# Urban County Council Work Session - July 9, 2013 > Auto-transcribed civic record · July 9, 2013 - **Permalink**: https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/meeting/3055 - **Source video**: https://lfucg.granicus.com/player/clip/3055?view_id=14&redirect=true - **Date**: 2013-07-09 - **Last revised**: July 15, 2026 - **Length**: 20,624 words > ⚠️ **Auto-generated content.** Audio from the official Granicus video was auto-transcribed with OpenAI's open-source Whisper large-v3-turbo model, run locally by The Lexington Times. Structured facts were extracted with GPT-4o; the narrative summary was written by Anthropic Claude. Verbatim wording may contain errors. See [methodology](https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/about/methodology) or [report a correction](mailto:editor@lexingtonky.news). --- ## Meeting Overview The Urban County Council met on July 9, 2013, at 3:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber on the 2nd Floor of the Government Center, with Mayor Jim Gray presiding. The council addressed 10 agenda items during the session, taking 13 votes and hearing 17 public comments from constituents. The meeting included several approvals: the council approved requested rezonings and docket items, approved a summary of prior proceedings, approved budget amendments, and approved new business items. One item involving continuing business and presentations was deferred to a later date. The council also received informational reports from the Mayor and individual council members, and heard public comment on both agenda-related and non-agenda issues before adjourning. ## Attendance The following 30 individuals were present at the meeting on July 9, 2013: - Jim Gray - Linda Gorton - Charles Ellinger - Steve Kay - Chris Ford - Diane Lawless - Julian Beard - Harry Clarke - Peggy Henson - Kevin Stinnett - Shevawn Akers - Bill Farmer Jr. - Ann Payton - Earl Payton - Charles Payne - Sue Alexander - Linda Sutherland - David Martirano - Lois Mather - Leona Hopkins - Joy Payne - Lena Cornett - Teddy Smith Robillard - Laura Thomas - Gail Reese - David Warburton - Margaret McCoskey - Susan Higdon - Tony Higdon - Laura Milligan No absences or late arrivals were recorded. ## Votes and Decisions All motions during the July 9, 2013 meeting were decided by voice vote and passed unanimously. **Docket and Procedural Motions** Council Member Ellinger moved to approve the docket for July 9, 2013, including requested rezonings and new business items, seconded by Council Member Stinnett [timestamp: 01:36:12]. The motion passed. Council Member Myers moved to add $450 allocation to CRB office incorporated in NDF list, seconded by Council Member Ellinger [timestamp: 01:36:42]. The motion passed. **Development and Infrastructure** Council Member Lawless moved to place on docket a resolution authorizing Master Development Agreement for Phoenix Park Center Point Courthouse project with Center Point Parking Company, LLC, seconded by Council Member Ellinger [timestamp: 01:37:17]. The motion passed. Council Member Kay moved to place on docket a resolution authorizing change order number 3 to contract with Triton Services, Inc. for HVAC and piping repair, seconded by Council Member Farmer [timestamp: 01:39:32]. The motion passed. **Legislative and Policy Matters** Council Member Farmer moved to place on docket a resolution expressing support for H.R. 2570, the Valley View Ferry Preservation Act of 2013, seconded by Council Member Lane [timestamp: 01:37:53]. The motion passed. Council Member Farmer moved to refer B1 ZODA 2012-9 amendments to the Planning Commission for further consideration of material changes, seconded by Council Member Kay [timestamp: 01:48:47]. The motion passed. **Budget and Committee Referrals** Council Member Stinnett moved to approve budget amendments, seconded by Council Member Ellinger [timestamp: 01:44:51]. The motion passed. Council Member Stinnett moved to approve new business items, seconded by Council Member Massadi [timestamp: 01:44:51]. The motion passed. Council Member Ellinger moved to accept revenue number from Budget Committee of the Whole, seconded by Council Member Myers [timestamp: 01:52:02]. The motion passed. Council Member Akers moved to refer Neighborhood Development Funds (NDF) to the Public Safety Committee, seconded by Council Member Myers [timestamp: 01:45:23]. The motion passed. **Additional Approvals** Council Member Beard moved to approve the summary of the work session, seconded by Council Member Myers [timestamp: 01:44:21]. The motion passed. Council Member Myers moved to commit to building one LFCCG-owned, maintained, and operated Senior Citizen Center, seconded by Council Member Ellinger [timestamp: 02:51:12]. The motion passed. Council Member Stinnett moved to adjourn the work session, seconded by Council Member Ellinger [timestamp: 03:46:26]. The motion passed. ## Budget and Financial Actions The meeting included authorization for the following financial actions and amendments: **Contracts and Service Agreements** - **RRC Company** was approved for a $395,000 contract to design and build the Haley Pike Compost Pad (RFP #19-2013) (L0750-13) - **The Explorium of Lexington** was authorized a $246,950 Purchase of Service Agreement (L0769-13) - **LexArts, Inc.** received authorization for a $450,000 Purchase of Service Agreement for the Fund for the Arts Program for FY 2014 (L0780-13) - **Bluegrass State Games, Inc.** was approved for a $52,500 Purchase of Service Agreement for the Bluegrass Summer Games in July 2013 (L0770-13) - **Kentucky Classical Theater Conservatory** was authorized a $9,000 Purchase of Service Agreement for Summerfest 2014 (L0779-13) **Change Orders and Amendments** - **Kalkreuth Roofing and Sheet Metal** was approved for Change Order No. 1 totaling $2,800.43 for Phoenix Building roof replacement (L0774-13) - **GRW Engineers, Inc.** was authorized Change Order No. 4 for $5,200 for Investigation and Design work on the Expansion Area 2A Pumping Station and Force Main (L0777-13) - **Central Indiana Truck Equipment** received authorization for a $4,416 amendment to include CNG front fuel option for 8 Heil Multipack Garbage Packers (L0762-13) **Grants and Property Actions** - A $50,000 grant from the **Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources** was approved for Archery Range enhancement at Hisle Farm Park (L0765-13) - Authorization was granted to accept Deeds of Easement for the Blue Sky Pump Station force main valued at $160,525 (L0772-13) **Ordinance Amendments** Additional authorizations included amendments to extend a temporary Administrative Officer P/T position for four years (L0740-13), abolish one Computer Analyst position and create one Associate Traffic Engineer position with $17,235.56 in savings (L0752-13), create FY 2014 budgeted positions effective July 1, 2013 (L0767-13), extend payment time for landfill and utility fees to 17 days (L0768-13), update Alcoholic Beverage License ordinances (L0775-13), and execute releases of streetlight easements (L0776-13). The vacant parcel at 302 Rosemont Garden was declared surplus and available for disposal (L0660-13), and an addendum to the five-year Routeware Maintenance Agreement was approved (L0656-13). ## Public Comment Seventeen speakers addressed the council during public comment, with the majority focusing on the future of the Senior Citizen Center and concerns about a proposed partnership with the YMCA. **Senior Center Independence and Separation** Multiple speakers advocated for maintaining the Senior Citizen Center as an independent facility separate from the YMCA. Teddy Smith Robillard [00:41:02] emphasized the need for a safe, independent space free from disruptions by younger people. Laura Thomas [00:45:21] shared personal experience of finding community and safety at the Senior Center and urged creation of a dedicated, spacious facility. Leona Hopkins [00:29:00] and Lena Cornett [01:34:27] similarly stressed the importance of preserving a separate, safe environment for seniors. **Facility Size and Capacity Concerns** Several speakers highlighted inadequate space at the current facility. Tony Higdon [01:00:01] emphasized the need for a larger facility to accommodate growing demand. Linda Sutherland [01:18:40] criticized current limitations and called for more space for activities like bingo, exercise, and social events. Earl Payton [01:10:59] presented data showing Fayette County's senior center is disproportionately small compared to neighboring counties. **Partnership and Operational Concerns** Gail Reese [00:48:02] expressed concern about the lack of performance metrics, due diligence, and exit strategy in the proposed YMCA partnership. Margaret McCoskey [00:51:20] stressed the importance of maintaining current social services including counseling, financial assistance, and food distribution. Susan Higdon [00:58:10] raised concerns about insufficient parking if seniors and youth are mixed at the same facility. **Commitment to Seniors** Laura Milligan [01:02:47] called on the council to honor its long-standing promise to deliver a new senior center, emphasizing seniors' tax contributions and voting rights. Sue Alexander [01:14:44] stressed that the decision affects all council members, who will one day be seniors themselves. **Additional Topics** Ann Payton [01:08:16] asked for clarification on whether the $5 million is solely for a senior center. David Martirano [01:22:48] advocated for independent research to determine the best long-term solution. Lois Mather [01:25:33] suggested that a single center may not serve all seniors equitably and advocated for multiple satellite locations. Charles Payne [01:03:58] called for comprehensive review and reorganization of the Bluegrass Area Development District. ## Contested Items **Senior Citizen Center Location and Partnership with YMCA** Council members and residents engaged in a heated discussion regarding the proposed senior citizen center. The primary disagreement centered on two key decisions: whether to construct a single standalone facility or develop multiple satellite locations throughout the service area, and whether to establish a partnership with the YMCA. Participants expressed strong concerns about equity of access, with some arguing that multiple satellite locations would better serve seniors across different neighborhoods, while others questioned whether a partnership with the YMCA would adequately preserve existing services. The discussion also highlighted the need for independent research to inform the decision-making process before moving forward with either approach. **Bluegrass Area Development District Reform** Residents and council members raised significant concerns about the Bluegrass Area Development District, focusing on issues of bureaucracy and accountability. Participants called for comprehensive reform within the organization, indicating dissatisfaction with its current operational structure and governance. The nature of the opposition suggests community members felt the district was not functioning effectively and required substantial changes to address systemic issues. ## Public Comment – Issues on Agenda [timestamp: 00:39:12] Residents and senior advocates presented public comment on issues related to the Senior Citizen Center. Multiple speakers