# Council General Government Committee - May 3, 2013 > Auto-transcribed civic record · May 3, 2013 - **Permalink**: https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/meeting/2976 - **Source video**: https://lfucg.granicus.com/player/clip/2976?view_id=14&redirect=true - **Date**: 2013-05-03 - **Last revised**: July 16, 2026 - **Length**: 9,031 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 General Government Committee met on May 7, 2013, at 11:00 a.m., with Steve Kay presiding. The committee addressed five agenda items during the meeting, taking six votes and hearing 17 public comments. The committee approved the meeting summary, the Metro Employees Credit Union Lease and Memorandum of Agreement, and a proposal to restructure government by moving the Divisions of Building Inspection and Code Enforcement to the Commissioner of Planning. The committee also received an informational presentation on CAO Policy #3 regarding Vehicle Use and Assignment, and approved items referred to the committee. ## Attendance **Present:** Steve Kay, Linda Gorton, Chris Ford, Diane Lawless, Julian Beard, Jenny Scutchfield, Ed Lane, George Myers, and Harry Clarke. **Absent:** Shevawn Akers. **Late arrivals:** None. ## Votes and Decisions The meeting included six motions, all of which passed by voice vote. **Approval of Meeting Summary** [timestamp: 0:00:00] Linda Gorton moved to approve the meeting summary with an amendment to list Diane Lawless as absent for the March 2013 meeting. Diane Lawless seconded the motion, which passed by voice vote. **Amendment to Council Rules and Procedures** [timestamp: 0:02:18] Linda Gorton moved to amend the Council Rules and Procedures to allow standing committees 15 minutes to obtain quorum before adjourning. Jenny Scutchfield seconded the motion, which passed by voice vote. **Draft Amendment to Section 2.201** [timestamp: 0:02:18] Harry Clarke moved to forward a draft amendment to Section 2.201 of the Council Rules and Procedures to the full Council. Diane Lawless seconded the motion, which passed by voice vote. **Metro Employees Credit Union Lease and MOA** [timestamp: 0:20:04] Steve Kay moved to move the Metro Employees Credit Union Lease and Memorandum of Agreement to the Council docket. Jenny Scutchfield seconded the motion, which passed by voice vote. **Government Restructuring** [timestamp: 0:53:32] Diane Lawless moved to approve the restructuring of government to move Building Inspection and Code Enforcement to the Commissioner of Planning. Ed Lane seconded the motion, which passed by voice vote. **Deletion from Referral List** [timestamp: 0:54:06] Harry Clarke moved to delete CAO Policy #3 Vehicle Use and Assignment, the Metro Employees Credit Union Lease and MOA, and the Restructuring Government items from the referral list. Linda Gorton seconded the motion, which passed by voice vote. ## Budget and Financial Actions The meeting addressed one lease agreement requiring action: **Metro Employees Credit Union Lease Agreement** A lease agreement for Metro Employees Credit Union at the LFUCG Versailles Road Campus (Lease Agreement 2012) was presented. This contract item carried no associated financial obligation at the time of the meeting. ## Public Comment The meeting included public comment on several topics, with speakers addressing credit union access, vehicle branding, and government restructuring. **Credit Union Access and Lease Issues** Frances Block from Commonwealth Credit Union requested access to engage with LFUCG employees at benefit fairs, employment events, and new employee orientations to promote financial products and services [timestamp: 0:01:38]. She emphasized the credit union's role in serving Kentucky Retirement System participants. George Myers raised concerns about the sole-source lease with Metro Employees Credit Union, urging the committee to consider opening the lease process to competitive bidding to ensure the best service for employees [timestamp: 0:04:34]. He later requested that the Law Department assess whether the council could proceed with the lease without first evaluating other potential providers [timestamp: 0:13:40]. Julian Beard opposed Commonwealth Credit Union's request, characterizing it as an "end run" and noting that Commonwealth Credit Union serves all of Kentucky, not just LFUCG employees, and that the issue should be addressed through proper channels [timestamp: 0:06:39]. Chris Ford stated that other credit unions like Members Heritage and UK have not been granted similar access, and that discussion should remain focused on the agenda item [timestamp: 0:09:55]. Linda Gorton suggested that Commonwealth Credit Union's request be addressed in a future work session or through administrative channels rather than during this committee meeting [timestamp: 0:11:01]. Ed Lane supported continuing the Metro Employees Credit Union lease, highlighting the long-term relationship, the credit union's willingness to increase rent to market rate, and their investment in the property [timestamp: 0:18:59]. **Vehicle Branding and Government Restructuring** Ed Lane proposed implementing a standardized logo on all LFUCG vehicles to improve city branding [timestamp: 0:34:14], and suggested including a council member on the vehicle acquisition committee [timestamp: 0:34:14]. Diane Lawless recommended adding visible division identifiers on vehicles to improve public understanding [timestamp: 0:36:23]. Julian Beard emphasized the importance of a unified city brand, noting that inconsistent vehicle logos undermine the city's image [timestamp: 0:34:47]. Derek Paulsen presented a proposal to move Building Inspection and Code Enforcement under the Commissioner of Planning [timestamp: 0:39:10]. Harry Clarke, Diane Lawless, and Ed Lane expressed support for the reorganization, citing improved coordination benefits [timestamps: 0:47:23, 0:49:38, 0:52:59]. Shevawn Akers asked whether code enforcement and building inspection staff could be cross-trained to improve efficiency [timestamp: 0:51:20]. ## Contested Items **Competitive Bidding for Metro Employees Credit Union Lease** Council Member George Myers raised procedural concerns about moving forward with a sole-source lease agreement with Metro Employees Credit Union without first evaluating competitive alternatives from other credit unions. Myers questioned whether the Council should proceed with this arrangement or open the process to competitive bidding. This dispute centered on whether the procurement process was following appropriate competitive standards or whether it should be expanded to consider other potential credit union partners. **Commonwealth Credit Union's Request to Address the Council** A heated discussion emerged regarding whether Commonwealth Credit Union should be permitted to speak during the meeting. Some Council members objected to allowing Commonwealth Credit Union to address the body, characterizing the request as an "end run" and arguing that it was inappropriate for the meeting agenda. This disagreement reflected broader concerns about the procedural fairness and structure of the discussion surrounding credit union services and leasing arrangements. ## Approval of Summary The committee addressed the approval of the meeting summary from the previous session. [timestamp: 00:00] **Key Speakers** Linda Gorton and Diane Lawless participated in this discussion. **Discussion and Amendment** The committee reviewed the meeting summary and identified a necessary amendment. The summary required correction to accurately reflect Diane Lawless's absence at the March 2013 meeting. **Outcome** The committee approved the meeting summary with the amendment incorporated. The motion passed without dissent. ## Metro Employees Credit Union Lease and MOA [timestamp: 00:14:45] The