Music Thank you. Well, hello everybody. This is quite a democratically enthusiastic group we have with us today. So welcome to the council meeting. Welcome to the work session of the council. So today, first on our agenda is public comment for issues on the agenda. Mr. Mundy, has anybody signed up for issues on the agenda? All right. For public comment later? Yes, but not for public. All right. So that allows us to move to item number two on the agenda, rezonings and docket approval. Are there any motions for the entire docket? Second. It's a motion to approve by Council Member Beard, seconded by Council Member Ellinger. Is there any discussion on the motion? Council Member Kay. If this is the appropriate time to. This would be appropriate for a request for zone change, yes, sir? I'll wait for the docket. All right. Is there a motion for zone change? I believe Council Member Clark, you have a motion regarding the zone change, right? Yes, I do. All right, sir. Council Member Clark. Thank you, Mayor. I move to place on the docket for the May 23, 2013 Council meeting an ordinance changing the zone from a single-family residential R1D zone to a townhouse residential R1T zone for .95 net 1.28 gross acres for property located at 4145 Harrodsburg Road. Motion by Council Member Clark. Second by Council Member Massadi. Is there any discussion on the motion? All right. Vice Mayor Gordon. Yes, Mayor. Just to clarify, is that number three and without a public hearing, correct? That's correct. Thank you. All right. Any further discussion on the motion? All right. Hearing none, then we can take a vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. uh council member council member lawless do you have a motion um i moved to place on the docket without a public hearing the zone change or number five number five yes sir thank you all right motion by council member lawless we had a motion over here by Council Member Ellinger before your enthusiastic motion, Council Member Lane. So we'll have a second here by Council Member Ellinger. Is there any discussion on the motion? Council Member Farmer. Council Member Lawless, and you may not know, and I haven't read the entire packet, if this business were to cease, would the B1 usage remain. There were a lot of restrictions placed on that as to what could be many of the B-1 allowable things were limited and taken off the table in perpetuity with the zone change. Through those restrictions. Through those restrictions, and it passed 9-0. There was one objector, and I spoke to her at length. All right. And so for that reason. Very good. Thank you, ma'am. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Council Member Farmer. Is there any further discussion on the motion? Thank you, Mayor. hearing the zone change outlined in number four under ordinances for first reading so moved motion by councilman Myers 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 opposed no motion carries All right. That allows us to move on to, I believe, Council Member Kaye has a motion. Council Member Kaye. Thank you, Mayor. At the request of the administration, I move to place on the docket for the May 2013 Council meeting a resolution authorizing the Mayor to enter into a price contract services agreement with Harsha Train to provide scheduled annual preventative maintenance services for HVAC equipment of the government center, police headquarters, and downtown arts center for up to three years, with the cost in fiscal year 2013 estimated not to exceed $8,600. So move. Second. Motion by Council Member Kaye, second by Vice Mayor Gordon. Is there any discussion on the motion? All right. Hearing none, we can take a vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. All right. Next, I'll call on Council Member Akers for a walk-on. Thank you, Mayor. I move to place on the docket for the May 23, 2013 Council meeting an ordinance creating general regulations for mobile food unit vendors and an ordinance creating a six-month pilot program for certain mobile food unit vendors to operate in limited parking street spaces. Move. Motion by Council Member Akers. Is there a second? Second by Vice Mayor Gordon. Is there any discussion on the motion? All right. For those who wish to speak on the motion, all right. Council Member Masada, you signed up to speak on the motion. All right. All right. Vice Mayor, thank you. I just have a question. On number two, it says creating a six-month pilot program for certain mobile food unit vendors. Are there some that are going to be under a six-month pilot provision and some others that aren't? I'm going to defer to our attorney, Mr. Barber. It's more of a limitation on the space of the parking area than it is allowing someone to vend for more than that period of time. The way it's written, you have to be able to fit and safely operate within the parking space. That's the limited part of it. So there are certain food vendors that will be affected by this, and there will be certain food vendors that won't be? I think that there will be certain ones that won't be able to take advantage of it because of the type of operation they have. It's more designed towards the food trailer type operation than, for instance, putting a cart in a parking space, which may create other safety type issues. But if the parking authority is okay with the food cart concept being in the space, then it doesn't really prohibit that. But that technically could end up happening. Okay. Thank you for the clarification. Thank you. Council Member Massadi. Council Member Kaye. Thank you, Mayor. First, I want to thank Councilmember Akers and all the people who worked so hard on this. Obviously, a lot of work has gone into it. And in the last few days, some of the concerns that I had about the six-month time frame and having some criteria by which to judge that has been addressed, and I appreciate that. I have a remaining concern, and that is that one of the proposed areas that was in some earlier drafts has been eliminated due to a concern by the Civic Center for competition with existing business. and I believe that there's at least one other area where the same issue arises and that is on South Limestone between East Main and West Vine Street at either end. They're extremely close to similar businesses and so I'm going to move to amend the proposal, the motion to delete the area between Maine and Vine on South Limestone. Part of the concern is that many businesses have raised issues about parking, and that's a place where there's not a lot of parking. It's closer to those businesses, and I think as a result, we should remove that from this proposal. Second. It's a motion by Council Member Kaye, seconded by the last Mayor Gordon. to amend. Is there any discussion on the motion? Council Member Ellinger. Thank you, Mayor. Do you have a map that we can look at that would actually have this? Yeah, but can we put it up on the... Chris, can you put the map up on the screen, please? And kind of put the areas that you're referring to, please? so I get a better idea. And could I comment, Mayor? We want comments on the motion? Yes. Council Member Akers. On the amendment, yes. I just would like to comment for the record that, you know, the work group, there was a previous task force that worked for nearly two years led by Council Member Henson, and then I picked up this work group again in January, and we have worked for three months revising and making amendments and changes and negotiating compromise to come up with this plan. And one of the recent work groups, we brought forward a map that had circles around the restaurants and we looked at the 100 feet distance, the 50 feet distance, 200 feet, and these areas were actually identified because they fell outside of those buffers far enough away from restaurants. They were selected by both the Downtown Lexington Corporation, Renee Jackson, as well as agreed upon by the parking authority and the food truck work group approved it and submitted this forward to Council. So I just would like to state that. Thank you. Thank you. Council Member Akers. Council Member Ellinger. Thank you. Council Member Kaye, could you go tell us Where are the ones that you want to amend to, please? If you look at the map, there's a short red line that goes right by the side of Phoenix Park. That's between Main and Vine on South Limestone. And that's the area that I would like to delete. Okay, that one right there. That's the only one? That's it. Is that right next to Center Point? I'm sorry? Center Point. Center Point? On the other side of the street. It's across the street from Center Point. Yes. Councilman Ellinger. Councilman, what is the reason for that one to be eliminated? Well, really two reasons. The parking authority suggested, and I gather that it was agreed to, to eliminate a small section that was deemed to be too close to their operations. Mr. Owen was here to explain to council that he thought it was inappropriate to have food trucks right there, and that street was taken out, and there was also a question about adequate parking. This area is a place where there is very limited parking on the one hand, And on the other hand, either end where the parking would be available to the food trucks, it is very close to numerous businesses, including restaurants, on both ends. And I believe that, in fairness, if we're going to eliminate a street that affects the Civic Center, we ought to do a similar thing for the adjacent businesses to that particular street. Thank you. All right. Anyone else? Council Member Clark? You're speaking to the motion, right? The amendment. I mean to the amendment, right. Correct. Yes, sir. I think I'd have to disagree with Council Member Kay. We keep eliminating these places. We establish the idea that if we're going to have zones, there needs to be enough that there's enough flexibility there for food trucks to operate appropriately. and if we're going to eliminate another one, we're just pretty much just the whole concept is being altered. If that's not a good place, let's have an alternative to that because we're getting down to the point now there are just not enough zones to make any sense at all. And so I would vote against the amendment but certainly would not disagree with the idea that if we could find an alternative space, that would be better, I would certainly support that. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you. Council Member Clark? Vice Mayor Gordon. Just to speak to the amendment and to Council Member Clark's point, this is a pilot. So I think that in support of the amendment, what we can find is at the end of the pilot, We may want to add more zones, but to begin the pilot, I think it is important to do the pilot as right as we can get it. And so that's basically why I'm going to support it, to give the other zones a chance, and then at the end, at the six-month evaluation, perhaps we'll want to add some more. Thank you. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Anyone else wish to speak to the motion to amend? Council Member Beard and Council Member Stennett. Obviously, that is a very attractive little slice of limestone there. But I don't see the problem of a food truck. It's not in competition with Bellini's. I don't know who are we protecting. There are other restaurants further up north line that also are pretty high-end restaurants. I just don't see it. I don't know why it's a concern, to tell you the truth. Thank you. Council Member Stennett. Thank you, Mayor. Councilman Acres, how many spaces, do you remember how many spaces was identified at this location? In that zone, there are eight available parking spaces. And according to the pilot, no more than half of the spaces can be utilized by food trucks, which leaves four. I also believe that there are handicapped spaces in that zone, so those would not be accessible. so the most food trucks would either be one or two, assuming that there were contiguous spaces available. Right, and that's the point. I think during our work on the work group, there was only one space there that could potentially be taken due to the size of most of the trucks. So thank you. Thank you, Council Member Stennett. Council Member Lane and then Council Member Kay. Thank you, Mayor. To me, we're getting a little bit on a sticky, slippery slope here because I don't believe that the intention of this ordinance is to decide who can do business and compete with somebody else. I think it should be just is it a safe location where there's adequate parking and it doesn't interrupt the operation of daily business commerce in the downtown area, wherever it may be. This is a pilot program. Only the people that currently have licenses can actually be in the pilot program. I don't know how many that is, but I don't think there's a whole lot of people rolling in here. That's not true anymore? The question is to Council Member Akers if she has that answer. Could you verify whether that's correct or not? Can you repeat the question? I'm sorry. The question is that there was a limitation on new licenses being issued. No. Was that in a draft that I read? No, I don't think that we ever were going to limit the number of permits. There are currently 19 permits issued the last time that I asked our Department of Revenue. And, you know, again, that's money that we bring in. The pilot project, to participate in the pilot project specifically, the mobile food unit vendors would have to pay an additional $25 fee to participate in the pilot project, above and beyond the other fees and licenses that they have to obtain. All right. Well, anyway, my concern is more directed as trying to regulate competition. I mean, we are in America. This is a free market system. You know, people have the right to start and compete with other businesses. So I worry about us trying to be too restrictive on trying to protect other businesses. And, I mean, that's what America is all about is a new mousetrap, or in this case, a new food venue. So I think we have to be open-minded in that regard. Thank you, Mayor. We're still speaking to the motion to amend. Council Member Kaye. Thank you, Mayor. Just a couple of quick comments. First of all, there have already been decisions made about where to place these specific allowable zones based on competing with other businesses. So this is not a precedent. They've also been made on the basis of available parking. Again, it's not a precedent. But to me, the underlying question is, why are we doing this? And I am in favor of food trucks. I think they'll be a great addition to downtown. But I believe that the underlying intention is to make downtown a more vital and viable place. We've worked on it for years. We finally have a downtown that most people would say is working. But if you talk to the restaurateurs, they will tell you that it's a little bit precarious. And if we do this in such a way that it, in fact, impedes existing business, and we end up either driving restaurants out of downtown or forcing them to close, then we have undermined our own intention. I think we need to have food trucks. I've been hearing about them from you. I have sons who live in big cities, and they love them, so I'm familiar with them. But I think we need to do this very carefully. That's why I offered this amendment. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Council Member Kaye. Any further discussion on the motion to amend? All right. All in favor? Mayor. Mayor. Oh, Council Member Clark. I'm going to take the Vice Mayor's argument, and I'm going to say exactly what she said, that the fact that it is a pilot program, and I think if we're going to err, we need to err on having enough spaces for the food trucks to prove their viability. If we take another space out, then the pilot program is going to have false data. And so I would strongly suspect that we ought to not approve this amendment. Thank you. All right. Council Member Forward. Thank you, Mayor. Mayor, the amendment is the section on South Lime as it pertains to Maine and Vine. I have a question, and this is speaking to the amendment. Mayor, I have a question in regards, and Councilman Brayker's, in regards to another one of the site zones, And I would like to be able to raise it now in the spirit of amendment and convenience to the council if we're going to amend maybe to consider the amendments collectively. because one of the comments I think that Council Member Clark made was, is if we're going to change zones, if we're going to reduce anything that's been presented and vetted and studied thus far, perhaps we ought to consider where we could replace that. I have a question in regards, and this is to the amendment because I may amend the amendment. elm tree lane and i i was only able to attend one of the meetings that the last meeting that the work group had and i guess the question is was there consideration in was there consideration or rule in regards to the proposed pilot zones as it pertains to residential dwellings any members of the of the work group if you could i'll ask whoever wishes to or was there a buffer zone to respond pardon council member stennett council member acres well what was in there was 100 feet from a residential property and so the and and that Thank you for that clarification, and I won't ponder. So the stretch of Elm Tree Lane from Corral to 4th, does that meet that 100-feet buffer zone? I'm not sure. I didn't personally look at those. And that was actually a recommendation from Gary Means with the parking authority because it's underutilized meters or available parking spaces that are underutilized. And we thought that by servicing the Lyric, that for events and activities around the Lyric, that's why it was added. But certainly the area beyond, is that third, is residential and probably should not be on there. And thank you, Council Member Akers, and thank you. But on the other side, isn't it? And to the left, beyond third, is the cemetery as well, just for reference. Yes, right there. This is, forgive you. Council, forgive me. Maybe this isn't as timely, but that's what we're here for to discuss it. And I apologize for having not noticed this earlier. But I think all of Elm Tree Lane is impacted by the 100-foot residential buffer zone. Single-family, and particularly the block between third, there's a mix of single-family and multifamily that this would impact. There is on-street parking now that facilitates the Lyric, but there's long-standing homestead residences there. And as such, I think it would be appropriate for us to remove that section as well if it does not meet the 100-foot buffer, and I'm concerned about that. Well, and the zones, however, only governed, I guess you could say, regulated between 7 a.m. and 10 p.m., if that makes a difference, Chris. I mean, part of the offering as well was that that area, there's not a lot of food access, and so this actually might provide lunch or dinner for the area. But you can certainly make the motion to remove it. In the spirit, I'm going to... I was going to suggest, Council Member Ford, if we could... One at a time. Take a motion. Yeah, take this motion and then come back if you wish to offer a motion. That's fine. Yes, sir. I'll present the concern. Thank you, Mayor. Okay. Does anybody else wish to speak on the motion to amend by Council Member Hayes? Council Member Henson. Thank you, Vice Mayor. and first I want to say that I really appreciate Council Member Akers for taking this bull by the horse because I had it for a long time and I know how difficult it is but I just wanted to reiterate that this is a pilot program there is an obvious interest in food trucks I I would really like to see the pilot program go forward, unamended, everything intact, and see where we go from there. Within six months, we can come back, look at it, see what the problems are, and correct them at that time. But I don't think we should correct a problem before it exists. So thank you. Thank you, Council Member Henson. All right. Does anyone else wish to speak to the motion to amend? I'm sorry. Council Member Kaye. This is really about Council Member Ford's comments, and it raises a question in my mind. I believe that that stretch between 3rd and 4th and actually part between 2nd and 3rd has a fair amount of residents that would not be 100 feet from the street. But my question is, the way it's envisioned, but there are some spaces that would be 100 feet away. So the way the ordinance is written, would that mean that between 3rd and 4th, for example, there are places where a food truck could park because it would be 100 feet from a residence, but there are places where there are parking spaces that are closer than 100 feet, and they would be restricted. And I'm not, I don't know if, is Mr. Powerboree, can we get legal to weigh in on this? The way it's written right now, it does not do that. it could easily be rewritten to do what you're talking about but the way it's written right now as as uh council member acres alluded to the hundred foot restriction only um applies at that 10 p.m to 3 a.m hour and i don't i also don't know whether someone got out a tape measure for all of these zones or the parking spaces and and did some sort of analysis as to how far away they were located from the residential properties okay so that really helps me so the the restriction the hundred foot restriction only applies in the more general they can go anywhere between 10 a 10 p.m and 3 a.m except within 100 feet of residences and these zones don't have anything to do with that restriction so under the way that ordinance is written we could have no i think generally speaking they started out that way but i think there may be some areas like you're pointing out where the 100 foot is not exactly this you know it's not 100 feet but generally speaking i think that was one of the focuses when they came up with the spaces was to keep them away from residential areas with the exception i hope of just this one street you all are talking about so council member k excuse me council member k question that i is does your does your question also relate to your motion to amend or does it would it relate to the anticipated possible motion that council member ford has indicated he may offer I think my concern is that there may be, if there are additional questions to be raised about zones, I don't want to be eliminating zones if we're not, and I agree, I think we need to have as many zones as possible, but they need to be the right zones. And if there are additional questions, then I would suggest that it's inappropriate to go forward at this point. So, but I'm happy to have the amendment voted on, and then we can, if he has additional amendments, we can talk about those. And then eventually we'll get back to a question about whether this is appropriate for the docket or not. And the reason I was asking that question was to ensure that there is an understanding of your question and the inquiry associated with it, the context of it, really. Right now, my amendment is on the floor, and that's all. Thank you. Okay. All right. Anyone else wish to speak to the motion to amend? Council Member Massadi. David, would you mind coming to the podium again? David, I appreciate it. Because there's been some questioning about the 100 feet in the residential, is there any type of liability associated with that on the government's part? because if we're not following the ordinance to... It would be a difficult case to make us liable. As part of this program, you're supposed to carry insurance that would run to us as well in case something like that happened. So we require them to carry general commercial liability insurance that would name us as an additional insured in case we were named in some sort of lawsuit. So basically the burden's on the vendor? Yes. That's what I need to know. Thank you. All right. All right. Looks like no one else wishes to go. Okay. Council Member Lawless. This has changed quite a bit, several times. and is it 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. on the designated zones because it says 10 a.m. to 10 p.m. limited to the five designated metered parking areas available. and then from 10 p.m. to 3 a.m. they can operate anywhere. So I thought it was just until 5 p.m.? No. I mean, in the last work group when we approved it, it was 7a to 10p, and several of the last drafts it's been 7a to 10p in the zones. Okay, thank you. I'm sorry I missed that. There's a big pause here. What are we waiting on? Is there a question? We're ready to vote. All right. All right. You're finished, Council Member Lawless. All right. All right. If there's no further discussion, then we can take a vote on the motion to amend by Council Member Kay. All right. Just make sure that we know what we're voting on. All right. All in favor of the motion to amend, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, no, and vote electronically, it looks like. No. All right. The motion to amend fails by a vote of 10 to 5. All right. So we are now back to the original motion by Council Member Akers. Is there further more? Council Member Gorton? Or Bure's? No, I think Council Member Lawless was first. Council Member Lawless. Council Member Lawless. Yours is showing it. Another thing that maybe was in the draft but I was unaware of is the, and I think that we also have an opportunity to amend, to add spaces to whatever as we move forward. But that from 10 p.m. to 3 a.m., they can operate in anywhere, I guess, in Fayette County as long as it is not within 100 feet of a primary entrance of a business on the same side of the street during posted business hours, and that is not limited to greater downtown areas. So when did they put in there that they, if it had to be on the same side, if it was on the same side of the street, but if it was less than 100 feet across the street, they could be there. Did I miss something? That was added by the law department as well, specifically because, and this goes back to other amendments that have been proposed, we tried to use language in the ordinance that did not protect any particular business. And so the 100-feet buffer is from any business that's open for business during that time. If they have permission from the business, then they can certainly operate outside of the business, in the example of a bar that's open late at night. Certainly, I understand that. And then David added in, unless they're divided by a street, and so then it wouldn't. If they're on the opposite side of the street on Main, selling in front of the old courthouse, than the businesses that are open at that time of night on the other side of the street. Even if it's 75 feet, then that buffer would not apply. I did not make that change. I didn't suggest that change. That was our law department. So you can maybe ask David. David, could you speak to that? And thank you. I'm glad I didn't just. Right. We felt that it was more legally defensible if you're going to create a foot restriction of that size that if you have a break the width of a street that it would be okay to operate across the