else to. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Council Member Farmer. Council Member Beard. Thank you, Mayor. Commissioner? Yes. The space that we're leaving from, what do we intend to do with that you know nature abhors a vacuum and if there's empty space somewhere along the line we'll go out and hire 26 people to go in there and do something right the space we have left from to date only consists of the lease for the building up on north martin Luther King. That was $125,000 a year. We have vacated that building, gotten out from underneath that lease. In the future, when 311 goes out there, then that opens up their spot right down here on Main Street. The 911 folks moving from fire, they have the upstairs of an outbuilding up at fire station one. I'm sure fire can reutilize that in some fashion for office space. And then the 911 call center over here, police, is a pretty sizable room. Police will be able to refunction that. I'm sure with, you know, somebody will move in there. I'm not sure. We haven't really looked that far down yet to see who would fill it in, but that would be a very valuable space for them as well that somebody will fill it in. Well, but I guess my question, the next step in my question is that there's going to be costs for that, and are those costs factored into this, or is that something that hasn't been done yet? Those reconfiguration costs are not factored into this. And, Mayor? Yes, sir. Caught you. You mentioned that the facility out at Coldstream was robust. As I remember, we were talking about two sources from separate substations for KU to put in for us. I'd forgotten that. The computer situation was also talked about at one point that it needed to get out of here. It needed to go somewhere, and that was not going to be cheap. So I don't know whether those were factored into the $38 million or the $43 million. I believe that is some of the function that that building was going to hold that pushed the price. But those are details that we weren't prepared to talk about today. We can talk about it at the workshop. Well, that's fine. And we were somewhat excited about the idea of doing that. We just couldn't strike oil to be able to pull that off. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Council Member Beard. That's all that's signed up among Council members. I think the homework, if we could summarize it for the workshop, I think it would be worthwhile to do a comparison evaluation matrix that just illustrates what the programming requirements were when the project was at the higher level and what they represent today. It would be helpful for the council, I'm sure. Okay. All right. Rick? Oh, all right. I thought she was. All right, sir. Okay. Thanks, everybody. Thank you. Thank you. All right. We can move on now to the presentation on the Senior Center, and it will be introduced by Commissioner Beth. Beth, are you going to introduce? Yeah, okay. Okay, Ellen and so Commissioner Mills will introduce our guests with Lifespan Design Studio. And Beth, before you get going, I know that Council Member Henson and Council Member Clark and I are all scheduled to be at the annual meeting of the Southland Association, Business Association, at 6 o'clock. So we'll need to leave at a quarter to 6, and then you've got to be. There's also a zone change hearing. That's at 6. At 6, which is why I'm not going to the Southland meeting. Oh, okay. I have not much to say except that the gallows from Lifespan Design Studio are coming back to talk about the two sites. The council asked that Continental Inn be reviewed in depth, and the administration has brought a new site to us at the Turflam Mall as an option. So they're going to look at those two sites, and I'm going to turn it over to them. Good afternoon. Thank you for having us back. We appreciate the opportunity to meet with you all again today. As you'll recall, we were asked to work with the Department of Social Services and the Senior Services Commission for the preliminary evaluation of sites identified by the city for a new facility to replace the Senior Center on Nicholasville Road. The department has prioritized issues that impact the intended uses and users of the facility in the site selection process. As Senior Center and Design for Aging Specialists, our focus was primarily upon participant, staff, and operations-centered issues. This is the first step in a selection process that won't be complete until more detailed follow-up evaluations involving civil engineers and others as needed are completed on the sites that pass this initial review. The last time we met with you, we reported on the evaluation of six sites. Three of the six did not meet parameters that had been identified as critical to meeting the goals of this project. The Verizon building near the intersection of Harrodsburg and Lane Allen, the vacant Winn-Dixie on South Broadway, and the current Senior Center location all were eliminated from further consideration because of challenges to the safety and ease of site access and egress and available site and or interior space to accommodate the project goals. We also, at that time, were asked to take a quick look at three additional sites, and since none of the three appeared to meet the critical criteria, they were not formally evaluated. Since that work session, we have evaluated two more sites in detail, the Continental Inn property at New Circle and Eastland Parkway as requested at the last work session, and a five-acre parcel on the Turflin Mall site at the request of the city administration, and we're here today to present our findings. I'm going to start with the Continental Insight, just to give you some background. The site is 10.6 acres. It sits outside of New Circle Road at the intersection of Winchester Road. The site is accessible by Lex Tran buses. It is in reasonable