CAO and Mr. David Barbary presented the final draft of the lease and Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with Metro Employees Credit Union to the committee. **Presentation and Discussion** The presentation focused on the completed lease agreement and MOA documents, which represented the culmination of negotiations with Metro Employees Credit Union. **Key Speakers** The following individuals participated in the discussion: Sally Hamilton, David Barbary, Piper Graham, Frances Block, George Myers, Julian Beard, Ed Lane, Chris Ford, and Linda Gorton. **Public Comments and Concerns** Public comment addressed concerns regarding competitive access and the long-term nature of the relationship established through the lease and MOA. **Outcome** The committee approved moving the Metro Employees Credit Union Lease and MOA item to the Council docket for further consideration. ## CAO Policy #3 Vehicle Use and Assignment Jamshid Baradaran presented proposed updates to CAO Policy #3 during this informational item [timestamp: 0:21:10]. The presentation outlined several key changes to the city's vehicle management practices. **Proposed Updates** The main components of the proposed policy updates included: - Fleet right-sizing initiatives - Establishment of a new vehicle acquisition committee - Improved reporting mechanisms for vehicle use and assignment **Council Input and Suggestions** Council members engaged with the presentation and offered feedback on the proposed changes: - Council members suggested including a council member on the vehicle acquisition committee to ensure broader oversight and representation in vehicle procurement decisions - Standardization of vehicle branding was proposed as an additional consideration for the policy **Key Speakers** The discussion involved several council members in addition to Baradaran, including Ed Lane, Diane Lawless, and Harry Clarke, who contributed to the dialogue regarding the policy updates. **Outcome** This agenda item was presented as informational, with no formal action taken during the meeting. The presentation provided council members with an overview of the proposed policy changes and allowed for initial feedback and suggestions before any further development or formal consideration of the updates. ## Restructuring Government to Move the Divisions of Building Inspection and Code Enforcement to the Commissioner of Planning Derek Paulsen presented a proposal to reorganize government operations by transferring the Divisions of Building Inspection and Code Enforcement under the authority of the Commissioner of Planning [timestamp: 0:39:10]. **Proposal Overview** The reorganization aimed to achieve several objectives: - Improve neighborhood coordination - Establish one-stop permitting services - Enhance civil enforcement capabilities - Integrate the CAP (Community Assistance Program) **Key Participants** The discussion involved Derek Paulsen as the primary presenter, with participation from Harry Clarke, Diane Lawless, Shevawn Akers, and Ed Lane. **Outcome** The motion to approve the reorganization passed unanimously, indicating full support from the governing body for moving these divisions under the Commissioner of Planning's oversight. ## Items Referred to Committee [timestamp: 54:06] The committee addressed several items on the referral list, with discussion led by Harry Clarke, Linda Gorton, and Steve Kay. The committee voted to remove three items from the referral list: - CAO Policy #3 - The Metro Employees Credit Union Lease and Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) - The Restructuring Government item Two items were retained on the referral list: - An item related to the Bluegrass Ad - A matter concerning the naming of facilities and parks The outcome of the discussion was approved. --- ## Decisions - **Motion** — passed: Approval of the meeting summary with amendment to list Diane Lawless as absent for March 2013 meeting - **Motion** — passed: Amendment to Council Rules and Procedures to allow standing committees 15 minutes to obtain quorum before adjourning - **Motion** — passed: Forward draft amendment to Section 2.201 of Council Rules and Procedures to the full Council - **Motion** — passed: Motion to move Metro Employees Credit Union Lease and MOA to the Council docket - **Motion** — passed: Motion to approve the restructuring of government to move Building Inspection and Code Enforcement to the Commissioner of Planning - **Motion** — passed: Motion to delete CAO Policy #3 Vehicle Use and Assignment, Metro Employees Credit Union Lease and MOA, and Restructuring Government items from the referral list --- ## Full transcript First item on the agenda is approval of the summary. Is there a motion? Second. I have a motion and a second to approve the summary and discussion. Seeing none, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Now the next item on the agenda is the Metro Employees Credit Union Lease and Memorandum of Understanding. And before I ask the Commissioner and Mr. Barbary to come forward, we've had a request from the Commonwealth Credit Union to address the Council, and I thought it would be appropriate to give them three minutes to explain what their interest is. And I understand that Ms. Frances Block will be representing them. If the Council, I'm sorry, if the Committee has no objections. Is this about the current issues that we're attending to on our agenda? I'm not sure. It's not clear to me what the interest is. I thought it would be useful to give them three minutes to explain what the issue is, if it has any impact. So it's about the Metro employee lease? Is that correct? No. No. It's about, I think it's about, well, I'm not sure. so I thought it would be useful to give them an opportunity. If it is relevant, then we can consider it. If it's not, it may be relevant for either a future meeting or something else that they want to do with administration. Okay. I was hoping they would come to the work session and speak to the council, but I'm happy to hear in this committee. Okay. Yeah. Thank you. Any other comments without objection? Thank you. We appreciate the opportunity to come and speak with you guys this morning. My name is Frances Block, and I am with a representative from Commonwealth Credit Union. And part of our mission for being here today is we would just like to have the capability of visiting with the staff here of the Lexington-Fade Urban County Government during employee events, whether it be through benefit fairs, employment opportunities, when they're doing their enrollment time for benefits. We are the credit union for all the folks that participate with Kentucky Retirement System, which obviously includes the employees here through the urban county government. So we would like that opportunity to just meet with them, provide them other options of products and services. If you look at benefits today now for employers, that's the number one reason folks come to an employer. They look to see what they are offering. And we would like to have that opportunity to extend our benefits, our products and services to them, to allow them to have that choice, that there is more than just one choice here in the area to purchase cars, to purchase homes, to be assisted with improving their credit scores, those kind of things. So we are here to do the helping people as far as the philosophy of the credit unions, and we would like to have that opportunity to visit with your staff on a regular basis, whether it be through benefit fairs, employment opportunities, or new employee orientations, or just one-on-one capabilities. Okay. Questions or comments, Councilmembers? Councilmember Beard. Thank you, Chair. Why did you come to us as opposed to go directly to our credit union? We don't have any control over that credit union. You need to talk to them, not us. Well, as my position of the business development, normally I come before councils and other government chambers to extend that opportunity to the employees. and then from that entity I am normally invited then to extend into a council workshop, for example, and make that presentation before what the products and services that we can extend to the employees here. I still don't understand why you're talking to us rather than them directly. I believe we were in a roundabout way invited by Mr. Myers, if he would like to address. Council Member Myers. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I guess I'll start by saying that I see this issue with the lease that we have here today, and we've talked sort of at item about this thing in the past, but when you look at the lease that is on the art facility downtown, and that lease expired, and we talked about as a council whether or not we're going to let the same group that's had the 10-year lease on that building continue with that lease, or would we put that out for bid for RFP to see if there are other people in this community that want to have an opportunity to occupy that space? And I think we all agree at that point that we would do that. In the conversations we've had with the credit union in the past, one of the things that we've said is they feel like they provide services to our employees that nobody else can provide. I think it's important for us as a council and as a government to examine that and make sure that what our employees are receiving is the best opportunity. I realize that we don't require our employees to join that credit union. But being located in our facilities makes a statement to our employees. And I think that if we're going to lease space, and we're going to lease space at a discounted price less than market rate, that before we enter into a contract for that, we might want to consider whether or not we put that out for bid and do an RFP to see if there are other organizations or entities out there that can provide the same or better services to our employees. And so I think it's incumbent upon us to do our due diligence before we enter into sort of a sole source contract for those services. So that's why they're here today, because this item is on the agenda. And before we would vote this out of committee to say this is what we want to do, I think it would be appropriate for us to just step back and consider if there are other options out there. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you. Council Member Beard. Thank you, Chair. This is a situation, let me see if I can develop an analogy, and maybe not. But the fact is that whether they're housed here or whether they're housed somewhere else, they're our employees and our credit union the owners of the credit union are our employees and it's an end run as far as I'm concerned for them to even be involved at this point I'm not sure about bringing in commonwealth to our facilities when they're really set up for initially, the Commonwealth was housed in Frankfort, Kentucky, and was there for the employees of state government. Our common bond, if I may, Councilman Beard, our main common bond for Commonwealth Credit Union is the entire state of Kentucky. It's for the Kentucky retirement system. So this not only includes your state government, This also includes your city governments, your county governments, your health departments, your school districts, et cetera. And we have a branch already physically located here in Lexington. We are in the process of building another one in Lexington as well as some others in the central Kentucky area. That's fine and good, but you don't go in competition. Excuse me. I'm going to take the privilege of the chair and intervene if I can. I don't think the issue before us is whether they provide a good service or not or where they're located. I think Council Member Myers has raised an issue about whether we ought to widen the option, but it's not a question of whether it's the Metro Employees Credit Union or the Commonwealth Credit Union. So I would prefer if Council Members would agree that we not debate the merits of one against the other. We've heard what the interest is. They would like to have access to our employees in the same way that other. It's an end run, Mr. Chair, and it doesn't work. It's not valid to do. My only suggestion is this, that we not debate the merits of this particular applicant. If Council Member Myers has a concern about the larger process and wants to open up the whole conversation rather than have us proceed with the lease, I think that's appropriate as a discussion item when we move to the actual discussion of the credit union. I'm afraid I'll have to say it is not appropriate. Okay. Everybody can take that for what it is, but it is not appropriate. Okay. Thank you. Do other council members wish to have questions or comments about the specifics of this request that they have made today? Council Member Lane. Mr. Chairman, I'll defer my comments until we get under the Metro Employees Unit's comments when that presentation comes up. Thank you. Council Member Ford? Thank you, Mr. Chair. I agree wholeheartedly with the comments made by Council Member Beard. I do appreciate the presentation by Commonwealth. Thank you for being here. But I think it's outside of them just stating their interests. I think any further conversation about this at this time is inappropriate because we have other credit unions, such as Members Heritage and UK and GT and everybody else, and they have not been afforded the same privilege to be at the podium today. So I would look forward to us being able to get back to agenda item number two, which we've been studying a long time, which is the Metro employees, our employees, lease and MOA. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you. Vice Mayor Gorton. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you for coming. I had actually hoped that if you were going to come, you would come to the work session where all the council members are and where you could have time to speak about issues not on the agenda. I think that also might be appropriate at 3 o'clock. I certainly am not averse to having this conversation. I think having it today, Mr. Chair, with your liking for an agenda a month ahead is inappropriate because it's a totally different issue than number two. So I would look forward to a time in the future when maybe we could have this discussion, and maybe it needs to start with our administration. We would be happy to. Yes. We would appreciate that opportunity. Since, well, it's a little complicated, but we don't tell our employees they have to belong to a credit union, and so I think having choices would be an okay thing for them. but I think right now today it's just come upon us and we're used to working through our agenda with items that we've vetted and our item with the Metro Credit Union has been going on for months. It could be years by now. Is it years already? Is it a year? So I appreciate your being here. I would hope that maybe you would have some conversations at the administration level and that that might come back to us through those conversations. And I'm not sure if that would be Madam CAO, our HR people, or make that connection. Yeah, we've already met Mr. Maxwell. Oh, okay, good. We've met with him. Okay, good. So perhaps they'll be bringing us something or there will be more conversation with him. We'd be happy to. Thank you, Councillor. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Council Member Lane, are you still in line? No, sir. Thank you. Council Member Myers, are you? Yes, sir. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And I appreciate your willingness to allow them to at least have a couple of minutes here. And I do think it's apropos for what we have on the agenda today, not that we need to go into more discussion about it, but that, to me, it goes back to that same issue. if we have government space that's available to lease, that we ought to exhaust all options to make sure that we're getting the best deal for our employees. And there are other credit unions out there that may want to be interested in this, and that's why I said I think in the last meeting when we discussed this, I may have asked the question of legal, whether or not we can enter into this type of arrangement without looking at whether or not there's somebody else out there in the community that we want to provide the same service. So I look forward to you guys being able to meet with the administration and work through some of those issues. And as we look at this lease agreement, I would ask the law department to at least weigh in on whether or not we can proceed with this one without looking at opportunities for other people to jockey for that same position. And again, thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Council Member Myers. And thank you, Ms. Block, for coming forward. Thank you for your time. Okay, I believe that there's nobody else signed up on this, so we will move to the second item on the agenda and invite CAO Hamilton and Mr. Barbary, if he's here, to come to the podium or if he's needed. But we'll start with CAO. Welcome. Thank you very much. We have been working with Ms. Graham to get this memorandum of agreement first negotiated and something that everybody could feel comfortable with. And I think due to Mr. Barbary's ability and skills, he's worked very hard on this for us, I think we've got this now where everybody is agreeable. It states this memorandum of agreement is something that the council had mentioned in one of our conversations about the lease, that to put down on paper exactly what the credit union, the relationship that the credit union has had with us since 1940, what they do for our employees, and then again what we are technically doing for them. And so it was basically to get that in writing so everybody would understand. And that's what we have done. And I think the employees credit union, the Metro Credit Union, agrees with this MOA. And we certainly do from a legal and administrative point. So everybody is fine with the MOA from this end. and now we, of course, would appreciate Council's comments. We also have had the lease, and you have had the lease for a while, and that is the five-year lease which takes the credit union up in stages on their lease payment. And I think that has also been mutually agreed upon by the administration and the credit union. So what we're presenting to you today is the final part of this. And if you remember, several months ago, I skipped the step and I think went the General Services, the General Government Committee had not really approved this, and I went straight to work session. So I'm not going to make that mistake again. This now has to be approved here, and then we would move forward. it. So I think I've learned that one. So, sir? Great. Thank you. Questions or comments from Council? Council Member Myers. Thank you, Mr. Chair. If we enter into this agreement with the credit union, does it prohibit in any way from other credit unions addressing addressing our employees, like, say, at a benefit fair or anything like that? Every time I make these statements without me. Do you remember my track record hadn't been too good the last two weeks? It's written in a manner that preserves their existing right, but it doesn't prohibit anyone else from doing the same thing. Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Mars. Vice Mayor Gorton. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just simply want to say to all the parties involved, thank you for working so long and so hard with each other and the council to get to this point. I think it's a good thing. And really appreciate what's gone into it, which is a lot of hard work and back and forth. And, Piper, especially from your viewpoint, I know that you represent the credit union and the employees in the discussions. It's been a lot of give and take, so thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Council Member Lane. Yes, I wanted just to make a couple of comments. I think that the long-term relationship that the Metro Employees Credit Unit has had with the Urim County Government is something we need to consider in the issue in front of us today, and also the fact that they've agreed over a period of time to raise their rental to the market rate at our request. And so that's another factor. And I think the third factor is that they have invested quite a bit of funds into the properties that they currently have, which they're advertising over time. And then I suppose the fourth issue is that, you know, we have, I think, that the Irvin County government and the Metro Credit Union have worked together in a beneficial way for our employees. So I would encourage us to continue and complete this relationship. But at the same time, I would not want to rule out sometime in the future if another credit union wanted to provide services in a competitive way that we would be receptive to that. Thank you. Thank you. Seeing nobody else signed up, I'll just add my own brief comment, which is to thank the people who have worked so hard on this and it's good that you've got something coming forward that is agreeable to all sides. And at this point, I would entertain a motion to move this onto the council docket. So moved. Second. A motion and a second to move this onto the council docket. Any further discussion? Seeing none, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? That motion carries. and we'll, I guess, on my council, when I get to report this out, I'll report this motion. Thank you all. Next item on the agenda is the restructuring government, and Commissioner Paulson, I believe you're scheduled to kick this off. Welcome. I'm sorry. I skipped an item straight in front of me. Dean, as Jamshid has the clicker, I'll let him go next. I see. I couldn't figure out why everybody was so surprised. Now I understand. CAO policy number three on vehicle use. Welcome, Jamshid. Thank you. I appreciate the opportunity to provide you all an overview of some of the changes and modifications that we are considering for the CAO Policy 3. For your information and background, the CAO Policy 3 primarily deals with any and all issues related to fleet management and fleet operation for the entire LFECG. We started looking at this probably about three, three and a half years ago. So as you are probably aware, like any other industry, fleet industry has been going through quite a bit of change, introduction of new technologies, systems, types of fuel, and so forth, has kind of got everything moving forward very quickly. We felt like this was a right time to take a look at what we have, which is the last time Policy 3 was updated and revised was in 2003. approximately 10 years ago. So with that idea in mind, we looked at what is it we're trying to accomplish. There are two primary groups that are impacted by this policy. Obviously, one is the fleet management, and the other one are what we refer to as our customers. What we found during the review of the current CEO Policy 3 were some gaps in regard to the level of authority as well as responsibility involved with the fleet and its operation that needed to be addressed and discussed and finalized. And really the most importantly also is clarifying our customers' responsibility and their needs. That to us is a very important