street from it. You have legal issues that come up if you try to make this protectionism in flavor. There are legitimate public safety aesthetic concerns with locating near open businesses. But if you base this upon, I want to keep other businesses from being detrimentally impacted, you get into some potential legal issues by doing that. So our thought was by having it not apply across the street, you avoid possibly additional legal issues by doing that. And let me just say, my issue is not about protecting anyone or so businesses. It's about the incredibly sparse amount of parking we have in downtown, which is one of the things we want is people on the streets. And so if anybody, food trucks are allowed, and I love food trucks, and I think that the people who are food truck people will, if they're honest, will know that I did a lot in the last task force to remove barriers they were facing. and I also tried to add some public property issues that we weren't able to do in this task force as well as I would like to see some places that vendors could use on the sidewalks that they don't have to move and that was taken out. But what my concern is on-street parking in downtown Lexington is at a premium. And I was driving last Sunday night at a quarter till 10, and I drove that entire area, and I found six open parking spaces on a Sunday night. So it's not about protectionism. If there are no limits to the number that can be parked there from 10 p.m. to 3 a.m. and that decreases the amount of parking available for people to come downtown and enjoy our downtown, that is of concern to me. So this isn't protectionism. It's about the living room for our entire community. And so is there a way that we can amend that or I can work on it between now and then? I'm not trying to slight the food trucks. I want people on the street enjoying downtown. And most people that were down there Sunday night weren't there for restaurants or whatever. They were walking around enjoying downtown, which is what we know is that's economic development for our community, people on the streets. So I'd like to clarify that that is not my purpose there. Thank you. Vice Mayor Gordon. Thank you, Mayor. First, I want to thank Councilmember Akers and her task force for taking this on. And I am going to support this. It is a pilot that we're doing. And I think that your criteria that we've all seen for evaluation come October, November, will tell us what we need to know about changes. I did have a question for Mr. Barbary. the parking authority and then I also might I know Jim Frazier is here the chair of the parking authority board I might also ask him this gives primary enforcement to the parking authority from 8am to 5pm yes for those metered spaces and then afterwards by default it would go to the police department to be the primary so is there is there enforcement only of the parking space, or is it of the whole rest of the ordinance? I think it's generally going to, in most instances, going to end up being the parking space. If they have an issue of concern where they don't feel comfortable, they regularly use the police department anyway to assist them, and I think that's probably how it would end up operating. Okay, so any other concerns? I suspect a lot of the issues that are going to come up with respect to the metered spaces are going to be the 50% issue, Did you use the electronic payment that you're required to pay and that kind of thing? And they would end up being the primary enforcement on that. If they needed assistance from the police department, my understanding is they use them today if they have a problem that they can't address themselves, and that's how it would operate. Okay, that makes sense. Do you have any further comment, Mr. Frazier? And I appreciate that the task force was willing to give the parking authority some input. I'm glad to be here today. I'm sorry Mr. Means is not here for more than one reason. I answer the best I can. Councilman Akers came to our meeting last week, and that was a big issue we discussed at enforcement because we had the boots on the ground, and we saw when we took over the meters spaces that our enforcement was a whole different level of enforcement than the police did. And I understand why, but it's just the way it was. And I do recognize, and I think Councilman Akers is correct, it is going to be complaint-driven. Our authority does not lie with anything other than trying to enforce the meter laws. So if they don't pay, what David said is correct. But we do have great concerns and honestly think that this is going to be an enforcement problem for us, to be honest with you. But it's a pilot program, and we'll probably figure it out as we go. But there are issues like that. And quite frankly, and while I'm here, because I'm going to have to leave, I've got my vice chair, Mr. Ball, on the way, and he's not real happy about this. but we do have a bit of a disconnect with regard to the ordinance. I want to make sure everybody understands we are trying to support what is being done here, and we did vote on this to try this out, and we made some amendments, and I think Councilperson Akers has incorporated those amendments, one of which was to delete the Mill Street area between Fine and Main because of safety issues. That was our concern there. But we have a fundamental disconnect on the hours of operation. I will tell you, quite frankly, I don't think the board is comfortable with a full eight-hour day of someone parking and using these meters, even though they may be half in designated zones. And I truly understand where Councilperson Akers is coming from, that a two-hour allotment just doesn't make sense practically. Get in there, set up, and time you're done, it's time to go home. And I appreciate that. All I would ask this council to do is whatever you all do, whatever it may be, please lead the administration of this program on street, on the site itself. Give the parking authorities some flexibility of how we interpret some of this because we're the ones going to have to live with this. And taking over the street meters has been a successful endeavor. I think everybody believes that, maybe except Councilmember Farmer. But I had to say that. I had to say that. I'm sorry. I say that lovingly. You know that. But I just really think that if we would be allowed to have some discretion as you unroll this and kind of get it out there, it will certainly help our folks a lot because there are going to be some things that none of us have thought about because it's new. And my commissioner, Wayne Masterman, who voted against this project for a lot of reasons, talked about that and enunciated a number of those at our meeting that Councilperson Acres heard. So that was the only thing I'd like to leave with you, that the administration of this really needs to be open-ended and give the parking authority some flexibility with regard to some enforcement and some times, because I don't really think, as it is right now, my board's comfortable in locking up half of those spaces in those designated areas on a full daily basis. We are only there until 5 o'clock, and Councilperson Acres is correct. After 5, what happens is really none of our business. We don't enforce the parking at that point in time. But it's during the day that we are concerned, as Council Member Lawless indicated, we've made great strides in making parking available. We've had a lot of problems with the garage being closed. It's back open. It's online, which has helped alleviate a great deal of the glut that we've pushed all these folks out of the garage. But having said that, the merchants are benefiting. The merchants are truly benefiting by our enforcement. And I think that if we end up losing too many spaces, I'm not saying this does this, Council Person Acres. I'm just saying let's be cognizant of that. And before you want to add some more spaces, I really like the parking authority, Gary, means to be vetted in with this because safety is a big concern for our folks. Mill Street between Vine and Main is a heavily trafficked area. You all know that. To have a food truck there would just be really a safety problem. That was the first thing we all saw when we met in our meeting last week. And Council Person Acres was nice enough to lead that for us, and I appreciate that. So that's the only thought I'd like to overlay with you all before. I leave that regardless of which way we go on here, please leave some discretionary administrative authority with the parking authority with regard to enforcement and application of some of the ordinance issues. Thank you. I appreciate your candid comments, and, of course, your input in October will be very important. Yes, ma'am. Thank you all very much. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Council Member Ford. Thank you, Mayor. I'll be brief. I want to turn attention back to the Elm Tree Lane section, and I have one question. in regards to all the zones, I'm looking at the map that's on the overhead. There are no parking meters on Elm Tree Lane. And my question is, for the other four zones that are designated, are those metered spaces that's referenced? As such, I will bring forth a motion, but I want to do so, And I have spoken with Council Member Akers about this possibility, which would be an alternative. The work group may have discussed it or not. But there is a section of Corral Street boarded to the west by MLK to Spruce Street. There's a combination of meters, I believe, and I'm speaking from just my memory sitting here. There's a combination of meters, and there's a combination of maybe, there's parking, on-street parking spaces, that I think that is monitored by the authority of Lex Park. And the closest residential, I believe, would be Corral Street as it crosses Spruce Street and heads to Elm Tree Lane. And I think there's a senior, maybe St. James Place is there. So that's the residential, I believe so. I feel obligated to the residents along Elm Tree Lane and to the Lyric Theater for whom most of that on-street parking is designed to serve. So I will make a motion to amend to remove this section of M. Tree Lane from this pilot program. And then I would offer, as a recommendation, a study or consideration of this work group or council of that section and the parking authority of that section of Corral Street, which, as the map shows, is in pretty good walking distance of much of the institutional businesses downtown, the courthouses, the annex, this building proper, etc. So, Council Member Akers and your work group who's worked so hard, I hope that will be a consideration. But again, I feel obligated for the residents to make this motion, and I'll ask for a second to amend and remove Elm Tree Lane from this section and its on-street parking, non-metered on-street parking from this pilot program. So moved. Okay. Okay, the motion. Council Member Ford, can you repeat the motion, the location? My motion is to remove the section of Elm Tree Lane from, that's highlighted there, which is from Corral Street going north to 4th Street because of its proximity to residential and also that it doesn't have metered parking. The motion is to eliminate the zone indicated by the red line from Corral Street to 4th Street on Elm Tree Lane. Is there a second to the motion? Second by Council Member Massadi. All right. The floor is available for discussion on the motion to amend. Council Member Farmer. Thank you, Mayor. Council Member Ford, on the amendment, so that would remove it in its entirety? Yes, sir, because as has been indicated, there's two reasons. Primarily it's the residential component, and none of us have taken tape measures out there, but I would contend from memory that there's residential impact along each of those blocks, going from Corral all the way up to Elm Tree Lane. And again, that used to be a two-lane on both sides. And we reduced one of the lanes to accommodate the parking primarily for access to the Lyric Theater, multifamily and residential. Also, what's been highlighted to me today is that there are no metered spaces. So we lack the enforcement that the parking authority grants with the metered spaces. Just in part of the working group's discussion, it did have to do with some of the viability or opportunity near the Lyric Theater. But are you saying that there's, I guess there is residential immediately to the south of the Lyric Theater and set back to its north, and all that's within 100 feet? It's residential impact all along that highlighted corridor. Thank you, sir. Thank you, Mayor. Thanks, Mr. Ford. Council Member Stenet. Council Member Ford, are you saying that there's residential properties on both sides of Elm Tree? Because isn't it just on the east side and there's none on the west, with our clinic being there and other things? There's no residential on the west side of Elm Tree that would be impacted. There are residential. There are. I can't remember and recall, Vinny. I know there's a couple of nonprofits, and our clinic is right there. I think we're splitting hairs. Thanks, Council Member Center. I think we're splitting hairs. I think are these zones, the remaining zones, that red line indicates that you can site in a metered space on any side of the street in these zones. And again, I contend, Council Members, there are no metered spaces along any of this stretch of Elm Tree Lane. there's no meter spaces so there lacks the enforcement that that this pilot program surely will need to be of success to the food truck vendors council member