proximity to known concentrations of senior residents in the community. It's about 4.3 miles from the current senior center, which is about a 15-minute drive using the main arteries between the two. This is the property itself. As mentioned, it is accessible off of New Circle Road onto Eastland Parkway. Coming off of Winchester, either eastbound or westbound, there are ramps. And if I can identify the laser. No? I thought there was. Well, anyway, the ramps that come off of Winchester merge along the east side of New Circle Road. It is also flanked on the right-hand side, on the east side, by Spencerian College. The entrance drive to Spencerian is off of Eastland Parkway as well. Beyond that to the east is Jennifer Road and the apartments that run along Jennifer Road. The existing site is tiered. There is currently a retaining wall on that site from when part of the building was removed, and much of the site still has existing structures as well as the majority of the site is still paved. This is the site plan that was given to us by the property representative. The two subparcels on here, the triangulated piece on the top, is Spencerian parking and then the lower rectangular portion on the right-hand side as well is Spenserian College and their parking area as well. So the rest of the site is the 10.6 acres that we are looking at right now. There are a few easements on the property. None of them really affect us with regard to any development on the property. Certainly based on the previous use and the current use of the adjacent properties, We believe utilities are available, and stormwater management does not seem to be a problem. This site usage diagram shows a little bit more detail on how we presume the site could be used. The proposed senior center is 46,000 square feet. We're programmed for 200 or more parking spaces. We've identified the usage on the property so that the entrance to the senior center property would be along Eastland Parkway, as far away from New Circle Road as possible, so we don't end up being too close to that for a traffic issue. The building is facing Eastland Parkway with the parking lot in front of it for security reasons, and looking at the overall site, we certainly believe that there's reasonable site availability for either additions to the building and expansion of parking, as well as outdoor amenities. With that in mind, however, we started looking at this property with the five critical issues of criteria that we reviewed all of our properties with. And based on that, we have decided that the site does not meet the criteria for ease and safety of the site for access and egress. I'll give you more definition to that. This is a photograph looking toward Winchester Road, and you can see that there are two ramps that merge coming off of Winchester coming down to New Circle Road. We have viewed some traffic patterns and troubles with that, and I'll explain those a little bit later. when you come off of that merged area there is a short travel distance between where those two ramps merge and the corner of Eastland Parkway at an extent of New Circle Road the cars coming off of the ramp that don't wish to turn right have to merge to the left, the cars on New Circle Road that wish to make a right hand turn have to merge right and as I said it's a very short distance involved there. While visiting the site on numerous occasions, we observed cars stopping in the middle of the road because they weren't able to make their turn, swerving from one side to the other, horn sounding, and avoiding collisions in each one of those cases. Although we know that looking at the overall property, that there are other means of getting to the site in review of the site with the senior center, participants, we believe that most people would use the major arteries to get to the site. We also observed backed-up rush hour traffic on New Circle Road going south toward Richmond Avenue. This was taken at 5 o'clock, and we observed significant traffic issues at that time, and we do have additional information that we can share with you about how many actual daily drive-bys there are on all of the streets. But it is an extremely busy area, especially during rush hour. We also looked at the overall area from a safety standpoint and using raids online and information provided by the Lexington Police Department. It was demonstrated there is a high frequency of incident at this address, both on adjacent properties as well as many that occur on the Spencerian College property itself. The area that's outlined in blue, there were 729 calls reported to the police in 2011 and 695 calls reported in 2012. Although we do not have any gauge of the safety perceptions of this community, we feel that those are very important numbers overall. Just looking at the property a little bit to give you some reference points, this would be looking across to the apartments that are beyond the property and the Spenserium parking. You can see that there certainly is still a lot of demolition that's necessary on the property as well, even though much of the buildings have been raised down to the ground. The property is covered, as I mentioned before, significantly. Still with asphalt, there still is a portion of building. There is an elevator tower, and there is a retaining wall. We do not have any environmental impact reports at this time. You can see, again, that there still is significant slabs, concrete sidewalk, asphalt parking lots, and existing buildings still on the site. Here you can see the retaining wall with the elevator tower next to it. Certainly the retaining wall grading can be reworked so that the site does not have significant change in elevation. We certainly would recommend that from an issue of safety and security viewed by police and just general safety on the property. This is actually showing