thing. I mean, primarily we're here because of the customers' needs and services that we provide. So those two goals in mind, we took on a review of the entire policy, and something that we anticipated would be a few changes, turned out to be quite a few. In regard to taking a look at fleet and what is it we'd be doing and what it is that we should be doing, The number one goal that was identified, and this is something that's been in the making for the past at least three, four years, has been the right sizing. That, to me, is probably one of the most important initiatives that we need to make sure that we stay focused on and move forward. What is a fleet right sizing? The old thinking has always been primarily dealing with a total number of your units. Well, that was a good assumption about 8, 9, 10 years ago, no longer. Right-sizing applies to many different operational centers within a fleet operation. One, and really the main goal is by utilizing different methodology and managing, be able to ultimately reduce your operational costs. That is probably one of the most important single factors when you're looking at any fleet operation, what has been done and how we've managed to at least keep the ever-grown cost of operation and fuel and repairs and purchasing and so forth. So that was one of the things that we were looking at, overall reduction in operational costs. And as you know, efficiency is just even looking at regular engines. I'm not talking about any hybrids or any kind of alternative fuels. Just the last five years, the same company has been providing and building new units that probably are at least about 15% to 20% more efficient in terms of mile per gallon and operational costs. The next thing we're going to look at also that's going to have quite a bit of impact is when the time comes, and time has come quite a bit for now, replacing some of the aging fleet vehicles. We have currently probably close to about 35 different classification of vehicles. That's from what I call a light vehicle, from your basic small sedans all the way up to the mid-sized trucks. And then from that point up, obviously, would be our heavy fleet, which goes all the way up to your full-size compactors. That solid race utilizes streets and roads, dump trucks, and specialty vehicles, and so forth. The idea was trying to identify a base unit by which that would be your de facto replacement item. Anything else above and beyond that unit will need a justification to us to make sure that, you know, if a simple, I'm going to use an example, F-150 standard cap will do, then we will not be interested in purchasing a 4x4 crew cab unit that's really not going to be utilized. Now there will be cases where due to the nature of the operation each customer will have a plan of opportunities to state their case why they need for example a four wheel drive or why they need a crew cab or any other specialty attachments. The other item which is equally important we were looking at was when we identified these units, we want to make sure, number one, we are fully aware of the environmental impact of our decisions, and thus the decision in really seriously looking into purchasing hybrid alternative fuel vehicles such as electric vehicles, biodiesel that we've been using for a long time now, as well as the CNG. For example, the CNG right now we've looked at for the past three and a half years. Obviously, it's been a run longer than that, but one of the biggest challenges have been is lack of infrastructure in terms of fueling. I think we're to a point where we can probably move forward. The decision has been made. As a matter of fact, we're in the process of placing our first order for the CNG units, primarily going to be our compactors. The decision was made due to the fact that we're getting about 2.1 to 2.2 miles per gallon out of the compactor. We felt like that's where we could really see a major impact in terms of cost as well as operational efficiencies that we're going to see. So over a period of 10 years, livestock cost analysis, we felt like the upfront capital is definitely, have been recouped probably within the first 24 months. The second item that we consider to be a very important addition to the current CEO Policy 3 is creation of a vehicle acquisition committee. I felt like at that point we're going to be needing to have some input primarily outside of our division. Primarily, we're trying to concentrate on getting input and feedback and guidance from what we consider to be our primary large customers. A CAO office, by their function and what this policy is, we felt like they needed to be involved with this. Finance Commissioner's Office, obviously whatever decisions made are going to have financial impact. General Services Commissioner's Office, Public Safety Commissioner's Office, Division of Central Purchasing, who are going to be involved quite a bit with purchasing of any units coming up, Division of Facilities and Fleet Management. And the last one is a correction. My apologies. is what we have handed to you all. The last item is different, but this one is the corrected one we will provide you with an update. Environmental Quality and Public Works Commissioner's Office has been included, rightfully so because of the nature of the operation. And we felt like this will give us a good representation of major groups that are utilizing our services on a day-to-day basis. The next was one thing we saw that was lacking, and some of the requirements that were noted in the current fiscal year policy 3 left some to be desired for. There were a lot of reporting requirements that we found to be cumbersome and honestly really not needed. So we decided to kind of rethink that whole process and be able to identify, number one, fleet liaisons to us are a very important link between us and each group. Each division has a fleet liaison who interact with us in day-to-day as needed in terms of decision-making or any issues related to fleet and operations. The next that's very important also is to make sure that the LFECG employees are protected by this policy where it's going to define specifically as you are provided with a vehicle to conduct your day-to-day business for the city, what are your responsibilities and what are our expectations. One item that is new to the system is obviously if there are any issues specifically related to collective bargaining groups, that has been put in by reference to an appendix. And then, as I mentioned before, clarification of reporting requirements. We are going to increase our reporting, and it's not going to be that we're going to bombard everybody every day, but we felt like a quarterly report will be really needed to provide all the division directors with a snapshot of where do they stand in terms of expenditures on fleet fuel as well as repairs. Now, this just gives you some ideas that some of them have already mentioned. What would be our thought process and goal in determining what type of units, when, and how? For the fiscal year 2014, we completely changed evaluating our fleet in terms of what units really need to be changed. The traditional method was primarily age and the mileage. We feel like that is inadequate at this point. So what we developed was a pretty detailed model in-house that would give us a capability of looking at all aspects. Mileage, obviously, age, condition of the vehicle, cost of operating that vehicle. We have a price, a dollar per mile, on every unit that LFUCG owns that's out there on a day-to-day basis. That would help quite a bit with making decision-making, anything from budgeting to repair to replacement and so forth. All of those combined will provide each vehicle with a score. and the higher the score is the more probability