acres do you wish to speak all right all right council member stenton are you Okay. Councilmember Henson, are you signed up to speak to this motion? All right. Councilmember Henson. Thank you, Mayor. Yes, ma'am. I just wanted to say that I have to agree with Councilmember Ford because the enforcement issue would not be present on Elm Tree. There is a lot of residential property, single-family homes. in addition to St. James Place that would probably benefit, you know, I mean, some folks would benefit from the food trucks, but if the metered spaces were there, I wouldn't be supportive. But without the parking authority being involved, I think that section should be removed. Thank you. Council Member Farmer, are you up again? No. Yes, sir. No. You're up. Council Member Ford, were you then considering making a separate motion potentially to add that piece or another piece to the group after? In fairness, not having consulted the work group or the parking authority, I feel somewhat reserved to recommend that Corral Street alternative from MLK to Spruce. But I strongly encourage it. I strongly encourage it, and I would like to dispense with the Elm Tree motion first. Very good. Thank you, sir. Thank you, Mayor. Yes, sir. But, Mr. Farmer, I didn't mean to cut you off. I would like to dispense with the Elm Tree motion first, but if the Council has an appetite to discuss Corral Street, I definitely would go for it to do it. Appetite. Either that or the other suggestion that you had, which is that part of East Short Street, all the way at the very end, too, potentially. Yes. Okay. Thank you. All right. Thank you, Council Member Farmer. Anyone else wish to speak to the motion? all right oh councilmember Kay yes just to kind of add the last maybe thought on Elm Tree Lane itself what you have on Elm Tree Lane between third and fourth streets is with the exception of the parking lot that's across the street from the Lyric Theater which is opposite to old Episcopal burial ground you either have the we have a an apartment complex multi-unit multi-family dwellings or you have the back side of residences that are on campsy place which is where I live I don't happen to back up to that but that's across the street from me so I know the area fairly well if you go down so between the Lyric is opposite apart itself is opposite parking lot so there's no residential but as you go south there is senior citizens assisted living and then corner residences all the way down on the east side and only businesses on the west side so there's a fairly significant residential impact on elm Tree Lane. And I agree with the issue of the lack of metering and the taking up of these spaces when we created them in particular so that there'd be adequate parking for Lyric Theater events. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Council Member K. Anyone else wish to speak to the motion? All right. If not, then we can take a vote on the motion to amend by Council Member Ford. All in favor of the Motion to amend, please indicate by saying aye. Opposed, no. And probably vote electronically. All right. The motion to amend passes. All right. So we're back to discussion on the original motion. Council Member Aker's original motion to. Yeah, sure. Second. Council Member, call on Council Member Akers. I don't know if I'll just add to my previous motion or amend or something, but I would like to make a motion to include Corral Street from Martin Luther? Mm-hmm. MLK to Spruce. From MLK to Spruce. Second. Second. Motion by Council Member Akers. to include Corral from MLK to Spruce? Yes. In the zone. All right, and a second by Council Member Ford. Is there any discussion on the motion? Vice Mayor Gordon. Well, since this is being done sort of on the fly, I would ask Mr. Ball, who's with the parking authority, Kenton Ball, welcome. Thank you. Thank you. If just on the surface you have any concern about that. No, that area would appear to be fine. and it's metered, and we've noted low usage of that in the past. So we would primarily have no objection. Thank you for that input. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you. Vice Mayor? Mayor. Council Member Akers? It is also my understanding, and maybe Council Member Henson can speak to this, that Mr. Means from the Parking Authority actually recommended this area in the previous task force as a proposed zone. All right. Thank you. Council Member Stenet? Okay. All right. Does anyone else wish to speak to the motion? Yes. Council Member Kay. Thank you, Mayor. Motion to amend, rather. Yes, motion to amend. A question for either Council Member Akers or others who are on the task force. Was North Martin Luther King ever considered as a possible site because it would fit with the Corral Street area and it's metered? It is commercial rather than residential with minor exception. So is that thought about as a potential area for the food trucks? Beyond 3rd Street? Is that what you're saying? Between 3rd and 4th? I'm talking between Corral and 3rd. Between Corral and 3rd. It was never mentioned that I know of. And that was, I mean, I had meetings with Renee Jackson and with Gary Means, and that's where the zones were identified. So I basically went on their expertise, relied on their expertise. Thank you. I'm not opposed to it, though. I'm sure the food trucks aren't either. Just for the record. All right. Council Member Kaye. Just to, I guess, continue on. I'm reluctant to do this, but I'm going to suggest that there have been enough questions raised about areas in and areas out that I believe this needs further vetting. I'm not comfortable that we've thought through all of the possible areas, all the ways to make it work so that it really does benefit the food trucks. It doesn't have a negative impact. So given that the motion on the floor, I don't believe I can make a motion to refer it to a committee, but I would urge council members to vote no to put it on the docket, and then I would make a motion to refer it into the planning committee. Thank you. Planning. Let's see. Now, we've got a motion to amend, so we're still speaking to that motion. All right. Does anyone else wish to speak to the motion to amend, to include Corral Street? All right. Hearing none, then we can take a vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. All right. All right, we're back to the original motion now. Is there any further discussion on the original motion? Council Member Lawless. Oh, wait a minute, wait a minute. Council Member Stennett was up. Apologize. I want to go back to something. I'm sorry Mr. Frazier had to leave, but let's talk about enforcement. And what I hear him to say clearly, I know we have a sub-end now, so I apologize. But you had asked for some leeway in terms of the enforcement and number of hours. and the way I read the current ordinance, the way it's written, and our law department can correct me, the most someone can stay there at this point, the way it's written, is two hours, and they have to leave. Is that how you all? That is because of the present rules with the parking authority. Right. Yes, you're correct. Your all's rules, our rules. Right, so they couldn't stay there six, eight hours anyway. At this point in time. Right, so I just want to make sure we all understand what we're voting on. It's two-hour max. If they're there at 7 a.m., they're leaving by 9, the way it's currently written. So I just want to make sure my colleagues, and I see a lot of confused faces, because I don't think what Mr. Frazier said was the same as what you're saying. What he said, yeah, let's confirm what this okay. I want to confirm how you're going to enforce it, because this will be a gray area. We should let Kenton know what it was Jim said, because I suspect he was on the way over here when Mr. Frazier was speaking. My recollection of what he said was that he was asking for flexibility in the enforcement. I didn't hear him say anything myself. I didn't hear the eight- or two-hour question addressed. Well, regardless of what he said, I think the issue is how are you going to enforce it? Is it going to be a strict two-hour rule, same as it is now, or are we going to have flexibility for this program? Well, I think we grant you flexibility for this program. And the reason we have a two-hour rule is because street parking, as we understand street parking in this town, is for the benefit of retail and professional. So we want short time in, short time out. This project is obviously a pilot project and is very different in focus than what you have with regard to regular retail parking, say in Chevy Chase, South Mill, wherever. So we would be flexible. And that's what Jim said to me on his way out. He goes, make sure you get that we are flexible. Okay, I just want a clear understanding for business owners, restaurants, that before they pick up the phone and call on a truck that's been there four hours, how we're going to enforce that. I don't think that they said, I didn't hear them say myself, somebody else may have, I didn't hear them say that they had made that determination. That's correct. Well, my point is we need to make that, and the public needs to be clear about what our opportunity for enforcement is going to be. Well, I think the enforcement would really follow upon the parking authority, and we'd be happy to work with the council on whatever guidelines you thought, but we would think that probably it's going to take more than two hours in these meters. But, again, the boss's rule is that I'm to be flexible. Right, and I think that needs to be clear before we pass anything, what our expectations are from the council. I'm just speaking to my colleagues, not to the Parking Authority Board. Now, the other issue of enforcement, not the spaces, falls under our CAO. And I know you're excited to enforce the rest of this ordinance, But I just want to have an opportunity to let you have time to address the council. If we pass this, can you enforce the rest of the ordinance? Do you have the staff? Do you have the hours of operation that you can respond? Who do people call to enforce the rest of this? Take your time. So are we going to rely upon the hand of the police, or are we going to be able to administer this a different way? Well, thank you very much for asking me. I know you like a good opportunity to address this. I do like a good opportunity, and I just don't know. I just don't know. When I looked at this the first time, you know, when I had sort of tried to stay out of the food truck business, And then when Mr. Barbary came to me and said, this has to go somewhere, and the logical place is with the CAO, I gulped. But in reality, no kidding aside, if this is what the council decides to do, we will get this done. We will shift things around and do it. It is not going to be an easy feat. When I looked at this, I kept saying, oh, my heavens, we've now set up an office of food trucks. I mean, how am I going to do this? But they're whispering back here to me $25 fee. But this will get done in a way. And then after the pilot, we're going to watch this very carefully because if this just becomes immense, we're going to have to come back and tell you all how immense it has become. Well, thank you for your candidness and your willingness to take this on. I certainly appreciate it. I just want to make sure we're doing all we can to help you enforce it. Well, I appreciate you asking. Thank you. I know you have some backup. They're ready to. Well, I was simply going to kind of echo what she said, that the six-month pilot, the interaction that the police will have with this, we're very flexible, and we feel like whatever steps need to be taken during the enforcement, we can put together the kind of reports and recommendations going forward on what might need to change towards the future. So we're willing to step in as a police department and provide whatever assistance and support we need to do. Very good. Thank you. Thank you all. Thank you, Mayor. Okay. Bill, you're good? Okay. It's covered, or you wish to amend? I was just going to say Sally Hamilton's my boss, and I'm here to support her. Me too, yeah. But the responsibilities under the CAO are both administrative, which I think revenue already has a hand in that, and we'll support her with that part of it, the $25 license fee, permit, whatever the term is. We're already administering the itinerant merchant and the mobile food unit vendor license, so that would fall under our area, whereas the police would be on the street, and then the CAO's office would be the appeals process in case there was a decision that needed to be appealed, then she would be handling that. So three points of reference that will be supporting the pilot. Thank you, Mr. Moira. Council Member Lawless. first of all I'd like to thank everybody councilmember acres stinnett farmer Clark notice a lot of new people on myself councilmember Henson and all the people that have worked for a very long time or a short time on this. I think that there are concerns that came up today with new parts of the ordinance and Mr. Barbary. I think that there are some of these zones that may not be as appropriate, but I also see some zones that may be more appropriate, for instance, in front of my house, because I really hate to go somewhere to get something to eat. And, again, I think that maybe this is something that we can put on the docket. I'd like to meet with various people, including food truck operators and the parking authority, and look at these areas and see what other areas