shared personal stories and expressed concerns about the facility's future. **Key Speakers and Concerns** The following residents and advocates provided comment: Teddy Smith Robillard, Laura Thomas, Gail Reese, Margaret McCoskey, Susan Higdon, Tony Higdon, Laura Milligan, Charles Payne, Ann Payton, Earl Payton, Sue Alexander, Linda Sutherland, David Martirano, Lois Mather, Leona Hopkins, Joy Payne, and Lena Cornett. **Main Issues Presented** The primary focus of public comment centered on the Senior Citizen Center. Speakers emphasized the need for a dedicated, safe, and spacious facility that would operate separately from the YMCA. This concern about facility independence and adequate space was a consistent theme throughout the comment period. **Outcome** This agenda item was informational in nature, with no formal action taken during the public comment period. ## Requested Rezonings / Docket Approval [timestamp: 01:36:12] The Council approved the docket containing multiple rezoning requests and new business items during this agenda item. Council Members Ellinger, Stinnett, Lawless, Farmer, and Kay participated in the discussion. Several motions were passed without dissent as part of the docket approval process. The specific rezoning requests and their details were addressed, though the structured data does not provide the individual property addresses, zoning classifications, or specific rezoning proposals that were included in the docket. The outcome of this agenda item was approval of the requested rezonings and docket as presented to the Council. ## Approval of Summary [timestamp: 01:44:21] The Council proceeded to approve the summary of the work session. Council Member Beard and Council Member Myers participated in this agenda item. The Council confirmed the agenda and actions taken during the work session. The summary was approved by the Council. **Outcome:** Approved ## Budget Amendments The Council considered budget amendments during this agenda item, which began at approximately [timestamp: 01:44:51]. Council Member Stinnett and Council Member Ellinger were the key speakers on this matter. The amendments included adjustments to fund balances and grant allocations. The Council approved the budget amendments with no opposition. ## New Business [timestamp: 01:44:51] The Council addressed several new business items during this portion of the meeting. Council Member Stinnett and Council Member Massadi were the key speakers on these matters. The new business agenda included a series of contracts, grants, and ordinance amendments for Council consideration. These items were presented for approval without substantive discussion or opposition from Council members. All new business items were approved by the Council. ## Continuing Business / Presentations [timestamp: 01:52:34] Commissioner Mills and staff presented updated information regarding the Senior Citizen Center, including cost estimates, staffing requirements, and potential site options. The presentation was attended by Craig Bentz and Christy Stambaugh, along with Council Members Myers, Stinnett, Ford, Lane, and Lawless. During the discussion, the council explored the feasibility of establishing a standalone facility for the Senior Citizen Center. Council members engaged in debate regarding the operational and financial implications of this approach. A significant portion of the discussion focused on potential partnerships with the YMCA as an alternative or complementary approach to addressing senior citizen services. Council members considered how such a partnership might affect facility needs, costs, and service delivery. The council raised various concerns throughout the presentation, though specific details of these concerns were not documented in the available materials. **Outcome:** The matter was deferred, indicating that the council did not reach a final decision and chose to postpone further action on this agenda item to a future meeting. ## Council Reports [timestamp: 01:45:23] Council members provided updates on recent committee activities during this informational segment. **Planning and Public Works Committee** Council Member Farmer reported on the Planning and Public Works Committee's review of B1 ZODA (Zone of Distinct Applicability) amendments. Specific details of the amendments and committee recommendations were discussed. **Budget Committee of the Whole** Council Member Ellinger presented a revenue summary from the Budget Committee of the Whole, providing an overview of the municipality's financial status and revenue projections. **Outcome** This segment was informational in nature, with no formal action items or votes required. The reports served to update the full council on the work and findings of the respective committees. ## Mayor's Report No mayor's report was presented at this meeting. ## Public Comment – Issues Not on Agenda [timestamp: 03:44:53] No public comments were made on issues not on the agenda during this portion of the meeting. ## Adjournment [timestamp: 03:46:26] The work session concluded with a motion to adjourn. Council Member Stinnett and Council Member Ellinger participated in this final agenda item. The motion to adjourn was approved, and the council adjourned the work session. --- ## Decisions - **Motion** — passed (0-0): approve the docket - **Motion** — passed (0-0): add to the NDF list an allocation to Community Relations Board of Federal Correctional Institution in the amount $450 - **Motion** — passed (0-0): place on the docket for the July 9, 2013 Council Meeting a resolution authorizing the Mayor and the Commissioner of Finance to execute a Master Development Agreement and any other necessary documents for the Phoenix Park/Courthouse Project, with Centrepointe Parking Company, LLC and its affiliates - **Motion** — passed (0-0): place on the docket for the July 9, 2013 Council Meeting a resolution expressing the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Council's support for the adoption of H.R. 2570 the "Valley View Ferry Preservation Act of 2013.” - **Motion** — passed (0-0): place on the docket for the July 9, 2013 Council Meeting a resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute Change Order No. 3 to the contract with Triton Services, Inc., for HVAC and piping repair for the Phoenix Building, increasing the contract price by the sum of $2,075.00 from $232,495.00 to $234, 570.00 - **Motion** — passed (0-0): place on the docket for the July 9, 2013 Council Meeting a resolution requesting that the President of the Kentucky Senate and the Speaker of the Kentucky House of Representatives take the necessary steps to refer to the Program Review and Investigation Committee examination of the following: the business practices of the Bluegrass Area Development District and all other area development districts, the structure of the area development districts, and the relevance of the area development districts in today's economy; and directing that a copy of this resolution be sent to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House - **Motion** — passed (0-0): approve the summary of the July 2, 2013 Council Work Session - **Motion** — passed (0-0): approve budget amendments - **Motion** — passed (0-0): approve new business - **Motion** — passed (0-0): approve the NDF list - **Motion** — passed (0-0): articles 1, 8 and 12 for modifications to the B1 zone be referred back to Planning Commission for further consideration of material changes Council has recommended to the text - **Motion** — passed (0-0): accept what is in the FY2014 budget from the July 11, 2013 COW - **Motion** — passed (13-1): commit to create a minimum of one stand alone site for a senior citizens’ center that will be owned and maintained by LFUCG and explore additional satellites with different types of partnerships that may become available - **Motion** — passed (0-0): go into closed session pursuant to KRS 61.810(1)(b) for discussion of the acquisition and/or sale of real property; an open discussion would likely affect the value of the property - **Motion** — passed (0-0): return from closed session - **Motion** — passed (0-0): adjourn --- ## Full transcript Music Thank you. I'm out. Thank you. guitar solo Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. unsettled in, and unfortunately, we have to enter what's called a closed session for some issues, which means that I have to ask for a motion to go into closed session, and then we have to ask folks if they will leave the council chambers, and then after the council does its business in the closed session, then we will invite you back into the open session of the council. So I wanted to explain that so you understand that adjusting and adapting, we regret that we have to ask you to do so, but that may be the case today. So Council Member Ellinger, I believe you have a motion. Council Member Ellinger. Thank you, Mayor. I move that we go into closed session pursuant to KRS 61.8101F for a discussion that may lead to the discipline or dismissal of an employee. Second. Motion by Council Member Ellinger. Second by Council Member Myers. Is there any objection to the motion? We've got to vote. All right. All in favor of the motion to enter closed session, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Object no. Motion carries. Thank you. I'm going to go ahead and put it in the middle of the room. Thank you. I'm sorry. Thank you. guitar solo guitar solo guitar solo guitar solo guitar solo Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Is there any objection to returning to open session? All right. Hearing none, then we are... Turn to open session. And after folks get in, then we'll ask for public comment for issues on the agenda. Thank you. All right. All right. We're now returned. Mr. Mundy. Mr. Mundy. Hello, Mr. Mundy. I was going to ask for public comment for issues on the agenda. Has anyone signed up? Okay. All right. This is a public comment for issues on the agenda, and I have a number of folks who have signed up to speak to issues on the agenda. So what we'll do is let me go through, if you'll allow me to, the protocol for this. For those who have signed up, I will call your name, and then if you'll come up to the podium and give us, for the record, give your name and your address, and then you'll have three minutes for public comment. And if someone yields their time to you, you can have more than three minutes. All right. So I will begin with calling Teddy Smith Robillard. Is Ms. Smith Robillard here? I know. I thought I saw her earlier. Yeah. Yes, ma'am. Yeah, we were talking earlier. Teddy, I knew that I wasn't losing it completely. So, Teddy, you know, what I was just saying was that if you'll give your name and your address, and then you've got three minutes, all of three minutes for your comments. Yes, ma'am. Thank you. My name is Teddy Smith Robillard. I live 180 Codell Drive, apartment 203, Lexington, 40509. First, I want to thank Councilman Ford and the mayor and the entire council for supporting a resolution for us recently. And I consider it a privilege to be before the council again today. Today, I am here on behalf of senior citizens, myself included. as a senior or as seniors, I do not want, at this point in my life or whatever is left of it, I do not want to spend my day involved with another program. When