that based on this vehicle's total cost of operation when that decision needs to be made in terms of replacement. So overall that's the gist of what we've been trying to do. We're hoping to have everything completed. Law is currently looking at doing a final check on the proposed changes and we hope that we can go ahead and have this in effect as of July 1st, beginning of the new fiscal year. If you have any questions, I'll be glad to answer. Thank you. Council members, questions, comments? Council Member Lane. Yes, first thought I had, I think it would be helpful if a council member were on your acquisition committee and the benefit would be you would have somebody on council who would be up to date on some of the reason and rationale behind your selection of vehicles and sizing. And I think to have somebody on council that can then speak the facts to the other council members would be helpful to you, keep the council in the loop. That's one suggestion. The other suggestion I'd like to make is, and this maybe goes outside of general services, but I think it would be very valuable for the urban county government to have a standard logo that would be on all vehicles. And, you know, if you drive around town, you've got the fire department, police department, public safety, sanitary sewers. Everybody's got their own logo. And I think it really sort of denigrates the image of our city that we don't have one standardized logo. That probably goes into a marketing area. but since you're putting it on many of the vehicles, maybe that's something that could be addressed. Maybe through the general government committee here we could put that on the agenda is another idea. And then the only other thought that I have is reducing the number of models that we operate because the more models of vehicles you have, the more training for repairs and maintenance, the more inventory of parts, and those become issues of cost also. I know you're very knowledgeable about that. I'm just sort of making a statement in general. Those are very good ideas. Okay. Those are just three quick thoughts that I had for you. And I enjoyed your presentation, and I think this is something we need to move forward on as expedited as soon as possible. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Lane. Council Member Lawless? I agree having the logo, but I also would like to look at, Because I have people say somebody from the city, and they don't have any idea that the division, just in big letters or something, fleet management or traffic engineering, whatever, would be extremely helpful. Because I get a lot of those inquiries, you know, somebody from the city. So thank you. All units that LPCG owns and we operate have a unit number, six-inch letters that have been on each unit. And that's been one of the main items in order to identify if there are any issues with any units and so forth. Time to time, we get calls regarding a vehicle being somewhere, and usually as long as we've got the unit number, we'll be able to make those changes. Some, if not most of the units, have the division or the group they can be identified with, but not all of them. And as we move forward with replacements, definitely those are some of the things we'll consider. Thank you, Council Member Lawless. Council Member Clark. Thank you, Chair. Good report. I appreciate it. And Council Member Lane stole my question or my suggestion. I think representing the council on the Acquisition Committee would be a good idea, but let me take it one step farther. These are representatives of these people, and perhaps rather than mandatory a council member, maybe a representative of the council, because it could be any member of the staff that could do that probably as well as we could. The other question, that committee, you added the Environmental Quality Commissioner's Office, and so you took off the Director of Facilities and Fleet Management. Is that correct? We felt like that was redundant at the time because that would be either being represented by me or the Deputy Director in Charge of the Fleet. We felt like that in combination with General Services Commissioner probably will suffice, and we just want to expand that a little bit further. I understand. So you're comfortable with that? Oh, absolutely. Good. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Council Member Clark. Seeing no one else signed up, I'll just add my own brief comments, and thank you for the report very clear. I'm encouraged with the direction that you're going in. I think it's a good model for accountability, for understanding, and for saving both money and having less impact on the environment. So thank you very much. Thank you. Now I believe the next item on the agenda is restructuring and Commissioner Paulson. Welcome. Thank you. I just want to give you guys a quick overview presentation, and then it'll open up to questions about this reorganization. There we go. Can't work a clicker. So this reorganization came out of some discussions that start between CAO Hamilton, Commissioner Mason, and myself back in January, if not a little bit before then between Commissioner Mason and myself in terms of talking about some of the priorities between divisions and that there was increasingly a lot of crossover between my current divisions and some of the work with building inspection and code enforcement. Increasingly, questions were coming to me that were kind of a cross between the two divisions, between the two departments, and we had talked starting back in the fall about ways that we could work better between some of the civil enforcement divisions. In January, we got together and started to actually have much more concrete discussions, of which has kind of come this idea of reorganization. The main rationale for this reorganization, the more we talked about it, really focused on these four issues. So I'll give, again, a quick brief about what these four issues are, about what we see as the benefits of these, and then open it up to questions. First is this focus on neighborhoods. The way we look at this, putting building inspection and code enforcement underneath planning, preservation, and development will really kind of shore up this whole idea of really from birth to, and I don't want to call it death, but from birth to old age of neighborhoods. From the very first land use decisions, we don't talk about death of neighborhoods anymore. From PDR and planning, we start those initial discussions. Where are we even going to create neighborhoods? To the next stage of neighborhood design with planning and engineering, the roads, where are the roads going to go? How are we going to design these subdivisions, or if not subdivisions, areas? Next to neighborhood construction, where we bring in building inspection into this area. To neighborhood maintenance, in which planning again is there with zoning enforcement, building inspection is still there with enforcement capabilities, and code enforcement becomes an increasingly important part of neighborhood maintenance. to the last stage, which is that preservation stage, in which historic preservation and planning are still playing a very large part. And again, code enforcement, a very big part. About a week ago, Jamie Emmons and I went to New York City to talk to their analytics department. They have this very advanced form of analysis that they do with three-on-one and other things. And one of the questions they asked us was, what is your big problem? and some of the things that they have worked on with their analytics were fire issues and major crime issues such as some of the violent crime issues. And really one of the things that really came out of this discussion was that we have a very high expectation of neighborhoods