might be as beneficial but less problematic. And one thing that has really been disconcerting to me is the vilification of restaurants and bars in downtown Lexington. Because I don't think that anybody needs to vilify the food truck vendors or the bricks and mortars or especially not me. But anyway, I still wish we could, and I think this was something that we worked on in the last one. There were places where people could become, and I think Jason was interested in Tony Rios, having a mobile food unit that could be not a peddler, which I use that term. Some people see it as derogatory, but that's in the ordinance where they could be stationary. on the sidewalk we came up with places that everybody felt really good about and i also want to say that there's also a lot of private property where people can go one huge concern i have is what happens from 5 p.m to 10 p.m and 10 p.m to 3 a.m and how is that again going to impact the vitality, not any business specifically or bricks-and-mortar restaurants or any of that, but people coming to our downtown and enjoying our downtown. So if we can come up with some guidelines around that, I think that that's really critical. And it's not just people, as I think Mr. Ball said, And those parking places in the daytime are utilized by people running in to meet with their attorney, do banking, getting their driver's license renewed, any number, going to the courthouse to file something or pick up papers. So it's not just about, and for me, this isn't protectionism of any specific or particular business, but the vitality of our downtown, and I think it can be a win-win situation. And I think there are a lot of opportunities for everybody, but it needs to be done well. and we need to know before we pass this exactly how that's going to work. And so I'm willing to go on and put it on the docket with, you know, we always have the opportunity to table it if it doesn't look like it's, but try to spend some time coming up with some more creative ways to make everybody, make it the best it can be for our community. Thank you, and Godspeed. Council Member Myers. Thank you, Mayor. I have one follow-up question on the enforcement piece. Do we have an understanding of how this is going to be enforced? I know that you guys asked for leniency or flexibility in how you do it, but if right now it says two-hour limit, are you just not going to, for this pilot's sake, It's a pilot program for six months, and all the spaces that are affected, only 50 percent may be used for the food trucks. And the areas that we looked at, we actually took out one of the areas, 100 block of South Mill, because we thought it was too highly, too densely used, too often frequently used. So we did work with Council Member Akers to pick areas that we think our usage surveys indicate are less than 80 percent or 70 percent. They're not maximum or optimally used spaces. So we do have the flexibility, and, again, that's what Jim Frazier said his way up the door. So that's what we're going to do. Okay, so I understand that. I just want to, again, we'll commit to being flexible. And here's the other piece of that flexibility. Okay. Is it going to be consistent? Because we don't want, if an event comes downtown and all of a sudden parking places become premium, a food truck today got six hours in that spot, but tomorrow a food truck only gets two. So it almost sounds like it would be better if you just say we're going to waive that part of the ordinance for the sake of this six hours. That's not our decision. That's a decision that's made pursuant to the ordinance by council member because it's on a first-come, first-served basis. Sure. Okay, so let me ask the council, I guess, is that something that we want to do is define how that piece of the enforcement is going to take place? just food for thought. I'm not suggesting what we do, but food for thought. And then, so maybe somebody else can pick up on that. Maybe Council Member Akers can speak to that. But also, Council Member Akers, could you speak to when the six-month pilot is over, how is the evaluation, what's it going to look like, and what are we looking to understand at the end of the evaluation period as to whether or not we either continue this program, expand it, pull it back a little bit and continue it, or et cetera? Thank you, Mayor. To the first question about the parking spaces and the allowable time, when I originally drafted this and worked with Gary on the parking spaces, I really did not want to legislate in the ordinance the parking authority's authority, so to speak. I wanted to leave the negotiations and agreements between the food trucks and the parking authority as far as what they would charge, if they would charge a special permit, a monthly fee, versus hour to hour or a daily rate or what have you. That's their business. That's their authority is the parking spaces. And so I tried not to legislate that. The question has come up, should we limit it to two hours? Should we allow four? And again, it is being discussed. I talked to Mr. Frazier today. I talked to Gary yesterday. So I think that we will know that answer sooner than later. We can call a special meeting of their board if necessary. They meet again June 13th. if we can wait until then. But I know that if this moves forward, we would probably need an answer before their next board meeting. So that can certainly be addressed. But again, I think that that's to their discretion and not ours to dictate specifically. But if I could interrupt just a second, I think he just said that it's up to us because they have to follow our ordinance. I think they're expecting us to give them guidance. Maybe. I could be wrong. Let me clarify something you all brought up earlier. Right now, the way it's drafted, it's first come, first served, but they can enter into an agreement with LFCPA to do otherwise. And there's also the flexibility on the hours that are set. That's up to them. That's the way it's drafted right now. So I think they're, and correct me if I'm wrong, I think they're just saying their current guidelines and operating structure is two hours a spot. Correct. And as to the evaluation, I did draft a proposed evaluation of the project, and everyone should have it in your packet. And my idea is to bring the pilot project to the Economic Development Committee of the Whole in October for consideration. During that time that we would consider the number of food truck, I'm going to say food truck instead of mobile food unit vendor. So we would look at the number of food truck permits issued prior to the implementation of the project, which to date are 19. The number of permits issued following the implementation of the project. How many citations were issued by the Division of Police during the project. How many citations issued by the parking authority. Same for health department. How many permits were revoked from the CAO's office. what comments were received from the downtown Lexington Corporation, the parking authority, council members, the mayor's office, the CAO's office, and all of that. We'll bring back all of these constituencies. Commander Pape, who was on the work group. We'll bring back Gary from the parking authority, Law, and everyone in October and begin the conversation of what needs to be changed. And certainly if council members want to add to the pilot and want to extend zones and suggest other zones, we would welcome that. And begin that conversation in October so that then in November we can continue the conversation and hopefully make decisions to amend, revise, extend, or terminate the project when it expires, assuming it's passed now or soon, it would expire in December. So I hope to get the ball rolling on review and evaluation in October. All right. Council Member Myers. My time's up, but if I could just make a final comment, please. That, to me, is going to be the key if I vote for this, is how the evaluation takes place and that we have things that we can actually measure and understand the real impact so that we make a wise decision moving forward. And I think one of the things that's going to be really key is hearing from the parking authority and how tough it's been to enforce it and those things. So great job on the work you've done, and we'll see how it goes. Thank you. Councilman McKay. Thank you, Mayor. Just briefly, I think we need to know what the regulation is going to say about how long a food truck can sit in a particular place. Right now, it would be two hours. My understanding is from the vendor's perspective, two hours is not adequate. It doesn't give them enough time to set up and to vend and to then leave. and that but right now there's no guarantee for them that it'll be more than two hours there's no guarantee for someone who has a concern on the other side that it might not be four or six or eight or that they couldn't arrive at seven o'clock in the morning and stay there until 10 o'clock at night so again i just think we need more information before we proceed thank you mayor thank you council member thank you council mckay council reformer Thank you, Mayor. Boy, you all are going to love the Farmer's Jewelry Gold Buy kiosk in the heavily fortified golf cart I'm going to get. But anyway. All right. Council Member Akers, on the proposed evaluation of the food truck pilot project. So these are some of the, I guess, ways to evaluate that you've come up with thus far, how well this works or doesn't work. And who will help draw this up, I guess? Well, after I submitted the packet last week, the final draft that I received from David that incorporated the changes from the parking authority, and I submitted that out and let everyone know that this is what I would be presenting today, there were questions raised on how we would actually know the success or failure of the project at the end of the six months. So to address those concerns, I drafted this. All right. I began with what I considered to be objective data points. I did contact revenue, and I would love to be able to compare revenue from food trucks going up or down during the time and aggregate that data. I would love to compare the income and profits of restaurants in the downtown area up or down compared to if food trucks were there and actually see if there's an economic impact. Unfortunately, I was told that tax returns are confidential, and so we cannot aggregate that sort of data and compare it. So these are the most objective data points I could come up with that we could access easily and begin the discussions. And obviously the last three are input received from the restaurant owners, food trucks, and concerned citizens. So you think it's balanced so that it would be objective in terms of the information we get back based on this pilot? Well, and again, this is certainly open to, I mean, we can consider anything we want in the Economic Development Committee and ask whatever questions we want to of the pilot project. But, you know, I think that the number of citations issued by the police is certainly objective, as well as the Health Department and Parking Authority, et cetera. I would like to think so. Anyway. Thank you. I just, this council has done a lot for food trucks already with your leadership in terms of changing the procedures. They have to go through in order to license and get out on the street, initiating a zone ordinance text amendment to provide them with different places to go than where they go right now. I just have a, I'm just, I'm stuck in my bricks and mortar background, And I just don't feel in this discussion that there is adequate kick-out opportunity at the end of six months. Everyone who's spoken to it has used terms of, with your exception, ma'am, because you did say we could end it in six months. Sure. It's just that, I don't know, I'm just stuck on the cusp here. And it's obviously my therapy in public. And if I could mention one last reminder, I know that all of us have received countless emails today, yesterday, and since we have been working on this. And so I did, against my better judgment and against my love of trees and not wasting paper, but I did print all of the emails from just citizens, not from food truck operators, not from restaurant owners, but just from citizens in the community who have asked us to support the food truck pilot project for simply six months and just to get it on the street, and this is that stack of emails. And so, you know, I think that if we do what's in the best interest of Lexington and do what the people ask of us, that we should pass this motion. For this pilot project. The pilot project at hand. It will be evaluated near its end, and determination will be made whether to enhance it, change it, or decommission it. Or say it was a complete failure and get rid of it, sure. Well, I mean, I think that part of the conversation is that we're going to do that. and has been made in the work group and here too, is what is the tenuous nature of success in downtown Lexington right now? And will these evaluation points take that into account? I, as much as everyone else here, want Lexington to be as beautiful and as progressive and do the right things in all of its neighborhoods. But I just, I don't know. And I'm going to go over my time, but I have a problem in one of my neighborhoods now, today, where a food truck owner, provider, purveyor, what have you, starts cooking at a very early hour and comes back at a very late hour and places an unfair situation on the neighbors in the neighborhood. Now, to go to Steve Kay's point, in this being a pilot project, we have not addressed a lot of issues. We have not addressed, in my opinion, what a food truck is, what a food cart is. Can they go on the sidewalk? What if they don't fit in one space? There are as many levels to this chess game as we can conjure up. But on the other hand, we can do that in six months. There's just more levels to the conversation than we took up. And that's why it's taken three years to even come up with this, and we cannot legislate every potential what-if. That's the challenge for sure. Well, it is, and you just want to make sure you're trying to do it. Not that anyone's acting in not good faith here, but we're making a change in how we purvey public right-of-way for private use. There are examples that food truck people have used that we may agree or disagree with, but we have not pervaded this space in this way before. And I think that's the major change in all of this is to step back and let that happen. And sometimes it's watching the bungee cord or watching the two trains hit or whatever. It's just hard to do, and I'm trying to let go. I'm working through this right now, obviously. But it's just, I don't know. I want to preserve the opportunities that Downtown Lexington is presenting to us right now. I'm happy. One of the thoughts that I had also was to do some sort of a survey and conduct an anonymous survey either with restaurant owners or with citizens or with food truck operators or all of the above. I would love to work with the, I see two members of the Herald Leader here, to work with them to conduct some sort of a survey, like you said, to determine whether people feel that the vibrancy of downtown was enhanced or improved because of food trucks or whether it was detrimental and include everyone's opinions. I mean, I would be happy to facilitate that kind of a survey and partner with them to open it up as wide as we can to the community because I do want an objective opinion of the results of the pilot project, six-month temporary project. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Farmer. Council Member, we're back to Council Member Lawless. The other thing I do want to remind people here is we're not talking about just downtown. This is the whole county. And Commissioner Mason, I appreciate your thoughts about regulating parking, But if you go to the 3rd District and see the after 5 p.m., and I've been working with the parking authority on a pilot for past 5 p.m. in residential parking areas, et cetera, we don't have the police power to regulate when people are parked. And, again, I love food trucks. I think they have a great place in our community. and I think as we move forward with this that we need to maybe amend it, and I will try to come back with some amendments, and I also want to work toward looking at places where they can be on the sidewalk with push carts and stay there for a period of time. I think that they have, and I think there are some places that maybe need to be removed and some other places that can be added that will be of great help. So that being said, chow down. Okay. All right. Vice Mayor Gordon. I move to call the question. Move to call the question. Is it motion? Second. Motion to call the question is not debatable, so we will take a vote. All in favor of the motion, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. All right. We can now, the question has been called, we can now vote on the motion, the original motion, by Council Member Akers. All right. Just vote electronically. This is to put the motion on the docket for Thursday night. So all in favor of putting the motion on the docket, the motion, please indicate by saying aye and voting electronically. Aye. Opposed, no. The motion carries. All right. This allows us to go back to the original motion to approve the docket. So all in favor of the motion to approve the docket, please. Oh, Councilor Mayor Myers. We've got another walk on. I didn't see that. Councilor Mayor Myers. Thank you, Mayor. Well, I was trying to figure out how to keep me on the screen because we've been here for two hours already. Not quite. I move to place on the docket for the May 23, 2013 Council meeting a resolution authorizing and directing the Division of Traffic Engineering to install a crosswalk at the intersection of Fiddler Creek Way and Clearwater Way. So moved. Motion by Council Member Myers, seconded by Council Member Lane. Is there any discussion on the motion? All in favor of the motion, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. All right. Now we can vote on the motion to approve the docket. All in favor of the motion to approve the docket, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Thank you. We can move on to approval of the summary. Is there a motion? Approval. Motion by Council Member Farmer, seconded by Council Member Scotchfield. Is there any discussion on the motion? Vice Mayor Gordon. Yes, Mayor. I have a correction in the summary on page one. I believe you were there and were chairing the work session, and so Vice Mayor Gorton should be struck and Mayor Gray should be added at the very beginning. All right. Thank you, ma'am. That will be appropriately noted. Is there any other 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. Next on our agenda is budget amendments. Is there a motion to approve? Move approval. Motion by Vice Mayor Gorton to approve, seconded by Council Member Siding. Is there any discussion on the motion? Yes, sir. Council Member Lawless. No, Council Member Farmer, rather. Thank you, Mayor. In the packet, because the budget amendments go on for several pages, There are seven that pertain to the landfill fees or other fees being billed, the Greater Cincinnati Water Works. And these are, what are the purpose of this group of seven budget amendments? Mr. Commissioner. Good afternoon. Yes, sir. Mr. O'Meara. About two months ago, I answered a similar question, and they were to establish the inter-fund billing of the LexServe bill. Among all the different components? Right. Through the budget process, we found that we were really jumping through hoops that wasn't necessary, that we could do it the way we'd always done. and not... So these are actually undoing the budget amendments we asked you to do two months ago and will put us on step to the way we've always charged those bills in all the years past. So these are actually corrections. So they just reverse what we had done kind of incorrectly and what we have assumed was the new system or the new way. Yes. And this goes across all the different parts of those funds, correct? Yes, sir. All right. Boy, that was a lot of them. Yes, sir. A lot of funds. All right. Thank you, Mayor. Or thank you, Commissioner. Mayor, I think that's all I've got on these. Thank you, sir. All right. Thank you, Council Member Farmer. Council Member Akers. Thank you, Mayor. I just had a question on a budget amendment regarding, well, there's not a number. It's on page 7. It's actually from the mayor's office. About the Angela Economics refund. The journal entry. Oh, sorry. All right. I know I remember when this happened and when there was supposed to be a scheduled refund. So I just wonder, is this the first installment? No media. Okay, Jamie. Is this the first installment, or are there more to come, and when can we expect a full refund? They were being made in quarterly payments. Okay. The total was about $72,000. We received just over half that. Okay. Actually, let me get you the exact number. We have received eight payments that equal $48,000. Four still to be made at $24,000. And do we expect to receive that in the coming year? We should receive it all? Kevin has the details, but it's quarterly, so it should be in the next 12 months. Okay. Four payments are still to be owed. It's a three-year. It's a three-year payment process. It began in early 2011. Yeah. Jamie's right. The next payment's due in July, and then the three quarters that will follow the July payment. So we agreed to receive it in over a three-year span, even though we paid it in not a three-year span? It was agreed that we would take the money in 12 quarterly installments, yes. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Anyone else wish to speak to budget amendments, to the motion? All right. And we can take a vote. All in favor, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Allows us to move to new business. Is there a motion to approve? Move approval. Motion by Vice Mayor Gordon, seconded by Council Member Myers. Is there any discussion on the motion? Is there any discussion on the motion? Vice Mayor Gordon. Yes, thank you, Mayor. I just wanted to highlight page four, and I am so happy to see moving forward F, G, and A, F and G, excuse me, the financial audits. The one which we built into the water quality fee and which could serve as a model for other funds when we do those ordinances is the first one that will have been done on the water quality fee. And then for the G is the moving forward to get our financial audit done in a timely way. and I appreciate that Mr. O'Meara and the CAO have brought that forward so that we can get on our new timeline. Thank you very much. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Council Member Lawless? You wish to speak on the motion? Oh. New business. Right. New business. I just want to say I'm very excited to see item Q, which has to do with Phoenix Park. We've been working on it. I've been working on it with the administration for a very long time. Thank you to all involved, and hooray, hooray. Bye. All right. Thank you, ma'am. Council Member Scotchfield. Thank you, Mayor. Is Charlie Martin in here? Charlie had a couple of questions, if possible, regarding L. I know that we met and we talked about this. I have some concern about the 25% down payment, how you came up with that number, determining that I'm just worried that that's going to be a hardship. The task force that met on this last year, they had actually recommended a capacity charge, not a deposit. And none of it was refundable. As we sat down with some of the stakeholders here in 2013, is that we tried to arrive at a deposit type of approach that essentially puts skin in the game in order to be able to make a reservation for something you intend to use, and that was what we came up with as far as 25%. Comparing it to Knoxville, Knoxville has a capacity assurance program that's slightly ahead of ours. The amount of money that you have to put down to reserve is actually higher, than what ours is. So I guess I use that or we use that as a litmus test as far as that 25% was just enough to have somebody be serious, be willing to put that kind of money down on it, that they're seriously going to pursue a project rather than just trying to take a reservation because they can and then potentially keep someone who seriously wants to have a reservation they're going to use and prevents them from executing. Lastly is note that if you take that reservation and you put that 25% up and you move forward, that is credited to your tap-on fees, and so you're not out the money unless you don't follow through with the project. I follow up. I had not only is the 25% then kind of it's, you know, Knoxville's higher, but I don't know what some of the other cities may be doing. But I do know, you know, the 450, I know when you came up with that number for the detailed, or the for the, I guess, the application, is that correct? Correct. That, I know, you said, was on the high end of what other cities have used. I'm just, I'm, you know, obviously this is a new thing. We've got to do some of it. I'm just worried about a lot of the fees that are associated with that they are going to hurt some of our smaller builders, some of our bigger builders even that have a large area that they're working with. And that's understandable. You know, the 450, again, we looked at Louisville. Louisville is 450. Knoxville was 300. When we came down to the 450, we felt like it was justifiable because we felt like we were compromising on the reservation deposit part of it because, again, the task force started with a capacity fee, not a deposit that was applicable. So we felt like it was a middle ground. The 450, we're paying a consultant to look at these things, and the consultant is going to cost us money. Also, that we have staff that has to be able to administer it as well, and that we felt like at the end of the day that 450 was a solid number. Obviously, if the council wants to arrive at a different one, that's fine. Again, you know, I ran the numbers for Knoxville because, like I said, they're always a pretty good comparison for us, and this is not for single-family as much as it is for a single-family larger development. But if you came forward with a 40-unit development, the initial cost in Knoxville was over $12,000, and we're barely more than nine. So I said I felt in the aggregate as far as the amount of money that you had to put forward, if you were a developer of any scale, that we were competitive. I didn't want to be uncompetitive. Again, if the council feels like we're creating ourselves to be uncompetitive, I'm fine with that. Thank you. Council Member Scotchfield. Thank you, Charlie. Council Member Akers. Thank you, Mayor. I had a question about letter J. Ms. Commissioner Maloney. All right, item J, which is regarding the converting one-way street next to the Charles Young Center. Right. I guess Kevin went to you. He's going to speak to this. Hi, Kevin. Hello. I just wondered what there was no mention of a