I go to senior citizens, I want to be with seniors and do what seniors do. I am a paying member of citywide of the YMCA. I have been asked to be on the board of Beaumont YMCA, and I still do not want to see or be a part of senior citizens or the Y if they become one organization. And I respect them both, and I admire both organizations. But as I said, as a senior, when I go to the Y, I go three days a week. When I go up with both arms loaded, oxygen tank on my back, and I push the button to go in, young people rush right out, almost knock me down, getting out of the door. I'm of opinion that if young people, I'm sure some young people have manners, but they don't use them. And I do not, I used to blame it on, well, it's the parents, it's from home, but I can't say that because I have great-grandchildren and they are taught better, and when they get away from home, they act an idiot too. but I can control them when they come in my house I'm in charge but please leave the senior citizens building alone true we need a lot more space because there's a lot of us and we're right up on top of each other but we can have something in our life that we can enjoy by not being run over by other people so whatever you do whatever you do for the wire whatever you do for senior citizens Do not mix senior citizens with the Y or anyone else. Let us remain independent. We have a lot of programs. They accomplish a lot of things. And I started going to the senior citizens because I was sitting home depressed, and my doctor said, that's where you need to go. And I have been going ever since, and I hope to keep going. But if you hook them, I'm through with both of them because I cannot deal, and many people my age cannot deal with the problems that being with the Y, not the Y itself, but some of the younger people in the Y, the problems that they will bring to us. And I thank you. Thank you, Ms. Smith-Robelard. Now, you all, I appreciate that enthusiasm. I must say that I have the unpopular role, though, of saying that in the council chambers, applause and that this level is considered not appropriate. We need to let folks make their presentation and we'll do that. All right. Thank you all very much. All right. Laura Thomas is next. Ms. Thomas. And Susan or Jennifer, you might want to help Laura with the podium there. We have an electronic little device there. Okay, that might even work better. Check. Yeah. There we go. Oh. All right. Good afternoon. My name is Laura Thomas. I live at 1175 Appian Crossing Way in Lexington, and the zip code is 40517. I want to speak about the Senior Center. In January, I moved to Kentucky for the third time, leaving behind 22 degrees below zero temperatures and every relationship I developed over the last 12 years. After all my boxes were unpacked, I sat there with my knitting needles and said, now what do I do? So I found online the schedule of events at the Senior Center and off I went. I made some new friends. I keep my brain active. I keep my body active. And it's a place that I can feel safe at. you've kind of seen us at your meetings for the last month or so well when the why got thrown in the mix of things we started wondering and doubting whether the council was really listening to our needs and our wants we still have our doubts we're not sure where you stand on things and I wanted to make it very simply clear what we want is a place of our own, a safe place, under one roof with more space, with staff who are trained and want to work exclusively with seniors who accept us for where we are in the tenure of our life, where we can engage in any activity without going from place to place to place. And for me, that would be sitting most of the day waiting for wheels to come and get me. where we can grow in our caring and service to one another. That's my impression that this was an idea that came about in 2002. It's been 10-plus years. It's time to birth this baby. Thank you. Thank you, Laura. Gail Reese. I know Gail is here right on this front row, second row. Thank you. Good afternoon. Thank you, Mayor. My name is Gail Reese, 608 Lakeshore, Lexington, 40502. I want to thank the mayor and the council for having us and for listening to this issue, and I'm speaking as a private citizen only. I've been involved in many family businesses over the year, wholesale groceries, banking, bottle water, information management and service. And in 2006, I started a nonprofit you all may know about, ITM Bluegrass, and we've given about 25,000 rides. And then in the spring, we had the successful I Know Expo with about 1,000 people there looking for services for seniors. What I'm coming today with is my view of business as it applies to a nonprofit and to senior centers, senior services. I am fully in favor of public and private partnerships. I think that's the way of the future. But when I read the proposal that was from the June 18th meeting, I was truly puzzled. My business hat went on, and I thought, you know, this reads like a really bad business deal. And these are the reasons. I didn't see anywhere in the proposal for $12 million where there was collateral, where there were performance objectives, measurements, or guarantees, where there was any recourse for poorer performance or where there was an exit strategy. I also didn't see anything about due diligence. Looking at these other cities where there were partnerships and finding the best practices and being able to work as groups to bring those best practices to Lexington. So I would like for you to consider carefully as we move forward this public-private partnership, and I think there is potential. Let me give you a short story about a woman that I know and link it into your very good economic development. I am thrilled that Lexington is attracting organizations like the Bingham McCutcheons. These bring high-quality jobs to Lexington, and with high-quality jobs bring taxpayer dollars. And with taxpayer dollars, you get social services. So we have to bring people like this in. But they also have to know that when they're here, and if they've transferred from out of state or another city, that if they need to bring their parents here for care, that there are professional services here so that they don't have to take off work, so they can provide for their parents here, and they can age themselves here in this community. So we are doing wonderful work developing it. My request would be that it's time to double down in our efforts to build a state-of-the-art community center geared toward older adults and use the YMCA partnership for the activities they specialize in. So double down, don't dilute. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Reese. Thank you, Gail. And next is David Warburton. But, David, have I pronounced correctly? I'm having a little struggle with reading penmanship. By the way, Gail Reese, you were right on the button three minutes. You must have practiced. Thank you, thank you. David? My name is David Warburton. I live at 2220 Arthur Way, 40509. I'd like to yield my time to Margaret McCocken, the next speaker. Margaret? Thank you, David. Good afternoon, counsel. My name is Margaret McCoskey. I live at 612 Beshear Court, Lexington, 40515. I have an undergraduate and a graduate degree in social work from the University of Kentucky and Louisville. I spend my loyalties around. I have worked for the past 12 years in the field of aging as a case manager, as a counselor, and most recently as community relations manager. My professional and community involvement includes being a member of the aging consortium. I'm also on the Mayor's Senior Services Commission, and I have been since 2009 when it was reinstated. I also chair the subcommittee on elder and friendly livable communities. I'm here as a private citizen and also representing social services. As such, I want to be assured that the social services that are currently provided through our senior center will not be dropped, diminished, or decreased in any manner. When I read the draft letter from the YMCA, I saw no mention of this. This is a concern to me. Presently at our senior center, the Social Services Department has two full-time master's level social workers. They assist with referrals, with counseling, our general public, and with resource. Two of the very most prevalent needs, they tell me, are financial assistance, whether it's helping pay bills, find medication costs that are affordable for them, or housing options. The other is food. Whether we realize it or not, food can be difficult for some of our senior centers and citizens to obtain. The senior center not only has the commodities distribution, but they also deliver. There are other distribution centers, but the senior center is the only one that uses its own van to deliver to our seniors. These are for low-income elders. It requires assessment and eligibility, which means we need trained, skilled individuals who know the programs and the terminology. Meals are also currently provided. There is space at the Center for Meals. This is through the Nutrition Program. I mentioned counseling that these social workers do. They help persons with Medicare A and B and also, most specifically, Medicare de-enrollment, which if you looked at any of the federal programs can be a little intimidating. They help with insurance benefits, such as looking over the supplemental plans for insurance, Medicaid eligibility, what's the process, how do I start it, where do I go. Again, requires trained individuals that know the programs and the guidelines and the terminology. They help with resources such as housing options, health care issues, home health agencies, home care agencies, caregivers. Are there daycare programs in our city? If they're new to our community, these are big issues. Do we have elder law attorneys? This may be critical. And what kind of clubs are out there for the seniors and support groups? These are all resources that our current staff at the Senior Center can help with. We do not want to overlook the educational component that is currently at the center. The OLLI program meets once a week, and they have for many years. They draw a big crowd. They're very popular. Again, the center also hosts an annual health fair, which draws approximately 200 persons to find resources and learn what not only the center can do, but what's out there for them generally. When I read over the draft letter, I noticed in the hours that they stayed at 8 a.m. to 3 p.m. To me, 3 o'clock is midday. I would like to see this expanded. I think that is a little early to tell seniors the door's closing. Transportation could be an issue as well. The center, the current center, has two vans. They do transport persons to and from the center. as well as do the commodity deliveries I mentioned earlier. I acknowledge that the YMCA provides excellent programs, exercise programs, equipment, workout rooms, and pools. They're wonderful. But in this proposal, I have seen no mention of or a plan for collaborating with LFUCG in any way to continue or increase as our seniors grow the social service issues and services that we now provide. I want to end by giving you some stats. Currently in Fayette County, we have over 61,000 baby boomers 50 to 69 years of age. In Fayette County, currently we have over 45,000 persons 60 plus. that figure