that although many portions of the building have been removed down to grade, there is still plumbing and still ceramic tile showing where the showers were. So that leads us to believe that certainly all of the foundation and much of the underground infrastructure to the building certainly exists still on the site, all lending itself to additional costs for demolition. The second property that we've looked at just became known to us recently, and that is the Turflin Mall site. This site is along Harrodsburg Road. It's 1.9 miles from the existing senior center. It was recently purchased, and the new owner intends to develop it, redeveloping the site, tearing down a major portion of the mall. Right now, we know that that developer is looking at or having discussions with the possibility of a medical office building and possibly a health club fitness center. The early discussions are that the staples which is on the property would remain. The Dillard's building may remain to be renovated or may be torn down. The discussion has been that we would consider five acres along the backside of the property next to the existing strip center there to the north and the area which basically is just outside beyond the abandoned movie theater area on the property. This would give us access off of Harrodsburg. There is a light that exists on Harrodsburg coming into the property. Additionally, there is a light off of Lane Allen onto Garden Springs, which is the site beyond the shopping center. So there is access to the property from the north side as well. There is also access to the shopping center, not at a light, but you do have good views both up and down Lane Allen at that point. There is significant concentrations of seniors in this area, and the property is bordered on two sides by apartment buildings, one of them being the Emerson Senior Center Towers. Again, here's the existing property, and we would be proposing to go to the north side of this, as I mentioned. The Home Depot owns that parcel on the right-hand side along Lane Allen, and the Verizon building is that lower right-hand corner. With the fact that this site has been used as it has been, we certainly don't anticipate any issue with utilities or stormwater management, considering the entire site right now is impervious. Reviewing this again against the five criteria that were critical in review of the site, this has passed in the evaluation. Although Harrodsburg is a major artery, we have looked at that for the Springs Insight and this site with regard to traffic flow and are very comfortable with the efficiency of the traffic flow being managed by traffic lights. There are turning lanes at numerous locations on this property that come into play, and a direct route into the property could be directed straight to the back off of Harrodsburg toward the Senior Center. This is coming up Harrodsburg with the Turflin Mall site on the left-hand side. There are turning lanes at the lights. This is looking back toward Harrodsburg with the Dillards building on the left-hand side. This currently in the parking lot configuration is a major drive thoroughfare to get to the back of the property. This is the Emerson Center. This is 176 units of senior housing immediately adjacent to the property. and this is the access out of the property or the adjacent shopping center property looking at Lane Allen you do have views both directions of Lane Allen to to view traffic coming and going as I mentioned before beyond this at Garden Springs there is also a traffic light as you can see the site is predominantly flat, currently paved, and in talking to the owner, they were certainly willing to talk about the specifics of location of where the senior center may be located. This is the back side of the Home Depot. The parking lot was empty when we were there. We've been told that it's usually empty. It is used, though, primarily for access to deliveries and pickup at the back side of the Home Depot. This is the shopping center to the north of the property, the back side of the shopping center, and the owner of the property did express his understanding that landscaping would be desirable to soften that visual. The site does have pedestrian access both to the shopping center and to both apartment complexes. This is the senior housing tower that you can see in the distance. And then this diagram is showing a proposed usage location so that it would be easily accessible off of Lane Allen as well as coming off of Harrodsburg there at the light. There are a couple of unknowns, however, that we do have concerns with. One of them is the fact that since the property has just recently been purchased, there is no master plan for the property, and we did express that concern with the owner. So we don't know who the neighbors of the senior center will be as this property is developed. We don't know what the traffic patterns on the property will be and what the volume of traffic will be. And we also don't know how long, if the senior center was to move forward on this property, how long the site would essentially be part of a construction site for the new developments that would occur on the property. However, what we have stated is that if the city could participate in developing the parameters of how this site would be developed and be as friendly to the senior center and its participants, we felt that that would be a real advantage to the development of the property. Additionally, the visibility of this site is not as direct as we would like. You really can't see the site off of Lane Allen because of the topography. and depending on how much of the mall was removed, you may or may not be able to see the senior center on the property at all. Certainly signage would be a solution there. The only issue that we take then with regard to visual contact is the fact from a safety standpoint, we certainly would hope that the police would actually do a drive-through of the property on a regular basis. So with that in mind, as we've looked at the eight sites and evaluated those, we've come to the recommendation that there are three sites that really still should be continued to be looked at, and that is the Springs Inn site, the Kroger-Beaumont site, both which we talked about before, and the Turflin Mall site. The additional issues that need to be discussed on these sites would be their opportunities, limitations, and the costs certainly associated with their development. So with that, we open it to questions and comments. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks, Doug. Council Member Stennett is signed up, and any other council members, please sign on. Thank you, Mayor. I don't have any questions right now, but I want to thank you all for giving us the opportunity to have this discussion and doing your preliminary analysis of both the new sites and the old ones, I still think the decision for this council to make in terms of where the new Senior Citizen Center will be are still out to the jury. Because I think, you know, in the words of the late Paul Harvey, now let's hear the rest of the story, especially when it comes to the Continental Insight. Several things were mentioned in the presentation on Turflin's site. Let me kind of give the council an overview of the Continental Insight. Within close proximity to the Continental Insight, there are actually five assisted living senior facilities. That wasn't mentioned, but yet Turfland Mall, the Emerson Center, was definitely mentioned twice. You have Lexington's one of three police precincts within a quarter mile of this site. That wasn't mentioned in here. You have the new federally funded and built last year's Social Security office, half a mile down the road. that wasn't mentioned in the site. So those are just some of the summary things that I think should have been mentioned when you look at a site like this. Let's talk about traffic. Traffic was mentioned as that on-ramp. And in our report, I believe it's labeled, and I'm not using this word, so I want people to understand it publicly. I'm not using this word. This is the word that's in the report as hazardous, potentially hazardous. The state just five years ago spent $5 million redoing that ramp. And we have seniors every day and people that live on the north end of town using that ramp. But yet we're labeling it as hazardous. Not one phone call to the state. Actually, I'm sorry, my office did call once about putting up merge signs on that ramp. But not one call from the city to the state about how hazardous this ramp is. But yet today we're picking it out, saying it's hazardous. Well, let's talk about traffic. 2012, top intersections for collisions in Fayette County. Number 20, Harrisburg Road at Lane Allen. Number 53, Eastland at New Circle. Okay, that's just for 2012. Because of time, I won't tell you 11. Between Street Collisions, 2012. Harrisburg Road at Lane Allen, 10. The off-ramp, this ramp we're talking about, 2012, 2. Okay, big difference. 2012, top 50 red light running locations. Harrisburg Road at Lane Allen, number 36. Eastland at New Circle is not on here. I won't talk about Herigberg Road at Beaumont. That was number one for all of our police stats on collisions going back to 2009 before the Double Diamond was built. Crime. Let's talk about crime. In the first report, not one single evidence of crime statistics was mentioned in our first presentation three weeks ago. Not one of any other site. Today, in the new presentation, the only site mentioned crime is Eastland, Continental Inn. that is a slap in the face to every North End person who's hardworking, who grew up there, who lives there, and who works there, to only mention it on the North End. Now let's talk about crime. I asked our police department, planning analysis unit, what is the just, I tell you what, just be outside the box, give me the total calls. Just give me the total calls where someone picks up the phone, maybe we don't respond, 504 for 2012. That's calls. It's a far cry from 695. But just tell me the number of reports you took. On the. 88. Sir, I didn't interrupt you. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. The reported crime. The reports. And Jennifer wrote, since it was mentioned, the number of reports for 2012. And this is coming from our police department. 88. 88. A far cry from 695. But I didn't stop there. I said, you know what, let's be fair. Let's go to raids online. And I'll draw a half mile around each site. And we'll just see the number of calls. Continental Inn. Half mile, much bigger than your footprint, 421 in 012. Turfland Mall site, 203 in 012. Let's not stop there. Beaumont Kroger, 144. And Springs Inn, 199. The point of it is, if we were to make a decision about crime and where we encourage economic development, we would never do anything downtown. We wouldn't do anything. A Rupp Arena, Distillery District, Main on Road would still be vacant. and to bring that in on this property is a joke to the people on the north end of Lexington. And this council member won't stand for it. But let's talk about investment that other people have put into this area. The governor, January 7th, here's the press release, came to that area, adjacent property, gave us $1.6 million to rehab the housing there. Jennifer Road Apartments going through a major rehab right now. There are three churches on Jennifer Drive that was mentioned as a crime problem. Three churches, two of which have expanded in the last year, invested a lot of money into their properties, over a million dollars. Diagonal from this property, Ron Turner recently, Turner Development, completed over a million dollar renovation of the property diagonal from here. The city is doing major