and the quality of our neighborhoods in Lexington. And that really is one of our biggest issues. How do we really create great neighborhoods and then preserve those great neighborhoods? and I think this will really help with the coordination of that in terms of that neighborhood focus. A second issue or second rationale behind this is the one-stop shop idea. We've mentioned it before in previous council meetings where it's been brought up and this is just sort of better coordination between the different divisions that deal with commercial and residential development as well as the creation of businesses. We are going to start with commercial permits and the two, again, the three main groups being planning, building inspection, and revenue. And we hope to move to online permitting of both commercial and residential permits. Part of this will hopefully get started or get kicked off with the adoption of a CELA, which will allow for a lot more functionality in terms of online permitting. Other cities are doing this. This is not so much a new idea, but it's going to be one that we're going to have to try to figure out. What are some of the pitfalls? One of the initial things we are doing kind of in line with this is we're hoping to start in July just taking online submissions of development plans. And just in the discussions of those things, we are already seeing lots of issues that are popping up. And so we've grabbed a lot of different people in terms of how do we take digital submissions, listening to both developers, architects, and then people within government as well, what makes the most sense in terms of streamlining that process. We're doing the same thing with the one-stop shop, starting with some of the easier things to do in terms of home businesses, food trucks, and a few others. What are some ways we can streamline that process, make it much easier if people don't necessarily have to come down here? And then we hope to learn from that to then build it into residential developments and commercial developments as well. The third thing is civil enforcement coordination. What a lot of people don't know is that all six divisions actually have some form of civil enforcement with around 50 officers currently across those six divisions. And one of the things we're looking at is with that better coordination across these, it really creates kind of a division of civil enforcement in a sense. And so one thing I've already talked with Director Jarvis and some with Director Crow is about the ways that we could possibly create some efficiencies and maximize our capabilities around the ideas of combining forces, cross-training in some ways. It's not an uncommon thing. If you look at some other cities, they have zoning enforcement and code enforcement are often combined or at least cross-trained. And I think we'd like to explore that. We don't have definite ideas on that at this point in terms of what we're going to do with it, but we are going to be looking at ways that we can increase that. We have four zoning enforcement officers in terms of being able to go out. So, I mean, ways that we can improve that without actually asking for new manpower would be great to deal with some of those new issues that we deal with. The last rationale is really CAP. The Capacity Assurance Program, I'm sure most of you are very familiar with. Some of you are much more familiar than you want to be. And then others are still kind of new. But one of the key things is that planning and building inspection are essential to an effective management of the CAP program. And without good coordination between these divisions, we're concerned that there could be some negative impact on development. Building inspection and planning have to be very tightly integrated in terms of how things work and work very closely with Charlie Martin's group. This is just a quick slide from how CAP credits, and I don't want to turn this into a discussion on CAP today, because that would take, Charlie is downstairs, I think, but that would take a long time. And that's a confusing slide, so I tried to just kind of point out in the red that the vast majority of all this in terms of cap credits is done through planning and building inspection. That this whole flow really has to work well. And the thing that makes the concern for me is that Charlie can be going great guns in terms of doing the fixes. My concern is that if we do not have it managed well on the back end, if we're not coordinating well, if we're not communicating well, that the reason that development may slow down is not because of the fixes that Charlie's doing, but because we cannot coordinate well enough on the back end. So I think this would be extremely important, and again, we're talking, and we will talk about in the future, the Acela program as well, that will help with those things, that coordination, and again, also some of the digital submissions and digital permitting. That is the quick overview that I will leave open to questions. Council members. Great. Thank you. I see at least one person signed up, and now more. I guess there are some questions. Council Member Clark. Thank you, Chair. Commissioner, in my case, you're preaching to the choir. When I first became a member of the council, I was looking through the organization, and at that point I was wondering why code enforcement and building inspection wasn't part of planning. And so this seems so logical that it almost defies discussion in a sense. So I just want to say that because this makes so much sense, and I'm certainly very supportive of it. Thank you. And I know, if I could say real quick, I know Mr. Schoenker did some analysis in looking at some of the history of where it has been and the way other cities have done it. And I know there is, I don't know if you raised the concern of public safety, but there is the issue of how do we coordinate well between these divisions and ensuring that they're still going to be following their public safety, their goals. Go ahead. I'm sorry. I was going to say, I think the key thing to know is that those are still the main, what they're going to be doing is still going to be what they're going to be doing. They are a function of public safety. And we are working right now, one of the things we're working on this summer is, if you're familiar with the Secure by Design program we have, really works on that secure aspect of the built environment from the very early stages of design on through. what people don't always know is the maintenance aspect of it. And one of the things that we're already starting to work on is how do we coordinate well between building inspection and code enforcement, building them into that securement design kind of process. But really, more than anything, it's really reinforcing that public safety aspect, making sure we have very good coordination between those public safety departments that are not within the Department of Planning. So that's something we're going to be working on this summer, just to keep that as a main focus of what those two divisions do. I meant to mention Paul's summary of the history of this because it helped me a lot to kind of know where we've come from and why we're at this point. But thank you very much. Thank you, Chair. Thank you. Council Member Lawless. I just want to echo what Council Member Clark said. And I have a folder on one case that would be an outstanding case study if you would. I spoke with you about it that day. And so I'm all for it. And the other thing is bringing streets and roads and water quality into the loop because those are huge issues in the older neighborhoods, which my district is all over neighborhoods. And I'm sure it's that they have those same issues in other areas that