budgetary impact for this change, I did read the supporting documentation where Council Member Ford is allocating or designating $30,000 of his paving funds for the paving and striping required. But I just wondered if there was any other budgetary impact for this conversion. No, and at this time we actually have a little more discussion to do. I'm not sure if an actual overlay would be warranted to where we could actually save that money and apply it elsewhere and actually use just a slurry seal coat over the top of the road, which would actually be a cost saving. But at this point, I don't foresee there being any other budgetary issue with this conversion. Okay, so no signage or any changes of any sidewalks or what have you? No, at this point, perhaps one sign that would, if this were passed, that would denote no entry from the Midland portion. But that would be a nominal fee that would normally be observed by Traffic Engineering's budget as well. Okay, thank you very much. You're welcome. All right. Thank you, Councilman Rickards. Council Member Farmer. Thank you, Mayor. Mine is on item G on page 18 that has to do with a financial audit. And the last line in the first paragraph says, Upon completion, the audit will be presented to Council. And I know we've had conversation about when that is and what information should be available to us at a certain point in the fall, and I wanted to make sure that this takes that into account. without an air of compulsion. All right. I think Commissioner O'Mara is making his way and has made his way to the podium. You and me again. Good afternoon again, sir. I think we're talking about two different things, if I could try to clarify. I have not sat down with Dean Dorton to go over their schedule, so I'm giving you those comments before we have that conference meeting. But we talked about a commitment to have an estimated fund balance at the end of September, October 1. Okay. That is not the same thing as having a fully audited set of financial statements and a report to council. I understand. So this is hiring Dean Dorton to do the actual audit, and in that is a report to council, which traditionally has been in January, because they have to wait. Usually they wait until after the single audit before they make that presentation. So we'll have a determination in a little bit more of a timely manner of so-called fund balance, but then the actual, when I say CAFR, would then come in January? Well, we still want to issue the CAFR, but then it's a matter of when they make the presentation. So, again, I haven't spoken to them. We haven't had a conference call or anything about that. So I can certainly convey your interest of having that presentation before you go on winter break. Given the way that you're bringing the other part in, it might not be as important as it was before, but it would still be nice to have. So I don't want to, since this is to be doctored for first reading and you're still in discussions with them, I just think we just want to remain timely in all of these things, and I appreciate that you've got that in mind. Correct. And this is the fee, not the calendar, that we're approving. Well, it's $149,000. Yeah, it's a fee. Thank you. Just as a footnote to that, I think what Bill was saying, and I think it would be useful to, at the time you get the schedule from Dean and Dorton, for them to share all the cautions, conditions, and so forth of that schedule. Because I think at least in something like that, probably, perhaps, maybe, possibly, the last thing we want to do is encourage an acceleration of something as relevant and important to us, an unnecessary acceleration of it, of the audit process. And I know everyone agrees with that, but I was once in another life urging the numbers faster from auditors, and the results were not what I had hoped. Aren't you still urging auditors? Unless the audit was not as complete as it perhaps should have been. So that's just to say, you know, there's all these considerations to be made. And I think that last year's audit was completed earlier than had been before. And the expectation is now to follow that as much as we can, right, Council Member Farmer, I would say? I think that what he has said, being able to work with the fund balance number, I think, is a primary importance. Meeting the need fiduciarily is something I agree with you. We don't want to rush, and it does just physically take longer to do than before. Today, which is what they're explaining. In years past or in budgets past. But just set the expectations, right? I just want them to know we're thinking about them. I'd be glad to come back. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Farmer. Vice Mayor Gordon. Thank you. And, Mr. O'Mara, on that very point, I agree with both Council Member Farmer and the mayor. And I think last year was very good. The only thing that would have made it better was to have a preliminary fund balance, which I think you're working on this year, and I appreciate that and am hopeful that it does work out that we can get the audit before we go on our winter break. I think that was just right. And if I could just clarify, when I was answering Councilmember Farmer, I was talking about their presentation to Council rather than the issuance of the financial statements. Thank you. All right. Is there any further discussion on the motion? Councilmember Farmer. Mr. Martin, on the capacity assurance, have you consulted with all stakeholders and all parts of this have been smoothed, if you will? I can't say that we've consulted with all stakeholders because everybody in this community is a stakeholder. And this is probably the thing that's going to touch everybody in some way or another. We've tried to engage the folks who were stakeholders through the course of the task force, and particularly folks who represent the development community. There were folks who attended regularly, so they've had the opportunity to review drafts that led to what you see in front of you. Actually, there's probably two other things that we're going to try to tweak based on some discussions that we had while you guys were back. Very good. talking about your other topic because you know this is going to be difficult you know it's one of those kind of things that that you know you you look for compromise you guys just spend a lot of time talking about compromise and this is one of those because it's going to be hard uh we're going to recognize that we're going to go into this with a little bit of unknown and agree to work together if things don't work out exactly the way that we intend to but um i think this represents a solid compromise for something that the consent decree has laid at our feet, and we're trying to move on and get behind us. Do you anticipate bringing us a couple of changes before we give this a first and second reading, then? Yes. One of them has to do with, it says currently in there that we will respond in 10 days as far as for an application. And the request has been, well, can you give us a little bit more? And so what we're going to suggest is that if we can't give you a solid answer in 10 days, we will update you every 10 days subsequently. Okay. I think they feel better about that. Likewise is that it has to do with the expiration of a reservation. If you're building the infrastructure that's part of one of the exactable areas, you know, you're actually building what's going to be infrastructure for other individuals to use, and it may take longer than that expiration time to complete that. So I think we're going to add a little bit of language here that allows for an individual agreement with a developer. If they're building exactable sanitary sewer infrastructure, that they may get longer than that typical reservation period, because they're putting a lot of money in the ground that they're dedicating to urban county government, and they should be getting credit for that. Very good. I look forward to those. Be glad to help with them. Thank you, sir. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Councilman Farmer. If there's no further discussion. I just wanted to say that. All right. Vice Mayor Gordon. Thank you, Charlie. I just wanted to make one comment. This capacity assurance program is new territory for us, and I want to publicly thank Charlie Martin and Tom Blues, who at the time was the council member who chaired this task force. It was difficult work. And Charlie and the consultants worked. I believe, hand-in-hand with the stakeholders, and a lot of them are here in the audience, and took into consideration every single comment. And so this will allow us to comply with our EPA consent decree in a huge way, and I know it wasn't easy, particularly for the stakeholders. So thank you very much. Thank you. And if I may, I mean, now we can turn our attention to solving the capacity problem which ultimately would make all of this work mute, and that's the real challenge. Which is a subject that Charlie and Vernon routinely comment on when I'm meeting with them as well. I see Bob Quick shaking his head back in a nod of agreement as well when the Vice Mayor referred to all the stakeholders. Yeah. All right. All right. If there's no further discussion, then we can take a vote. All in favor of the motion, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. It allows us to move to continuing business. Is there a motion on the NDF? Move approval. Is the motion by Vice Mayor Gordon, second by, who was the second? Council Member Myers. 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. It allows us to move to a summary of the Public Safety Committee, and that's going to be by Councilmember Peggy Henson. Councilmember Henson. Thank you, Mayor. This is the summary from the Public Safety Committee that was held on May 7th, and the first item on the agenda was approval of a summary. The second item on the agenda was a report from the Divisions of Code Enforcement Law regarding infill and redevelopment steering committee recommendations. The item was introduced by Council Member Kay, and he had said that the infill and redevelopment steering committee felt that there had been a lack of consistency and that constituents have the perception that the Division of Code Enforcement often favors landlords. He said that there were three changes were needed, clear and adequate policy and procedures for complaints and citations, adequate record-keeping system, and transparency of all of these sets of information to the public. Dave Barbary came to the podium to present the Law Department's response to the infill and redevelopment committee recommendations. The first recommendation was to rewrite Section 12-1B to make it easier to read. The second recommendation was to change reasonable time to 30 days or in compliance with the proof plan. Third was to request funds for the next budget cycle to hire a paralegal devoted solely to filing and managing foreclosure actions. And fourth, a recommendation directed at the Department of Law to request funds in the next budget cycle to contract with a hearing officer to handle code enforcement cases. Barbary said that Lexington Fayette, Urban County Government has never paid a hearing officer and that that could be an appearance of bias. Council Member Myers asked Barbary about hiring a hearing officer and Barbary said the Department of Law would not have that as a position in their budget. And Council Member Kay asked about the hiring of a paralegal and Mr. Barbary said they are comfortable with the current staffing level. Burberry said that there had been a comprehensive review on the section of the code. There had not been a comprehensive review of the section of the code in 15 to 20 years, and that Council may want to consider a review. David Jarvis, Director of Code Enforcement, responded to the recommendations to analyze the current fine structure. He said they had doubled the fines in 2010, and four chronic properties were recently sold. David Jarvis also recommended to review the code to determine if certain provisions are too restrictive. He made points to say that the sidewalk regulations had recently been revised, 24-hour emergency forms were reviewed and approved by council. He responded to the recommendation to update the standard operating procedures. The update is complete and has been revised by the Commissioner of Public Safety. He also wanted us to know that the 1998 property maintenance code is on the LFUCG website, along with the field inspection forms. He said they are currently using 30, 60, and 90 day systems for the issuance of civil penalties. Council Member Lawless stated that she would like to increase the fine on chronic properties. David Jarvis said that the LFUCG is very aggressive with code enforcement and is one of the only cities with a $10,000 per parcel fine. There was a lot of discussion on this item. Council Member Myers asked about the two vacant positions in the Division of Code Enforcement. There's one vacant housing code enforcement officer and one vacant nuisance control officer. The positions were budgeted, but he thinks he could hold off on hiring for three weeks or until the lynx process is over. Jarvis then said his inspectors are running ragged right now with overwork. And again, Council Member Stenet then asked Jarvis about the vacant positions. Council Member Myers made a motion to fill the vacant positions within the Division of Code Enforcement immediately. It was second by Council Member Akers. The motion passed without dissent. and that motion was made at last week's work session. Then Council Member Kaye said that there was much more work needed to be done on this item, and he wanted it to stay in committee until the reorganization has occurred. Next on the agenda was the Division of Home Fleet Policy, introduced by Council Member Stinnett. Commissioner Mason said that the new policy had been in effect for seven months, that there has been a 9.57 reduction in mileage-driven, 8.4 reduction in fuel consumption, a savings of $335,000 for physical year 13. They received revenue of $60,000 for off-duty employment. There had been $268,000 savings in insurance and depreciation. There's been a slight increase in Part 1 crimes. And there were 167 officers who reside outside of Fayette County. Audi County payment monthly average is estimated at $9,000. Stenet asked Chief Ronnie Bastin about the crime statistics. He responded, overall crime statistics are down. Auto larceny is up slightly. Commissioner Mason said that the lack of visibility is not translating into more crime. Then items in committee was discussed, then Council Member Stenet made a motion to remove the whole fleet policy from the items in committee. That passed without dissent. That concludes my report. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Council Member Henson. Council Member Kaye for the General Government Committee summary. Thank you, Mayor. The General Government Committee met on May 7, 2013. The first item on the agenda, the summary was approved without dissent. The second item on the agenda was the Metro Employees Credit Union lease and memorandum of agreement. Francis Block with the Commonwealth Credit Union came to the podium, asked council if they would be allowed the capability to meet with employees of LFUCG during employee events. There was a fair amount of conversation and discussion by council members about the ways in which other people have access to our employees. Towards the end of that discussion, Council Member Myers asked David Barbary from law if the LFUCG decides to enter into the agreement with the Metro Employees Credit Union if it would prohibit other entities from addressing our employees at a benefit fair. Mr. Barbary said that that preserves the right of the Metro Employees Credit Union to address our employees, but does not prohibit other entities from addressing our employees. At that point, there was a motion by Council Member Beard to move the Metro Employee Credit Union leases and MMOA to the full council. That motion passed without dissent. The third item on the agenda was the CAO Policy No. 3 on vehicle use and assignment. Jamshid Baradaran, the Director of General Services, came to the podium. He said that the most important goal is the right sizing of the fleet. and this involves an overall reduction in operational costs due to gained operational efficiencies, as well as replacement units classification. He also said that they are creating a vehicle acquisition committee consisting of the following members, CAO Office, Finance Commissioner's Office, General Services Commissioner's Office, Public Safety Commissioner's Office, Division of Central Purchasing, Director of Facilities and Fleet Management, and Environmental Quality and Public Works. in some conversation about this council member lane suggested adding a council member to that committee council members lawless and clock agreed and i believe they will take that under consideration there was no motion the fourth item was restructuring government to move the divisions of building inspection and code enforcement to the commissioner of planning derrick paulson the commissioner of planning came to the podium said that the main rationale for the organization is dedicated neighborhood focus a one-stop shop, civil enforcement coordination, and capacity assurance program management. There was, again, a fair amount of discussion among Council members about the impact of this proposed move, after which there was a motion by Council Member Lawless to move the reorganization of the Division of Code Enforcement and Building Inspection to the Commissioner of Planning and to forward that to the full Council. That motion passed without dissent. There was then the fifth item on the agenda was items referred to committee, and the three items that had been discussed were removed from items pending. And that concluded our meeting. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Council Member Kaye. All right. Now we can move on to Council reports. If Council members will just queue up on the electronic monitor. Council Member Scotchfield, and then Council Member Massadi. For those that were able to attend the Fire Department Field Day this past weekend, I want to put out my thanks again for them to do that for us. It was a phenomenal experience. Recommend anybody do it if they haven't done it. And I want to thank the Fire Department again. Thank you, Council Member Scotchfield. Council Member Masati. To follow up on that, this is National Emergency Medical Services Week, So just wanted to recognize our paramedics, our emergency physicians, nurses, and medical technicians, our firefighters that put their life on the line every day for us. And Lexington Fire Department began their emergency medical services to citizens in the year of 1899. And in the year of 2012, they've responded to over 34,390 EMS calls. So, you know, in the face of all confusion and calamity, we're lucky that we have these steady hands and dedicated public servants that are taking care of us. And I, again, appreciate and thank them and express my sincere gratitude to these firemen and firewomen whose dedication is unwavering and who puts our community and our well-being at first and foremost. And I think we did have a lot of fun on Saturday. And I think everyone, if they had that opportunity, ought to give it a try. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Council Member Massadi. Vice Mayor Gordon. I just wanted to add my thanks to Chief Jackson and his staff. Council Member Clark, Hanson, Massadi, Stinnett, Scutchfield, and myself were at the fire field day. And until you do something like that, I think it's hard to appreciate what our firefighters and EMS folks do. And so I thank all of them for giving us a small taste of that and appreciate what they do. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Council Member Lawless. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Mayor. I'm leaving now to go to the church on the corner of Audubon and Forest Park near Elizabeth Street right off Nicholasville Road. There's plenty of parking, and we are having a meeting with South Elizabeth Street area, North Elizabeth Street area, and the Seven Parks area for organizational meeting and discuss solutions and issues and better ways to address those. So if anybody out there lives around there and would like to come, please come on down. Bye. Thank you, Council Member Lawless. Council Member Clark. Thank you, Mayor. I would also like to thank Chief Jackson for the opportunity to don fire equipment. I was told what I added to my meager body was 75 pounds. I won't tell you what percentage of my body weight that is. Thank you, Bill. It was indeed a great experience. And the thing that I noticed as much as anything, other than just learning a whole lot about what the fire department does, was the morale in the department seems to be very, very high. And that's a tribute to Chief Jackson, and it was very obvious in how we observed the workings of those folks. And I appreciated that as much as anything, and I'm still sore. Thank you. Thanks, Harry. Council Member Farmer. Thank you, Mayor. I'm always glad to support Police and Fire and certainly always go to both of their banquets, which are wonderful events. Saturday morning during wedding season is a great time to be in the jewelry business, and I was there. But I appreciate the invitation, and I know all did equate themselves quite well. Recently I was on an airplane, and I think it's interesting you can hear things that you don't hear. It was a flight from Minneapolis back to Lexington, and some people behind me were talking about what the College of Agriculture is doing on Wednesday and Fridays. They have opened a little meat market over there from 1 until 5. This is in the Garagas building. It's near the intersection of Cooper and South Lyme. So I went over there last week, maybe Friday a week ago, and taped a little bit of a council report. And I think we have that queued up as a promo now, for those of you who may not watch GTV3 enough. When I say research purposes, everybody kind of gets that weird kind of connotation. I understand that. You glow in the dark type thing. Dr. Farmer, yes. Yeah. You're okay. Thank you. Thank you. Literally making some of the worst. Yeah, some of the worst. We'll be right back. This is what we do at some council meetings. You got your label right there. See how they're smiling at you? Oh, you're good. Versus... Oh, don't be frowning at me. Don't be frowning at me. You've got a subliminal thing. Well done. Well done. So we made, they went out and cooked it up on the grill. Oh, Greg. I'm going to try it right there. There you go. That is hot. I hear that covers a lot of moss. Make you happy, happy, happy. And done. You get some of the flavor. There I am with the ham. Hamming it up. Hamming it up, yeah. I could, just so you all know, it's kind of the back loading dock of the Garrigues building. It's from 1 until 5. Actually, some of the, it's a bourbon apple brat that we made that day, and I went back and purchased some and cooked them at home on the grill. Different than some brats you might otherwise usually buy that are already cooked, these are not pre-cooked, so you need to take a little time with them. I also got a nice chuck roast that took, I mean, it would barely fit into the crock pot. I really want to tell you, they're doing a great job over there. And if you have time to go over on the Wednesday or the Friday from 1 to 5, you will see great, local, very Kentucky proud products. That's all. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you. Council Member Farmer. Council Member Henson. Thank you, Mayor. I just want to echo what my colleague said about the fire department training. And I've truly, truly enjoyed it. After I got home and I was so sore, I kind of thought maybe it was a ploy to kill me. I wasn't sure. But I'm eventually recovering. But I enjoyed it tremendously. And what Council Member Clark had said I think is very, very true. They're all around great, great bunch of folks with great chiefs. There are two neighborhood meetings tonight. Mitchell Avenue, it's at 630 at Rosemont Baptist Church, and Piccadome Neighborhood Association is at SCAPA at 630. So thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Council Member Hanson. Council Member Akers. Just real quick, I wanted to say how sad I was that I actually could not attend the fire training session. I thought it sounded like great fun, and I was otherwise engaged. I went to the Metathorpe Great American Cleanup on Saturday morning and then did the Peace Walk on Georgetown Street, and it was a great turnout. And so I just want to thank everybody again who organized that with First African Baptist Church and everyone who attended, including the mayor. And we had congressmen and we had Councilmember Ford attended. And so it was a great event. And I just want to congratulate that community again. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Councilmember Akers. It looks like that's all the council members who have signed up. Next on our agenda is the mayor's report. Is there a motion to approve? Move approval. Motion by Vice Mayor Gordon, second by Councilmember Stennett. Is there any discussion on the motion? Hearing none, then we can take a vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. The motion carries. And next on the agenda is public comment. I believe that several who had signed up to speak have maybe it was related to the food trucks, and they may have left by now. All right. Is anyone else here who wishes to speak? All right. No? All right, then. That allows us to take a motion. Council Member, I'm sorry, Vice Mayor Gordon. I move that we go into closed session pursuant to KRS 61.8101F for the purpose of discussions which might lead to the appointment of an employee. Second. All right, there's a motion and a second. Motion by Vice Mayor Gordon, second by Council Member Kaye. Is there any discussion on the motion? Hearing none, take a vote. All in favor, please indicate by saying aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. So we are entering closed session. I'll ask everyone to leave, please. Council members need to stay, though. Please. Please. Yes. Oh, it's like that. I thought you said it's a pretty place. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Oh, my God. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. guitar solo Thank you. guitar solo guitar solo Thank you. guitar solo guitar solo guitar solo guitar solo guitar solo guitar solo Thank you. guitar solo guitar solo guitar solo guitar solo guitar solo guitar solo guitar solo Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I'm sorry. guitar solo guitar solo guitar solo guitar solo guitar solo Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. guitar solo Thank you. All those in favor say aye. Anybody opposed? Do I hear a motion to adjourn? All those in favor say aye. Anybody opposed? We are adjourned. Thank you very much.