projects behind here. So when we talk about crime and investment, this area is rejuvenated. There's a lot of good investment in this area. And what speaks better to help crime than the city putting dollars in there to rejuvenate a blighted area? We can kill two birds with one stone with this project. I gave the commissioner my word, my word, that I would support it no matter what. But I wanted a fair analysis. When you only include crime on one site, not the other, I have a problem with that. Now, you may have looked at it behind the scenes, but publicly we put it out there now. And I've gotten calls. I want to thank everyone in the Eastland area. There were people here earlier. I want to thank Buddy Hoskins, who's here from Spencearian, because he has a different take. And I have his crime report, too, much different from what was told here today. I want to thank them for calling me and all the people that called me, the Brown Station Alumni Association who's gotten behind this. Thank you all, because together we can make a difference. And whether it ultimately ends up at Continental Inn or at Turfamall, which I like that site too personally, that's to be determined by this council. But I want everyone to understand the real facts out there. And if anyone wants to see the information, it's right here. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Council Member Stennett. Would you like us to respond? Yes. Ellen, yes. Go ahead. Yes, ma'am. Appreciate your concerns, and to be honest, maybe we made a mistake in presenting incomplete data today. Many of the statistics that you just reported to us are in direct. They're different from statistics that were provided to us by the Lexington Police Department last week. We're still in the process of receiving that data from them and reviewing that. Unfortunately, the woman at the department who gathers this data has been called away on a family matter and was unable to provide us with the complete data this week. We take the issue of crime and the issue of traffic safety obviously very, very seriously. That evaluation will continue. We were provided with data previously, but it was more of a cursory review. It wasn't as comprehensive. When we were asked to review these sites, the police department provided a different level of data, not at our request. Just randomly we received much more detailed data. we immediately responded to them and said we'd like to see the same level of detail for the sites previously evaluated so that we can provide a comparative analysis. We will receive that data, and it will be included in our final report. This process is still very much still a process. The report is yet to be finalized, and we hear your concerns. With regard to collisions, we do have collision data which is contrary to your collision data, so I don't know which is true. In 2011, there were 91 collisions around the Continental Inn area, 37 on the ramps. In 2012, there were 75 collisions in the Continental Inn area, 26 on the ramps. Around the Mall area, in 2011, there were 53, and in 2012, there were 49. Harrodsburg between Lane Allen and Cardinal Lane. In 2011, there were 34, and in 2012, there were 38. We should certainly express that traffic safety has been expressed, strongly expressed, in our full report. In the mall area, we have recommended further study of those issues as the investigation of these properties move forward. but as we looked at our five points of criteria, traffic safety and access was our number one of our five critical points. If you failed any one of the five critical points, we didn't continue to review the site. We reviewed this site because of the additional request of the council, and we certainly felt that we addressed those issues properly. But we said that it didn't pass on safety with regard to traffic, and we still stand here stating that fact. We observed cars stopping and standing, trying to make turns off of that ramp, and older drivers with impaired eyesight and slower reaction time, we just do not feel it's an appropriate site, just like we don't believe that the existing senior center site along Alumni and Nicholasville is an appropriate site for a large collection of older drivers on an everyday basis. All right. Thanks, Doug, and thanks, Alan. And, Council Member Stanton, are we ready to move on to Council Member Scotchfield? I'm just, the stats I provided are all on our website from traffic. And those charts for traffic are on our website. Sure, I didn't mean to contradict you. Just wanted to let you know. No, I'm just saying that's where I got it from. They're on our website. Right. I understand that. Council Member Scotchfield. I just have something real quick. And, you know, these might be the three best places in all of Lexington. I am disappointed that we don't have them spread out a little bit more around Lexington, that all of the sites that we're looking at are in a very small area. There is – Lexington's a lot larger than the Harrodsburg Road area. And I think, you know, comparing different sites would have maybe – or different areas. And maybe there aren't properties around the areas. I'm not an expert on that. But I'm disappointed in that. I think that's been the bulk of the problem. behind the scenes the city has put in quite a lot of legwork trying to identify sites for us to evaluate these were this is you know based in those efforts this is the best list that they felt that they could put in our hands to work with we did not participate in the development of that list but we understand that it's uh that you know many stones have been turned and this is what they came up with councilmember forward thank you mayor quickly i want to express appreciation for the response to this Council's request that the Continental Land site be evaluated. I do wholeheartedly share in Council Member Stinnett's frustration. The fact that none of the previous sites presented any data in regards to crime and that this site was picked out for crime is disturbing to me and as I close all that says to me right now is it raises a question of objectivity in regards to the method and so I just wish to express that it is a battle that that Northside in a lot of areas in our city face I don't think it's fair to if we're going to judge on criteria we should judge them across the board thank you mayor sincerely apologize for the impression that this site was scrutinized in a different to a different standard than the others were When you have the full report in your hands, you'll see that the same lens was applied on all of the criteria across the board on all of the sites. Council Member Beard. Thank you, Mayor. Did you talk with Ron Schweitzer specifically about the turfland mall? Because he's the owner, I just wondered. No, we were not put in direct contact with the owner. We were put in contact with his representatives. It's interesting to find out that he is interested in putting a health club there because he already owns the largest one in Lexington. The LAC is his. The Springs Motel, I happened to get my prescriptions filled at the CBS. And the Springs Motel is a mess to get into, especially off of Lane Allen, the other side from the telephone building. That side of Lane Allen, if it's Islay. I don't know what the name of it is anymore. It could be Rosemont Garden also. So anyway, you can't get there from there. And then also, you mentioned Cardinal Lane. That would be what they would have to do is go out to Clay's Mill Road and come back in to make a right turn into the area you're talking about. You couldn't cross traffic, I don't think. We asked the stoplight. We observed on Harrodsburg the traffic lights on Harrodsburg at Lane Allen and then further down past the mall. Those two traffic lights are so in sync that I actually saw, I think I mentioned, I actually saw someone do a complete 180-degree U-turn in the middle of Harrodsburg. We sat there at Harrodsburg where the service road comes off. Excuse me just a second. We've lost our quorum, but we're gaining it back. There we go. Thank you, Council Member Stennett. When the lights are in sync, the service road that comes off of Harrodsburg onto the Springs Inn site, we sat there. I didn't put a stopwatch to it, but we sat there and observed no traffic coming from the east or from the west or the north-south. it's actually turned, for probably 30 seconds or longer. And I actually observed a car do a complete 180-degree U-turn in the middle of Harrisburg because there were no cars coming in either direction. That's certainly not to imply that there aren't times when the road is as great. I think there are different times of the day. Sure, absolutely. And we might mention that a further evaluation of traffic safety conditions at that site is part of our formal recommendation for the continuation of this evaluation. I mean, you are dealing, as you said, with elderly people who have slower reaction times. I fall into that category, but I have never had an accident. My driver's license is 1954. So don't paint everybody with the same voice. All right. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Beard. We are running up against the clock, so we thank you all for joining us today. and I'll need to ask for a motion to adjourn. No, no, no, no, no, no, no. Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. Well, we've got, okay. We'll move to, I'm going to ask Vice Mayor Gordon, Vice Mayor Gordon, go ahead with Council Reports, but I've got to exit. Thank you. Mine's quick. Happy birthday belated to Kevin Stinnett, and happy birthday today to Chris Ford. He says he's 29 and holding. Thank you. Thank you, Vice Mayor. All right. Council Member Lawless. Just quickly, I wanted to remind people that on Wednesday, March 13th, from 730 to 9, there's going to be a panel discussion on parking downtown, and you need to contact Catherine at downtownlex.com. Several people will be talking about traffic and networking and parking, et cetera, and they have coffee and donuts. for those of you that are just hungry and not particularly interested. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Lawless. Council Member, I'm sorry, Vice Mayor Gordon needs to take leave, and so do I. And I will turn the chair over to, I've asked if he will accept it, and he has willingly, to Council Member Ellinger. Thank you, Mayor. Council Member Akers. Thank you, Chair. I just wanted to announce that the Food Truck Work Group will again meet on Friday, March 1st at 9 a.m. here in the Government Center in the fifth floor conference room. And March 4th, the Georgetown Street Neighborhood Association is going to meet at 6 p.m. in the O'Rear Center in Douglas Park. And during their meeting, architects and Dr. Augusta Julian from BCTC, as well as others involved in the new BCTC campus on Newtown Pike, We'll be giving a presentation about the project and answering questions for neighborhood residents. So I invite everyone with any questions about that new construction to attend. Thank you. Thank you. Unfortunately, we have lost our quorum, so if we could try to get everybody back in here real quick. We'll finish up our agenda for the work session. All right, we have our quorum. Is there any other council members who would like to give a council report? See you, none. Next item on the agenda is the mayor's report. Do I have a motion? We have a motion and a second. All those in favor say aye. I was opposed. That passes. The next item on the agenda is public comment issues not on the agenda. Seeing none. The final issue is adjournment. Do I hear a motion? We have a motion in second. All those in favor say aye. All those opposed, we are staying adjourned. Thank you. Thank you.