have the older neighborhoods. But I'm thrilled with this moving this forward this way. But I think when we look at, you know, we're paving backyards in residential properties where there are no curbs on the street, where they've been overpaved, and the stormwater can't drain if they have stormwater systems, and raw sewage comes up. And so I hope that there will be regular conversations with streets and roads as well as water quality in this loop. But I'm all for it, and thank you so much. Absolutely. Thank you. Council Member Akers. Thank you, Chair. Thanks, Derek, for this. I am happy to see it as well. As Council Member Clark said, I think it seems logical. and I also wanted to thank Paul for his summary of the history. It was very helpful to me, and I appreciated it very much. And Jen, if you helped with that, I want to thank you also. Just one question. When you mentioned instead of increasing manpower by hiring new staff for the different divisions when the need arises, will you be cross-training staff from code enforcement, zoning inspection, building inspection? Is that even possible? Because that's certainly not anything I know about. But, you know, so that a code enforcement could go on site and actually do code building and zoning without having to have three people do the same job. I think there are, right now it's kind of early discussions. I think some things are easier to cross-train than others. I think building inspection may be a little bit more difficult because of the construction process versus particularly with some of the specialized inspectors within building inspection. But one of the things that we were definitely looking at at first is to explore the idea of zoning enforcement and code enforcement, at least on some levels, to try to see can we improve, maybe not improve, but just to expand just the number of people out there being able to do some of those issues. And there are some things that have crossed over across the divisions. Signs are one of those issues that are really covered. Between planning and building inspection, there are lots of crossover, as well as code enforcement in terms of who picks up signs and who writes sign violations. So there are some specific things that we're going to target in terms of efficiencies as well. Great. Thank you. Thanks, Chair. Thank you. Council Member Lane. I, too, would like to say I like this idea. While I've been on the council, we've had issues come up where the zoning ordinance says you can do this, but people are doing something else. trying to get code enforcement to come out and enforce the ordinance, sometimes very complex because the ordinance is very complex and subject to the layers of interpretation. And it really seems to me having a team where all your team members are on the same group together and you can collaborate and cross over information very effectively and hopefully do a better job of code enforcement. So I think that's a very good idea. Keep it up. Thank you. Seeing no other council members signed up, I'll add my voice to this avalanche of approval. I think headed in the right direction. It's very encouraging, and I believe that we would need a motion to put approval of the reorganization plan on the agenda. Second. Moved by Council Member Lawless, seconded by Council Member Lane. Any further discussion? All those in favor, please say aye. Any opposed? That motion carries. Thank you very much. And on we go. The last item is the list of items referred. And I believe with today's agenda, there are three items that can be deleted, but I would need motions to delete the CAO policy number three, lease agreements, and the restructuring. I still move. I have a motion to delete all three by Council Member Clark, seconded by Vice Mayor Gordon. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? That motion carries. That leaves two items. because Council Member Myers is not in the room, and I don't know what's the relationship with the Bluegrass ad, which we have as an item referred. Can you tell us what you would like to have happen with that? Yes, sir. I think after the meeting we had the other day in social services, we talked about the administration. They're working on a plan where we actually have somebody that's a voting member, and the administration is working on putting together for us what all services and programs and resources are available through the ad, and then we're going to come back and present. So I think if we could wait long enough for that to happen, this might be a good place to present that information. And then based on that information, we begin to talk about how we move forward with that relationship. Your sense of the timing at this point? I would defer to CAO Hamilton because they're the ones that are meeting with the ad and understanding what those things are. C.L., would you like to? The first meeting that we're setting up is with Jennifer Compton on the web, and Kevin Atkins is dealing with certain people on the ability of the proxy to vote, which is extremely important. And I would think that the next meeting we ought to be able to come back and at least brief on what we found out so far. If that's okay? So we could put it on our agenda at least for update, if not for something definitive? We'll at least update if we don't have a lot. Okay. Thank you. Unless there's objection, we'll do that. And the other item, Vice Mayor Gorton? Mr. Chair, I think the CAO is working on that policy, the policy for underwriting or sponsoring or naming facilities and parks, and it's actually become a much bigger issue. So if you could speak to where you are. I saw when I left General Services, I turned that over to my successor, who said he's been so busy cleaning up after me. Commissioner Reed, and I saw a draft of it this morning. And so I had, of all the, and what that draft looks like is basically it's a staging of if you made this kind of contribution, you would get this. That's exactly what we talked about. And so I had suggested to Commissioner Reed, and we talked about it just a few minutes ago, that we needed to talk to the mayor's office about it so they knew what we had not run it through those chains. I think it may be, you're going to have a lot to chew on, but it's certainly different from anything you've seen before. And of how donations are recognized, I think it will be really good for, it's going to be good. And it's ready for next meeting. Well, again, unless the name is. I'm just, since it's Jeff, I'm just, let's put him in there. Let's just put him right there. It's ready, though, really, to talk about. Unless there's any objection, we will place that on the agenda for the next meeting. And unless there's any further business, entertain a motion to adjourn. Motion second. All those in favor, please say, oh, I'm sorry, Council Member Lane, before we adjourn. Yes, sir. Thank you, sir. Yes, I would like to make a suggestion that we add to the items in the committee, a referral, the standardization of branding and marketing initiatives for Lexington Fayette County. May I? Vice Mayor? The protocol is to make a motion in work session so that the whole council can move to put something in committee or to ask the Vice Mayor to put it in, either way. All right. Well, since you're here, Madam Vice Mayor, we'd like you to okay that. Well, I'm not sure. Are you asking if the Vice Mayor is willing to place this in committee, or are you asking? If you'll give me on paper what the issue is, the branding issue, I'm happy to do that. Thank you. Thank you. Again, if there's no further business, we already have a motion to adjourn. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? We stand adjourned. Thank you. Oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh