Are they not on? No. We, technical problem, we'll get it fixed, but why don't we proceed? So, I guess my motion would be appropriate, but then there is an amendment, so that would come later. So I move to approve the summary and motions. I have a motion. Need a second? Second. I have a motion and a second. Yes, Mr. Chair, thank you. I move to amend the summary and at the very beginning where attendance is listed to list Councilmember Lawless as absent. Second. I have a motion and a second to amend. Any comments? Any objections? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? If that amendment passes, any further amendments to the summary? If none, then I'll take a vote. All those in favor of approving the summary as amended, please say aye. Any opposed? That motion carries. Next item on the agenda is the issue of a quorum, and I believe that Ms. George from Legal is here to report on what we have and to take questions if there are any. Welcome. Good morning. If you look in your packet on page, let's see here, 5, what you see here is another amendment to the council rules. This was done at the request of Vice Mayor Gorton relating to what you all can do if you have a committee meeting and a quorum doesn't show up. And the request from Vice Mayor Gorton was for us to amend the rules to make it similar to what Robert's Rules of Order says. And so that's what you have here. In the event that you all have a meeting where a quorum does not, where you don't have a quorum, then it lists the following procedural actions that you can take. And you can take measures to obtain a quorum, which includes researching for a specified period of time, Fix the time which to adjourn or to adjourn. Okay. Thank you. Questions, comments? Council Member Clark. Just one quick question. The change says that one council member who's not on the committee, if more than one person is present who is not a member of the committee, why can only one of them be recognized? Is that a procedural thing? No, that, again, was added at the request of Vice Mayor Gordon, so I'll have to defer to her as to why she wanted the language that way. Do you have a further question? I was waiting for an answer, I guess. Okay, yes, Vice Mayor. If I might take a stab at it. Okay, so I'm just going to tell it like it is. Please. I've been here long enough to have seen situations where there was not a quorum and a chair of a committee would recognize many council members in order to sway the vote. I don't think it's appropriate to put more council members on as part of the quorum than are needed. You know, usually whoever shows up first or whoever the chair wants to select can be a part of the quorum. So it's up to the chair to select that one person then? And it's kind of a protective mechanism, I think. not that this council hasn't done that. It was well in the past. But I have seen it happen. So my feeling was, and I asked Ms. George to put it in here, that there really isn't any reason to recognize all extra council members for the quorum when you don't need that many. But I may be the only council member who feels that. No, I asked the question because I was simply curious, and I had no real problem with it. It just seemed like a rule that I simply didn't understand. Thank you. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I still don't have the ability to recognize people from our system. Is there anybody else who has a? Okay, now I do. Thank you. No problem. Thank you, Chair. I think in the adverse, along with Council Member Clark's, I think the problem with only recognizing those that the Chair recognizes in meeting that quorum could have the adverse effect. Obviously, I respect everybody on the Council right now, and I do not believe that they would play political favorites. But at the same time, if you have three people that show up and you have to pick two of them to reach quorum, the same political potential could come into who you're going to recognize. And so I do have a problem with that addition, that language that allows for a selection of who's going to be recognized to meet quorum. Okay, thank you. Council Member Lane. Thanks, Chairman. Excuse me. I, too, have an objection to that because there are a couple of situations that come up. If there were four extra people at the meeting, the chairman could pick the ones that were maybe going to vote for a particular item on the agenda so that that would be able to sway the vote. And then I think the other reason is that although a committee does have a vote, anything that it votes on is reported out to the council as a whole. and all members of council would get a chance to vote on it at a later date. So I don't see that we are hurting anything, and I'm always worried about wasting time and money, and when we call a meeting and we couldn't have a quorum and conduct a meeting and move forward, I think that's better than delaying and having to reschedule a meeting because we don't have a quorum. Thank you. Okay, thank you. If I may, I just want a clarification because I'm not sure that what I'm hearing is consistent with the language that's been drafted. So could I ask a question, Ms. George? My understanding of the language in this draft is that it does not speak to choosing specific people. It simply says if there is a lack of a quorum, only that number of people will be added who are not on the committee to make up a quorum for voting. It does not speak to selection. It does not speak to the number of council members who could serve in that position. So if we need six people for a quorum, we only have five, and another council person is here, that person could serve. If there were only four and there were two other council people, those both could serve. Is that, Ms. George, your understanding of what the language now says, or is there more in it that I'm missing? No, you're right. I agree with what you're saying. Vice Mayor? I just wanted to add, in the past, the way it has worked is as council members came in, it was whoever arrived first. so that it was not the person selected to make up the quorum were not based on what the chair really wanted. It was based on who showed up first, which may or may not be the way Council wants to do it, but it's just how it has happened. And just in comment to Council Member Lane, it certainly can make a difference to an issue in committee if more council members are recognized than make up a quorum because that can sway the vote in committee and affect whether or not it comes out of committee, if you understand that. So anyway, just thank you. Any further comments? Council Member Stinnett. Thank you, Chair. Glenda, were you given any instruction about a specific time we would wait, amount of time as to what that would constitute? Is it 15 minutes, 30 minutes? No, you all can decide how long you would. I think we would need to put an exact time in there so we're all in agreement because I wouldn't want one chair to say 10 minutes and another chair to say 30. And, again, that can get into some touchy issues. So I think we would agree on 15 minutes would be sufficient for our standing committee. This is just standing committees. I can't make a motion, but I think we would need to specify time. Just to be, if I can, to be clear, your suggestion is that there be a minimum time that a committee would have to wait beyond the official starting time. Or max. Minimum or max, however you want to look at it. Fifteen, that's it. You've got to wait 15. You can't wait more than 15. For PhDs, regular professors, we just do 10. However you want to do it. Okay. Okay, so thank you. May I ask a question? That would be 15 minutes when you're just going to adjourn, not if you're going to try to obtain a quorum, correct? It would be 15 minutes to get a quorum, and if you don't have a quorum, then you adjourn. Zone change, I think we do 30 minutes. Is that in our rules? I don't think it's in there. I think it's just more of a... It's not in your council rule. Right. It's a policy. But if we're going to make a change, I would say we'd put it in here. Vice Mayor Gordon. Yes, I'll go ahead and make that motion. I think it's a good one, Council Member Stennett, that we add that the committee. Well, you'll figure out the legal language, but basically we request that each standing committee have 15 minutes and they will adjourn after 15 minutes if they don't have a court. Okay. I have a motion and a second. Any discussion of the motion? All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? That motion carries. Any further discussion? If not, then is it the pleasure of the committee to have this redraft and come back? or take action at this time? Actually, unless I hear a motion, I presume that the default position will be leave it on the agenda, get the new language, and have it back on the agenda at the next meeting. Council Member Clark is asking if we can't take action today. The answer, so far as I know, is there's no reason not, but I would need a motion if you believe we should take action today. I so move. Second. I have a motion and a second to, and I believe the motion would be to forward this to the council and put it on the council docket. Discussion of the motion? Vice Mayor Gordon. So I would like to see your language before I vote on it. So do you know when you will have your language, the addition? Well, what we've done previously is before it comes to work session, we send out a draft to everyone. So we would do that as we normally would so everyone would have an opportunity to see it before you vote on it at work session, whether or not to put it on the docket. Okay, so you'll be coordinating that so that it doesn't come forward without us seeing the thing. Correct. Thank you. Further discussion? All those in favor of the motion, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? That motion carries, and that will be part of the report out for this committee. Thank you. Thank you. The next item on the agenda is the Metro Employees Credit Union update, and I believe Commissioner Hamilton has some information for us about that. Commissioner, welcome. I'm going to talk just a moment about the memorandum of agreement, not the lease. We have been dealing, per the Council's instructions, with a memorandum of agreement with the credit union and LFUCG that outlines the responsibilities of each party. But we had prepared, David Barber and other consultation had prepared a memorandum of agreement, and we called a meeting to discuss this with Piper Graham from the credit union. I neglected to send Piper a copy of the agreement, which is totally my responsibility and my mistake. So Piper arrives at the meeting surrounded by attorneys and all of us and naturally would like an opportunity to respond to this agreement, which was only fair. She did take that time, and she responded with some suggestions to that draft. We had then hit spring vacation, and people just returned. So what we're getting ready to do now is to look at the changes that Piper proposed to the draft that our legal worked up, and then come to an agreement that we can finalize and bring back. So the delay is my delay, and I apologize. Thank you. Questions, comments? Council Member Lane. Welcome. Thank you, sir. On the memorandum of agreement, we're referring to employees of Lexington. Is this a new format for legal documents we're doing here? We used to refer to it as LFUCG, and I know there was some discussion about maybe calling it Lexington, or either I'm misinterpreting what the memorandum is saying there. It's not. You can do either way. I mean, I prefer Lexington myself, but legally it can be done either way as long as it's clear what the entity is. Okay. All right. Well, now, okay. I just thought it was a little bit unclear, and that's why I asked about that. I was thinking maybe it would be better for, say, employees of the city of Lexington or the urban government of Lexington or something to be a little bit more specific, but I realize it refers to it up there. Okay, the other question I had is I'm not seeing a commencement date in here. Would that be just the date it's approved by council or executed by the mayor and the parties? I mean, when do you expect this to go into a portion of effect? We would expect that now that we are in April that we would make this effective with the lease, and that would be the beginning of July. Okay. Now, is there any provision in the agreement that is part of the commitment of the credit union that they would have to maintain certain standards of financial reporting, send us an annual report, be it in a national association or have any type of insurance on behalf of the people that are holding, you know, like secure deposits, et cetera? It seems to me that that ought to be mentioned somewhere in this document. Since we are, by giving this agreement to them, we're sort of endorsing the credit union, and I think that our employees would expect us to receive the financial information and accreditation and insurance information for the union because they are putting their money in there. We're actually direct depositing some of it in there. It seems like we would have some responsibility to just make sure that everything is running smoothly. Okay. And that is not a disagreement at this particular time, but we can look at that issue as we negotiate here. All right. Those are just a couple of thoughts that I had. Thank you. Thank you for your work on that. Thank you. Council Member Beard. Thank you, Chair. If I might call Piper to the podium. Do you get routinely an examination by the credit union as banks do to the FDIC or controller of currency? Yes, sir, we do. We actually get examined once a year by the Department of Financial Institutions. We are state chartered, and so they are responsible for doing an examination. We also have an internal audit that is done annually that we pay for. Now, I can tell you, as far as disclosing some of that information, financial information we could obviously disclose with no trouble. Anything that's done by the Department of Financial Institutions is confidential and cannot be disclosed. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. Thank you. Council Member Stinnett. Thank you, Chair. CEO Hamilton, where do we stand on the actual lease and charging rents? Have we rectified that situation yet? You remember when I came out of work session, went right in and made that mistake. We brought back to here the lease agreement. It's a five-year lease agreement stage. That has not officially been adopted here by this committee. So when we had the lease before and we were going over the lease, the idea was you need to have a memorandum of agreement also with this lease. So that five-year lease, which is the last one we have prepared, And my understanding is if we can, and I'm going to quote you, so I misquote you, just come on up here. My understanding is if we can reach agreement on this memorandum of understanding, the five-year lease, if it were acceptable to council, is acceptable to the credit union. But they're not tied specifically together. We could do the MOU and say the lease? No, they are not. Okay. All right, so you want the MOU first, then the lease, and the final lease that you showed to this committee back in February, I believe it was, or maybe earlier this year, is the final negotiated recommendation from the administration. Yes, it is, sir. So it would be up to the council now to decide if that's what we like or if we didn't want to make changes. Okay. That's exactly right. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. Yes. I commented. I was hoping I could get out of here. No, I just wanted to make sure, because when I looked at the memorandum of agreement, it was specifically related to payroll. And I wasn't sure where that part of it came from. I thought the memorandum of agreement, the whole point of it was for the council to determine what the relationship between the credit union and the city really was to help you determine what was fair market value for rent for us. And so when I saw the memorandum of agreement, I tried to make revisions that showed you kind of what that relationship was. So I think in some ways it is tied to the lease because it kind of substantiates what we do for the employees. And so I just wanted to clarify that point. Okay, thank you. Thank you, Council Member Stennett. Council Member Lawless? Just quickly, I think it's, I really appreciate Council Member Lane's and Council Member Beard's comments about an annual report. It sounds like there is a lot of oversight, federal, state, and the internal audit. So I wouldn't want to add another layer of expense, but I do think an annual report is important. And I also hope that it is such a benefit to so many of our employees that are struggling and have through these hard times and hung in there with us, that I think it's really important with such a small amount of money that helps so many people avoid payday advance places and things like that and get in financial trouble. So thank you. Thank you. Councilman Belain. Thank you. Commissioner, when we discussed this last year and earlier this year, one of my aspirations was that we would have a closer working relationship with the credit union and actually could maybe help the credit union be more financially viable have more assets by maybe depositing some funds with them have them provide some services for the government and I would encourage us to take another look at that because in return for them being a tenant in our building and paying market rate rent But, you know, I think if we could work with them and provide additional services or they could provide services for us that we could compensate them for or they could earn fees from that, that to me would be appropriate. Thank you. Thank you. Any other comments, questions? Hearing none, then I presume that we will again leave this on our agenda and have those documents back before this committee at the May meeting? Yes, sir. Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you. I think the last item on our agenda is the items in committee. It's the last page. Are there any, I guess we, at least agreement we know what's going to happen with, quorum we know what's going to happen with. The franchise agreements, Council Member Ellinger's not here. I'm assuming that that's an issue that actually is going to be addressed with the budget. Is that of the people's understanding? I hate to take it off without... Well, then, if it's appropriate to remove, I'll entertain a motion to remove that item. I have a motion to remove. A second. The motion is second. Comments? All those in favor, please say aye. Any opposed? The motion carries. There you go. Relationship with the add district. Council Member Miles is also not here. unless someone wishes to speak to that. I presume we just leave it on the list. The CAO policy, vehicle use and fleet right-sizing, again, that may be addressed in the... I believe... Go ahead. Jeff, are you all ready for May on the CAO 3 policy? I believe that's what John Sheet said, but okay. Yeah, that'll... That will be ready for May, so we can, without objection, put it on the agenda for May. Procedure for underwriting or sponsoring one of our facilities. Do we know what the status of that is? Mr. Chair, I suspect that's ongoing as the administration is looking at the policy for sponsorship throughout government. I think that's ongoing and it's not ready to be heard yet. Okay, so we just leave that on the list. And then the last item, the restructuring. Also, Vice Mayor, did you have an update on that? As you know, the council is the entity that has the authority to restructure. And so Commissioner Polson said that he would have the presentation for May. and it is in time, if it's heard in this committee in May, to be, if it's passed, to be enforced come July 1st with the new fiscal year. It has to do with moving building inspection and code enforcement under the Commissioner of Planning. And I think he's spoken to many council members about that. So it will be ready for May. So unless there's objection, I would schedule that for the May meeting. Is there anything else that needs to be added or any other comments, any other business before we adjourn? If not, I'll entertain a motion. Motion is second. All those in favor, please say aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Thank you.