will only grow. We do need to be conscious of serving all of our elders, even if they are low income. Thank you. Thank you, Margaret. Thank you so much. Susan Higdon. And then Tony. Yeah, Higdon. My name is Susan Higdon. I live at 1649 Harrogate, Lex, Kentucky, 40505. And thank you, Mr. Mayor and Council members, for the opportunity to speak to you. I was going to yield it to Margaret, but apparently she doesn't need it. So as being prepared not per se, I think it can all be said and done. And thanks again to Mr. Chris Ford for all he's doing for us. My concern is like the rest have been said, but it's the transportation as it is right now. Beaumont, Loudoun, and is it higher upper, has a limited space as we speak for cars to park. And when you put the youth and the seniors together at any given time, I'm not quite convinced there's enough parking. so my question is with the money that's allocated that we'd be giving you under different management do you expand the parking lot first uh and i'm sure we'll see that in the plans of the why i'm sure this has been thought through and we haven't given them the opportunity so with that i'm just going to close and thank you for your eyes and your attention and your willingness to come and visit us sometime as my husband will ask you. And I apologize for not sitting in your seat. You know, I've been your age, but I don't see any of you that's been mine. So I've been thrilled to have new visions on the horizon and the energy to do it. But until you step in my journey in my shoes, please don't judge us as we're trying not to judge you. But come out and have a good time. We do line dancing and you will stay young. We're not a nursing home. Thank you. Thanks, Susan. Tony? Tony Higdon? Thank you, Mr. Mayor and council people for listening to us today. Hi, my name is Tony Higdon, and I live at 1649 Harrogate Drive, 40505. My connection with the Senior Center, I am a three-time past president of the Participants Council. I have seen the center grow from very few individuals who come in to seek senior benefits. My wife and I got started when my mom was injured. We didn't really know that much about the senior center, and we took her there thinking it was a nursing home, which was the concept most people have. But once we got there, starting to see the activities, the different programs that were offered to seniors, we liked it. So when my mom passed away, I said, well, I'm going to get in there and try to make something out of it. And we have a wonderful staff. There are a lot of people who have volunteered many times beyond what they normally would do. And as a result, our center has grown. It is blossoming. It is filling up. and we really need a bigger place to accommodate all those who will be coming through. Some of you have been to some of the activities that we've had, and I have here in my hand a special thing that I would like each one of you to have. It is called the Messenger. It is our newsletter that goes out every month to the members in the center. And if I were to ask you what activities do we have there, I don't know that any of you could actually say what there is. Installed in here is the menu, all the trips, everything that takes place at the center. And we would like you all to have these. and I guess, Mr. Mayor, I could give them to you to distribute because we've got invitations for each one of you to come and see what goes on at the center. We'd love to have you, and we welcome you. Thank you very much. Thank you, Tony. Yes, sir, if you'll just... Yeah, we can pass them out right here. Thank you, sir. Thank you, thank you. Help me. All righty. All right, and next is Ms. Milligan. My name is Laura Milligan. I live at 3901 Wyndham Ridge, and thank you for having us. More than 10 years ago, the seniors were promised a new facility, and Mayor Gray ran and was elected on the pledge that he would follow through. We would like you to honor your commitment to the seniors. Seniors pay taxes and we vote. And we would like to have the promise of the city taken. Thank you. Thank you, Laura. All right. Charles Payne. My name is Charles Payne. I live at 1528 Bell Harbor Court, Lexington, Kentucky, 40517. I'm the president of the River Park Neighborhood Association, and I'll have to move fast. So I'm here to talk a little bit about the Bluegrass Area Development District again today, and I want to address the Attorney General's opinion that came out in March. And in that opinion, he described the area development districts as an arm of local government. Well, it turns out that my arm does not do anything that I don't tell it to do or when I tell it to do so. The only thing that acts independently within the body is disease. and it appears that there is a cancer out there at the end. It infects much of the administration and manifests itself in the obstructionist attitudes and behaviors of entitlement that we have seen unfold over the last year and a half. The only way to treat a cancer is to cut it out and then follow up with periodic examinations to ensure that it does not return. A comprehensive treatment plan needs to be implemented at the Bluegrass Ad, which must begin with a comprehensive review and reorganization of all staff at the department head level and up, but especially at the director's level. Restrictions as to board appointments and allowable associations, travel, gifts, etc., for example, should be imposed on staff out of common sense and necessity. The bylaws out there need to be trashed and completely rewritten without internal influence, perhaps even by the General Assembly itself. A necessary part of orientation for all employees and board members should include the limitations on allowable activities as per KRS Chapter 147, all the Attorney General's opinions issued since the system's inception, and the clear understanding that the system exists to serve local government and not vice versa. Most importantly, simply replacing one person with another within the organization having similar views will not do. We need fresh faces out to the ad if we ever hope to get control of this out-of-control bureaucracy and restore it to the original intent of the legislature when the ads were formed. It's time for meaningful and lasting reform at the Area Development District. I'd like to thank you guys. I'd like to thank Councilman Ford for what he's about to propose. Have a good day. That's all I've got to say. Thank you, Charles. Thank you, Mr. Payton. Ann Payton. My name is Ann Carolyn Payton. I live at 902 Edgewater. drive Lexington area zip code 40502. I'm a retired school teacher, 34 years, loved kids, but I've been there and done that. And I would just like to say that I am thoroughly enjoying everything that I have been a part of at the Senior Citizen Center. There are so many activities going on, as you all will see when you read our messenger page, that you will maybe be surprised. All of you up there, as somebody said, some of you may be 67 like I am. Most of you look much younger. but you will be if you live long enough. I have actually just two questions that I want you to think about. I wanted actually for you to answer me, yes, yes, yes, yes. I wanted to call everybody's name, but I feel like that's probably inappropriate. But I do want you to think about these two questions. First of all, if I understand correctly, the Council has approved $5 million for the design and acquisition of a new senior citizen center. Is it your plan, and I'm asking each individual, is it your plan or your intention for this to be a senior citizen center alone? or do you plan to add the YMCA or somebody else in with it? I would really like to know, and if you want to email me, yes, I feel this way. No, I don't. I won't put you on the spot now. But my question is, the $5 million that you have, is that for the senior citizens alone to start with the building? Second question. This, if I understand correctly, has been in the discussions since 10 years or more. Do you possibly agree that it's time to move forward on our original plan? I don't want to wait for 10 more years. I'll probably be too old to enjoy everything that's there. You all might, but I won't. So please think about these in your heart of hearts and let me know. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Payton. Earl Payton. My name is Earl Payton. I live at 902 Edgewater Drive in Lexington, 40502. My wife and I are regular visitors to the Senior Citizen Center on Nicholasville Road. Please provide a larger building for the Central Senior Citizens Center. The senior citizens that attend the Senior Citizens Center on Nicholasville Road want to keep the same services because the activities, services, and personnel are wonderful. These services have been developed over the last 30 years, and they are excellent. The senior citizens just need a larger building. Fayette County needs a single, central senior citizen center where the needs of the senior citizens are the main issue. The size of Fayette County's senior citizen center is not proportional to the nearby counties. For example, Fayette County's population is 305,000. Fayette County's Senior Citizen Center is 15,000 square feet. Woodford County's population is 25,000. Woodford County's New Senior Citizen Center is 12,000 square feet. Fayette County's population is 12 times larger than Woodford County's. For Fayette County's Senior Citizen Center to be proportional to the Woodford County's, Fayette County's would need to be 144,000 square feet. Scott County's population is 49,000. Scott County's Senior Citizen Center is 8,000 square feet. Fayette County's population is six times larger than Scott County's. For Fayette County's senior citizens to be proportional to Scott County's senior citizens, Fayette County's would need to be 48,000 square feet. Franklin County's population is 50,000. Franklin County's Senior Citizen Center is 18,427 square feet. Fayette County's population is six times larger than Franklin County's. For Fayette County's senior citizens to be proportional to Franklin County's, Fayette County's would need to be 110,000 square feet. The personnel at Scott County, Woodford County, and Franklin County invited the Council to visit their senior citizen centers. A lady at Scott County said, tell them to come and visit us. We will show them what a senior citizen center is supposed to look like. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Payton. Next is Sue Alexander. Sue here. All right. My name is Sue Alexander. I came to Lexington about 71 to further extend my graduate education at UK. I live at 120 Londonderry Drive, Lexington, 40504. I'm here really to speak to a document which was sent to each of you by Dr. Sarah Laws. Sarah could not be here today. She had prior commitments in Florida for personal business that's been ongoing. And I felt that someone needed to speak to this document. It is a resolution that I'm sure would be supported by every senior citizen that we have in this community. It's a very concise statement of the needs of our senior citizens, the ongoing needs that you will have, they will have in the future. And I want to implore you, if you haven't read this resolution, to read it and read it for content. It's very all-encompassing. It pretty much says pretty much what's been said here by all of these other people. Please do read it, if you haven't, before you vote. And I want to remind you that you're not going to be writing or voting for something for them. you're going to be voting on something for us. A few of you are closer to my age. I'm 82, by the way. Most of you are not. But as each day passes, you come closer to mine. And you will continue to do so, God permitting. This means that down the road, your needs are going to be what my needs are, and the needs of all the senior citizens we have in this community. So it's not for them, it's for us. You will get to us soon enough, much sooner than you think you will. I want to thank our council and our mayor and our vice mayor for all that they do in taking care of the needs of the entire community. I am very pleased with our community's administration, and I hope that I can continue to be that pleased. We all, as senior citizens, all of us who have spoken and those who haven't and could not be here, know that we have to rely on you to decide for us what we are going to have or not have. We also realize that this is a difficult task. It's not simple. There's much more to it than any of us could possibly realize. I do know this. My father was mayor of the town that I lived in for 26 years, so I'm well aware of the things that go on behind the scenes in running a city. The city was not nearly as large as Lexington, but it was a nice little city and had a very nice community center, senior center, probably almost as big as ours, and the city was only 12,000. That's not a criticism. It's just a statement which says that we need more than what we have. Surely there's some possibility somewhere to take care of our seniors. And when you do vote, just remember, you are a part of us and you will get to where I am. God willing. I want to thank you. I want to thank you for allowing us to come and speak to you. And I implore you to read this resolution. Thank you. Thank you, Sue. Thank you so much, Ms. Alexander. And next is Linda Sutherland. Okay. She feels like I'm always in front of the podium anyway. But anyway. I think all the speakers have been excellent. I'm looking to all of you to not build on top of the former senior citizen center because it will not work. It just will not. And we need much more space to do the activities. As I've said, they do taxes out there. and they teach seniors computers. We also have a child-of-paying room that doubles as a ceramic room. And then we have the exercise room, and we have a book club. And things go on out there like parties that you cannot, unless you use the extra room, to have. And the bingo hall is really too small. It doubles as a dining room. And that concerns me when we're not allowed more in there than a certain number. And then they have to leave and we eat. But that really isn't efficient, Mayor Gray. It really isn't. and I don't know how much you all think you know, but I wish that all of you would come out one day and go through the entire rigmarole of what we do. I have not been out there in two months, but I plan to go back. And I love bingo, and I like the activities. They just coincide with too many things that go on. And we don't have enough time nor space to keep those times separate. So I just hope that this council opens their hands wide and does what is supposed to be done, which is, you know, build a new senior citizen center. and that's all I have to say. Thanks, Linda. Next is David Martirano. Thank you, Mayor Gray, Council. My name is David Martirano, 1237 Litchfield Lane, 40513, today representing the YMCA of Central Kentucky. A few weeks ago, I presented an option that was simply a loose framework, a concept about a potential partnership, and a potential way where the Y and the city could work together to service our seniors for the long haul. One of the key elements of the Y proposal was that it outlined four geographic locations, convenient locations, for our seniors throughout our city. It also could potentially save taxpayer dollars in a few ways, one being the Y could help build the centers, and the Y would bring at least matching capital dollars to the partnership. Both the city's concept, which you will hear shortly, and the Y's concept have created some good dialogue, constructive dialogue. and I think if we're looking to serve our seniors in the most thoughtful way long term, we need to have that dialogue. It's important for our future as a city. Over the past few weeks, I've taken a step back to evaluate both positions and thought about what if it was my project at the Y that's on the table today. What would I do? You know, during my 23-year career, I've navigated and explored over 30 opportunities of this nature. While evaluating every one of them, we always had independent research. Let me repeat that. Independent research done to test operational viability, geographic site location, needs of those in the market, those served presently, but also the future needs of the residents to be served. And that was probably in every case the most important work done to make an informed decision in terms of next steps. Council Member Lane mentioned this two weeks ago in his comments where he said, where is the independent research? As council members, I would ask, what independent research has been done on this project? Have we asked the 45,000 seniors of today, and to Gail's point, the 69,000 of baby boomers that will soon be seniors? I would ask you, how many in your district have been surveyed with this independent research? What do the seniors of tomorrow want for our new senior center? Frankly, the answer is we don't know. We just don't know. If we truly want our city to make the best possible decisions for our senior citizens, having this research is the only way to make the right decision. Today is not about the why proposal versus the city proposal. It's about what's in the best interest of our seniors moving forward long term. That's what it's about. It's about making the best possible decision to serve our seniors. So today I ask you to take a minute and get the research done. And collectively as a community, we'll make the most informed decision for our seniors of today and of tomorrow. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Martorano. And next is Lois Mather. Mr. Mather. Professor, I should say. I'm tired. That's all right. Once a professor, always a professor. Mr. Mayor. Tom Blues. Thank you. Mr. Mayor and members of the council, thank you for inviting comment today. I must say I feel a bit like the onion in the petunia patch, but I have great respect for those who have spoken before me. I looked at the data that you had available in your packet. I'm sorry. I'm Lois Mather. I live at 1544 Cantrell Drive, 40505. I looked at the data in your packet, and I was quite surprised with the outcome in that nearly 60% of the senior population in Lexington is in the east half of town. And if you look at the density of senior populations, if you look at zip codes with less than 500 seniors, your two most dense areas are 40502 and 40505. why I'm pointing this out is I think you're going to have a problem coming up with a good usable site if you go with a single center because as an example if you place it in East Lexington where most of the residents, most of the seniors are you're going to have a lot of people from across town trucking across to get to a senior center and vice versa if you did it on the other side of town regardless of where you'd want to site a single center, I'm a bit overwhelmed with the size of the facility being proposed, especially considering the size and the cost of operating that facility. I commend the planners for responding to what was the number one issue coming out of the survey of seniors, and that is their very clear favorite, and that is of an exercise facility. On the other hand, is a single exercise facility in Lexington Wise, given the fact how the senior population is distributed around town, as opposed to multiple sites. So unless you would put a senior center in the heart of downtown, you're going to have a lot of seniors that are quite far removed from the main site. And you can tell I've got a bit of mileage on myself, and I don't want to spend most of the time I have left trucking across town in traffic if I don't have to. Excuse me. So I've heard recently about the proposal to partner, perhaps with the YMCA. I find this rather attractive, and there may be pitfalls down the road in investigating that, But I think it is worth looking into because I think it could be more sound economically and perhaps programmatically. Because I feel an approach like this might make senior centers more available to more seniors and might even well be more cost effective than would be a single site. And I'll carry this one step further. Even if you planted a single site on my street, I would be opposed to it because the more I've thought about it, the more I think multiple sites make more economic sense. And let's face it, government levels at all levels are faced with fewer tax dollars, so we need to think more creatively about how to stretch those dollars as far as we can. And therefore, I think this proposal of partnering is one that I do hope that you make some serious investigation. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mather. Professor, thank you. Leona Hopkins. Hi, my name is Leona Hopkins. I live at 2272 Camberling Drive, 40515. I'd like to thank you for the opportunity to speak to you. This is my first time here, so I'm nervous. You can probably tell it in my voice. I would like to request that you please keep the Senior Citizen Center separate from anything else. I go to the Senior Citizen Center now, and it's a really enjoyable place to go. The employees there are very knowledgeable, helpful, friendly. You feel safe. You have activities there for everyone, not only disabled, but for everyone, and they're fun activities. It's a very enjoyable place to go. I understand that you all have allegated money for a new senior citizen center, and I'd like to request that you please, please consider that. My mother, I'm a single person. My mother was disabled. She was an amputee in a wheelchair, and I had to take care of her. I arranged with wheels to take her to the senior citizen centers in the morning. She was there all day. She had her lunch. They brought her back shortly before I got off from work. I cannot tell you how much she enjoyed going there. The people there were just great to her. She made little crafts and things, and she really looked forward to it. I think it really helped her health-wise and really prolonged her life. She's passed away now. Also, Parks and Recreation has an office there, and they offer trips to seniors that are really enjoyable. Their staff are very friendly and knowledgeable and helpful, and seniors wouldn't have an opportunity to take these trips if it was not for them. So we get to go to a lot of nice places and it's really enjoyable and fun. It's not for old people, it's for fun people. And remember, someday you all may want to go there. And believe me, it's really fun. So I hope you will really consider making it separate. Thank you very much for your time. Thanks, Leona. Joy Payne. Hello, Julian. Julian is my former boss. My name is Joy Payne. I'm a former banker, and he was a great boss, and he encouraged us to be involved in civic activities, which we did, and I chose the Senior Citizen Center. The Senior Citizen Center has been the focus of my life for 30 years. I've given 26 Christmas parties and raised over $75,000 in order to fund those parties. The senior center is not a building. It is an attitude. The director and the social workers know every person. They know about them. They grieve for the deaths. They cry with joy when they have something good happening. If someone doesn't show up, they check them out. It is an attitude. We need our own place. I love it. Seven generations of my family have lived in Lexington. My grandparents had the first house on the Avenue of Champions. My great-grandfather, great-great-grandfather, has a little lane for him, Jacob's Star Lane in Victorian Square. So Lexington is my love, it's been my life, and the Senior Citizen Center is a wonderful focal point for us now that I'm a Senior Citizen Center. When I started out and was working for Julian, he encouraged us to be involved in civic affairs. And without that, I would have never known about the Senior Citizen Center. But we need our own place. Now I'm a senior. I don't want to smell sweat socks when I go to the senior citizen center. I want to see a pretty tablecloth, flowers on the table like they do. They embrace you. They love you. They care about what happens to you. My husband has Alzheimer's now. They pick him up three days a week. They take him to the center. He has lunch. He exercises. And that's the happiest time of his life now. So we have to think about the future of all of these baby boomers coming up now and what we can do for all of them. I'm not going to be here when that happens. But we still need a senior citizen center that belongs to the senior citizens and not an appendage of another entity. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you, Joy. And the council. Yes, ma'am. And Lena Cornett. Lena? A little short stuff here. I'm Lena Cornett. I live at 982 Lakeland Drive, Lexington, 40502. And I've been going to the senior center several years, In fact, I was going down my hallway this week looking at some of the oil paintings that I did back in the 90s. We do oil paintings. We do exercise. And even in the exercise, you have some of these people in their 80s and the 90s. And we're so proud. And when I'm moving back, I feel like I'm going to kick somebody. I have to look back to be sure that I don't hurt. There's one lady right next to me on her walker. She sits there and she moves her legs. She moves her arms. And it's great. and of course we do bingo and play cards and do a lot of traveling on trips and we have a lot of parties. When you get old you enjoy these parties. You know Christmas and Thanksgiving and Halloween and just have a great time together. And you know I love children. I have four great grandchildren. But I feel like we don't need to be mixed with the children at the YMCA. We need our own. And I'm 83, and I'm planning on being there another 10 years. Thank you very much. Thank you, Lena. All right, that's all. You signed up to speak for issues on the agenda today. I know that all Council members share in our appreciation for the benefits of the comments and the observations and the emotion and the passion of them. So thank you all for being with us today. We'll continue now with our agenda. and first on our agenda is, after public comment, is the requested rezonings and the docket approval. So I'll ask for a motion first and then I know that there are some walk-ons. There's a motion by Council Member Ellinger to approve. Is there a second? Second. Second by Council Member Stennett. Is there any discussion on the motion? Councilman, I believe that we do have some walk-ons. Council Member Myers? Thank you, Mayor. I move to add to the NDF list an allocation to the CRB office incorporated in the amount of $450. So moved. Motion by Council Member Myers, seconded by Council Member Ellinger. Is there any discussion on the motion? All right. Hearing none, then we can take a vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Councilmember Lawless. Thank you, Mayor. I move to place on the docket for the July 9, 2013 council meeting a resolution authorizing the Mayor and the Commissioner of Finance to execute Master Development Agreement and any other necessary documents for the Phoenix Park Center Point Courthouse project with Center Point Parking Company, LLC, and its affiliates. So moved. Second. Motion by Council Member Lawless, seconded by Council Member Ellinger. Is there any discussion on the motion? All right. Hearing none, then we take a vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, like, sign. Motion carries. Council Member Farmer. Thank you, Mayor. On behalf of Council Member Lane and myself, I'd like to add a resolution to our docket expressing the Lexington-Payton County Council's support for the adoption of H.R. 2570, the so-called Valley View Ferry Preservation Act of 2013. And I had placed a copy of this in everyone's box. So moved. Motion by Council Member Farmer. Second by Council Member Lane. Is there any discussion on the motion? All right. Here, Council Member Lane. I'd just like to add just a couple of bits of information. The Valley View Ferry has in the past carried as many as 105,000 vehicles a year across the Kentucky River and had as many as 169,000 passengers. And many of these people are commuting to and from Fayette County to work here or to shop here. So I'd just like to say that we do need to try to support the ferry. I think it is a viable economic engine that helps drive some of the retail and work in our community. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Lane. Ready to take a vote then. All in favor of motion, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Council Member Kay. Thank you, Mayor. I move to place on the docket for the July 9, 2013 Council meeting a resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute change order number 3 to the contract with Triton Services, Inc. for HVAC and piping repair for the Phoenix Building, increasing the contract price by the sum of $2,075 from $232,495 to $234,570. So move. Second. That's a motion by Council Member Kay and seconded by Council Member Farmer. Is there any discussion on the motion? Hearing none, then we can take a vote. All in favor, please say aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Council Member Ford. Thank you, Mayor. There are two items that I would like to bring to the attention of the Council as it pertains to our docket this afternoon. I want to provide notice of the motions that I'll bring tonight at 6 o'clock. The first one pertains to a sidewalk right-of-way in the vicinity of Rand Avenue and Elm Tree Lane. It is identified on our council docket as ordinance number one. This evening at 6 o'clock, I will make a motion to remove that from the docket and to refer that item to the council's planning and public works committee to allow for further discussion amongst the public and this council. Secondly, this afternoon, I will also be addressing the issue with the Bluegrass Area Development District. I've expressed my concerns to you guys via communication via email. I will also move that under the second reading of resolutions, number 33, that we amend that resolution to remove the purchase of service agreement with the Bluegrass Area Development District in the amount of $75,110. I believe this to be a reasonable demonstration of accountability on behalf of this council. So, Mayor, I'll bring forth those items at our council meeting this evening. Thank you. All right. Thank you, Council Member Ford. Council Member Lane. He's all right. Mayor, that was from our previous go-around. All right. Council Member Myers. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. And, Council Members, I sent out an e-mail in response to one of the original e-mails that Council Member Ford sent out over the weekend. and I've asked the Law Department to draft this resolution. It came into your boxes late today, so you may or may not have seen it. I'm going to read the motion and then discuss a little bit about it. It's a resolution. I moved to a place on the docket tonight, a resolution requesting that the President of the Kentucky Senate and the Speaker of the Kentucky House of Representatives take the necessary steps to refer to the Program Review and Investigation Committee and examination of the following. the business practices of the Bluegrass Area Development District and all other area development districts, the structure of the area development districts, and the relevance of the area development districts in today's economy, and directing that a copy of this resolution be sent to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House, so moved. Motion by Councilman Myers, second by Councilman Farmer. Is there any discussion on the motion? Can I start, Mayor? Council Member Myers. Thank you, Mayor. For those of you that were on the council last year, this council passed a resolution that was signed by the mayor unanimously to ask both the Senate and the House to look at the ad and to put it into a committee that was appropriate. That has not yet happened. And so what this does is kind of work off of the previous motion that we did and actually gives the House and the Senate a specific committee in which to review the ad. And this particular committee is a legislative committee. It was designed to review state agencies once they've been instituted to make sure that they're doing the things that they originally intended for them to do in the way that they intended them to do it. And so this is really an opportunity, and I think it's the first time, it will be the first time if this committee takes this up, that the area development districts across the state have been reviewed since their inception about 30 or so years ago. And so I realize that you got this late, but this is just a further recommendation and request of the State Senate and the State House to actually put this into a specific committee so that we can get these things looked at. Thank you, and I appreciate your support. Anyone else wish to speak to the motion? Hearing none, then we can take a vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. All right. All right. Thank you, Mayor. No one else wish to speak to the motion so we can take a vote on approving the docket. All in favor of the motion, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. That allows us to move on to the approval of summary. Is there a motion? Second. Motion by Council Member Beard, seconded by 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. Budget amendments, is there a motion to approve? Yes, approval. Second. Motion by Council Member Stenet, seconded by Council Member Ellinger. Is there any discussion on the motion? All right. Hearing none, then we can take a vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Moving on to new business, is there a motion to approve? No, approved. Second. Motion approved by Council Member Stenet. Second by Council Member Massadi. Is there any discussion on new business on the motion? All right, then we can take a vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Moves us on to continuing business and presentations. Is there a motion on the NDF? So moved. Very well. Motion by Council Member Akers. seconded by Council Member Myers. Is there any discussion on the motion? Okay, hearing none, we can take a vote. All in favor, please say aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Planning and Public Works Committee Summary, up next by Council Member Farmer. Thank you, Mayor. This is the Planning and Public Works Committee Summary of Motions from our June 18th meeting. It appears on page 48 of our packet. Our first item of business was approval of our summary, which passed without dissent. Our second item was adult daycare centers, which is an item that has been a part of both the council and the planning commission, then back to the council and ultimately back to the planning committee. And there's still a lot of interest in this issue. And in the reading of the minutes themselves, you'll see that there were several motions brought forth during the discussion. to define adult daycare centers, to define homeless day centers, and to make some different provisions that we had not really talked about up until that time. I personally thought that that entire discussion resulted in a motion to bring this forward to the council. I was incorrect, and the minutes are incorrect the way that they reflect that. Actually, the committee voted to have the planning folks have a look at our changes, our potential changes and bring it back to us in our August meeting. So I do not have a motion to bring forward on that issue today at this time because we'd asked for more information based on the changes that we were making during the conversation we had. That is mercifully short. The next item was the B1 ZODA, which is a text amendment that updates the B1 zones across all parts of the zoning ordinance. This was a very complicated discussion and one that resulted in some changes that the council wanted to make, or pardon me, the committee wanted to make to what the Planning Commission had resubmitted to us after they had vetted through it. You'll see a July 8th memo that's been attached and sent to each of you outlining the specific material changes that our committee made during its work, and they are to make rehabilitation home conditional uses in the P1, P2, B2, and B2A zones and secondarily to remove tattoo parlors from the B1 Zota prohibited uses in the B2B zone, which is basically the downtown frame or the Rupp Arena area, and make them conditional uses in the B2B zone. The Department of Law held that these were indeed material changes to the work that had been sent back to us from the Planning Commission and opined it. In order for us to pass this with the changes that were made during our meeting, we needed to reflect that back to the Planning Commission for them to vet through again. With that in mind, I now, on behalf of the committee, I move that the ZODA 2012-9 amendments to Articles 1, 8, and 12 for modifications to the B1 zone be referred back to the Planning Commission for further consideration of material changes. Council has recommended to the text. So moved. Second. Motion by Council Member Farmer, seconded by Council Member Kaye. Is there any discussion on the motion? All right. Hearing none, then we'll take a vote all in favor. Please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Thank you on that. Our last item of business that day was an update on how subdivision bonds and letters of credit work. It was a very good discussion. as outlined on page 51 of the packet, and it was an informational session and derived no motions. We did not really have time to look at our committee list, and so after that we had adjourned, and, Mayor, that would conclude my report. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Farmer. Council Member Ellinger has a report on June 11th Budget Committee of the Whole Meeting. Thank you, Mayor. we met on june 11th for our final cal meeting we started at nine o'clock and actually went to the work session and then recessed and came back after the the work session there are numerous motions in here and our council administrator asked if i need to do all the motions and actually the law department said if all the motions have been acted upon for example incorporated into the budget or voted not in place in the budget, then all I need to do is just report these motions were made and all were incorporated into the budget so it's not necessary to make all these motions. So I won't have to go through each one, so you'll all be glad to hear that. We actually had three items on this summary, and the first one was a report from Councilmember O'Meara, and it dealt with the revenue. He said there were assumptions that the council intended to supplement the street light program revenue in fiscal year 2014 and the method to fund the streetlight program has not been decided. He said that the options include the franchise fee, the property taxes, or fund balance, and the urban service fund budget requires supplemental revenue of $2.5 million to be in the balance. He proposed to reduce the rate adjustment the mayor's proposed budget and the franchise fee by $1.5 million. This number assumes a rate increase in the second quarter of fiscal year 2014. He said that net profits have been strong the fourth quarter, and he proposed a $3.65 million increase in revenues in net profit. To summarize, there is a decrease in $2.15 in the withholdings, an increase in $3.65 in the net profits, an increase in $1 million in insurance, and the net revenue number of $297,211,180. And there was a motion to accept this revenue number, and it passed And the next two items were the recommendations from the links, and then the council member recommendations were all the motions that I previously said passed, and I would just say that I would make a motion that we accept what is in the budget, so moved. Second. Motion by Council Member Ellinger, second by Council Member Meyers. Is there any discussion on the motion? All right. We got a quorum? Yep. All right. Is there any discussion on the motion? Hearing none, we can take a vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Councilman Rellinger. Thank you, Mayor. And that concludes the summary. Thank you. All right, sir. Thank you so much. Next on our agenda is a presentation. It's an update on the Senior Citizens Center. Commissioner Mills, you're going to introduce. Good afternoon. Good afternoon. We're here today, and the presentation we're prepared to give you is at the request mainly of Council Member Stenet. He had said that we hadn't had a plan brought to you all since February, and he's exactly correct. So what we're going to bring to you all is what we have, what would be the cost of building one center or two centers, and what the operating cost of those two centers or one center would be. This data has been collected. You all do not know how we arrived at what was put in the CIP. A lot of this has been shared with the Senior Services Commission, but you're correct. You've seen what the consultants have given you, but not what we have done. In addition to spending $30,000 on professional consultants who work in geriatrics, I want Christy Stambaugh and Craig Benz to do this presentation. They have worked diligently over the past two years to arrive at what you have before you. They've had input from surveys. They've done over 44 focus groups. They've looked at benchmark centers. They've read AARP white papers, census data, and industry standards for construction that Craig has gotten from his background in urban planning. They've worked internally with planning, general services, and purchasing many times as they arrived at this data, and also with input from the Senior Services Commission. Historically, Fayette County was the very last of 120 counties to build a senior center. And that was because we could not come up with a location. Here we are 30 years ago, 30 years hence, the same problem as location. And we discuss location a lot in these chambers, but I think the first priority for our seniors would be comprehensive services. We are mindful of being good stewards of taxpayer dollars. Our department is about 3% to 4% of the city budget, and you get a lot of bang for your buck. And that being said, we also know that in the nature of public service, some services are subsidized for our citizens. I would think that golf course and swimming pools are a good example of that, and rightfully we do subsidize those, because they bring quality to our community, quality of life. And I would think that services to our seniors would also fit in that category. So if our senior center doesn't break even financially, we are not opposed to partnerships and finding ways to fund it, But our center received $100,000 in federal grant money this year, and it was for all those services you heard about earlier that are in addition to recreation. We also have two vans that bring people to and from the center regularly. We have wheels that comes regularly in LexTran, so everybody that comes to the center does not drive. And although it's been said in these chambers that I oppose a collaboration with the YMCA, I would like to say that that's not true. That didn't come from my mouth. I'm fine with working with the YMCA. In northern Kentucky and Louisville, there are satellite centers run by the Y to central centers that are run by those counties. I think a model like that might be well replicated in Fayette County. But back to the analogy of the swimming pools. The swimming pools with the most amenities and services in this town are the ones that generate the most revenue and get the most service. We've talked about how Woodland Pool takes Creek, Southland, people even going to Jesmond County to swim. The satellite centers that are smaller and don't have the pools that are smaller and don't have the services, we've been closing those. Maybe that would be the case with the senior center. We need a hub and spoke model. All the research we have done shows that. We need one center with comprehensive services. If we have satellites to that, that would be fine. If the YMCA runs one of those, we think that would be a good idea as well. and we would most of all like to say how much we appreciate the Marion Council allocating $5 million in this year's budget. It is a step towards getting these seniors what they deserve. And we thank you very much. The time has come. And I'm going to turn it over to Christy and Craig. Hi again. I think I'm here a lot. But first I have to say that my staff and I are so honored to get to work with our seniors and we have the best job in the world, thanks. So this is what we're going to talk about today, and our objectives are here, and I'll not insult you by reading them. But we'll let you know about the progress and what the analysis is from today, from 2008, and what today is since 1983, the new study in 2008 and the current study in 2012, how much it's going to cost, where we would like to see the next steps, and how long it might take us. So here's the statistics, because I think the last time I was here, you all asked for these more comprehensively. And so this is outlined. It's also in your packet. And then when we got started, and it was a couple years ago, we did a survey, and we did this thing called Ask Lexington. It was community conversations, and these conversations were held with people who weren't necessarily seniors. We worked with teen mothers. We went into the jail. We had a meeting at Golden Corral. We had meetings throughout the community, one at the Lyric Theater. And then we also had a senior survey. The senior survey is still available online, and a couple of you have sent it out, and I'm getting more data. But of the 561 surveys, we came up with this data. And the exercises like dance class, line dancing, yoga, tai chi, our stretch and tone, which is a low-impact exercise program, they're looking for concerts. we're not doing a whole lot of concerts right now, but that's something that they would like to see. We have a lot of continuing education, but we certainly could do more. We work closely with OLLI. That's not a program that we provide, but something that the University of Kentucky does. Travel has been mentioned, and with the help of Parks and Recreation, many of our seniors are able to travel safely with somebody that they can trust. And movies and live entertainment are something that we think our baby boomers are going to be looking for. It's what the wave of the future, it's what people are going to be looking at. And again, 79% of the seniors surveyed in these 561 reports said that they would like the center located inside New Circle Road. Now I'm going to turn over to Craig, unless he wants me to cover this. Good afternoon. So this slide just shows the progress to date. This is the slide that shows what's happened over the past 10 years, and most of you are familiar with this. So just briefly, this all began in 2002. We had a focus group that formed, and a planning committee came out of that. And the not surprising conclusion a year later was that we need a new senior center. Those efforts continued in 2004 and 2005 with additional strategic planning, and as recently as 2008, we had an RFP issued and had some efforts undertaken related to doing some design for a new senior center. So this is the more recent history. Last August, you'll recall, we began a feasibility study to identify the appropriate site for the new center. in January and in February we brought those results back to you. The consultant reported back to you, and then in February they came back again and they reported on a few different or additional sites. So the study really identified five critical issues, and those were simply the ease and safety of accessing the site. The second item was just simply will the building fit on the site that was being evaluated. The third item was can larger spaces, wider drive aisles, defined pedestrian pathways, and so on be accommodated on the site for the parking areas? Fourth, the consultant looked at the ability to configure the sites for accessibility generally, and those are things like slope of the site and the ease of the building access and the accessibility of the amenities that are being proposed on the site. And then finally, if there's an existing structure on the site, can it be reused for a senior center? Three of the sites that we brought to you met all of those criteria. So this, it gets a little tough to see what's on the slide here, but what's happening here is this is a building usage comparison, and what it shows in the first column, or the second column really, is the square footage of the current uses in the existing senior center. And the existing senior center, as you know, is 15,000 square feet. The second column on there is the proposed square footage on the 2008 study, and the aggregate of that was 34,000 square feet. And then finally, the most recent study, the 2012 study, we'll call it, proposed 46,288 square feet for a new senior center. Just some of the highlights, I'm not going to read all these lines to you, but just some of the highlights you have on there are towards the bottom of the slide, three lines up, you have a tiered lecture hall, 4,000 square feet, which supports indoor walking track use. This is just a continuation of that same building usage comparison. Significant increase in the size of the dining room to 4,800 square feet with a separate dining and party room to meet demands accounts for an additional 1,650 square feet. The typical level of service for dining rooms is about 12 to 15 square feet per person. The consultants explain to us that the recommendation for seniors for the same use is about 18 to 20 square feet due to mobility and safe use of the space. So that accounts for some of the size increase that you see there. We also are proposing dedicated exercise studios. Those have been incorporated. There's two at 1,600 square feet each. The fitness room is expanded. An indoor walking track is added, and that adds 2,640 square feet. And separate fitness restroom and locker rooms are added as well, and those are all accounted for on the 2012 column of this slide. So this is the last slide in that series, and at the bottom you can see the aggregate square feet of the uses. Three activity rooms in a multi-purpose room that the existing center uses for up to nine uses each and every day will be addressed in separate rooms. Right now what happens is activity room one, two, and three and the all-purpose room that are listed on that slide, each one of those rooms is used for up to nine purposes each day. So you can see that it would be tough to offer multiple different types of classes because there's just so much demand on those. The reason you don't see that listed again in columns two and three is because those were dispersed out to separate rooms, which accounts for a lot of the increase in square footage. Corridors and wall areas, which is near the bottom of the slide, that's the 8,708 square feet in the 2012 column. Those have also grown significantly, and that provides mobility of movement that the seniors need. A typical hallway or corridor might be four feet and the seniors require eight feet. So that's why you see such a jump in that square footage. So these are the construction costs that we presented to you when we requested funds for the CIP. This is essentially lifted right out of the CIP that was approved and accounts for a total of $15.27 million for the total estimated cost of a new senior center. One single senior citizen center that's 46,000 square feet. Construction is 10-5, about 10.5 million. AE, architectural and engineering, brings you to about 800,000 when you take contingency into account. Property acquisition is about three and a half million. We believe it may be less than that at the end of the day. That's kind of the worst case scenario, I think, at this point, just based on what we've seen with some of the examples. And again, the total project cost rises to a total of $15.27 million. These are the proposed staffing costs for a new senior citizen center for a 46,000-square-foot center. The net increase is $161,000 annually. So what this slide shows, the top of that shows our current staff up to the subtotal, which is the $393,000. All of the new positions are at the bottom of this slide, and essentially what we're looking at adding there would be two new full-time staff and nine part-time staff to supplement programs and provide social services. And again, the net increase is $161,000. This slide shows the estimated operating costs. Our current operating costs are about $67,000 annually for the existing center. The new building, we believe, would be about $223,000. One of the things you'll notice on there that we don't currently have is contract janitorial staff. That's a significant amount of this, but really what we're looking at doing is adding that so we can keep the new building serviceable and in good condition. Essentially, janitorial staff would come into the building in the evenings and clean it and make sure that it's ready to go the next morning. That's not a service we currently have. So with all of that said, everything you've seen up to this point was for a single building that's 46,000 square feet. What we did on this slide is we assumed a two-building example. This was something that came up at a recent council meeting. We wanted to be responsive to that. This assumes a 35,000 square feet hub or a central center and an additional 20,000 square foot satellite facility. We believe that will require at least 11 additional staff over and above the 11 additional staff that would be required for the 46,000 square foot center. So we'd be looking at a total of 22 additional staff to run two buildings. and you can see on the the matrix on the bottom of the slide there what we believe some of those construction and related costs and so on would be it essentially raises from 15.2 to 17.9 million about a 17 percent increase and the total staff or staffing and operating costs raise pretty significantly about 37 percent over what we believe it would cost for a one building scenario So once we have a site selected and have completed due diligence, we'd like to move forward with the release of an RFP. That's really our next step at this point after securing a site. And that would be to finalize the architectural program and come back to the council with detailed renderings of the site and the building. There would also be community meetings to get input from the community meetings on what this needs to look like and feel like and to get final input on what the programming needs to be in the building. There is an option to do a complete design-build RFP. That's something for the council's consideration. It would require a bit more time and resources up front to do that. That is an option to just do the complete design-build RFP at this time. This slide shows the timeline. This is a very aggressive timeline. This assumes, just to be straightforward, this assumes that we select a site this month and we move forward immediately with an RFP. So what would happen under that scenario is in November, we would begin the conceptual design and renderings process, and those would be completed and presented to you by February of next year. the next phase RFP, if that's the will of the council to move forward with two RFPs for a pre-development and construction, that would come forward to you in February of next year. And then that pre-development or permitting process would happen between May and November of next year. So really under this, what I consider a best case scenario, we'd be looking at starting construction in about December of 2014 and finishing sometime right at the end of 2015 or the beginning of 2016. A little over a year is what we believe it will take to get the building constructed. So again, with that, the next steps are site selection and to release a RFP for site and building design and construction. And we're here for any questions you might have. Thank you. All right. Thank you, Craig. I've got several council members signed up to speak. Again, Council Member Myers. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Mr. Bens, for your report and Commissioner for your report. I guess one quick question, and I hope that what happens is that we take this time while we're on break to both have the why do the research that they want to do, the administration do the research they're going to do, and actually my aide's already started doing some research and Paul started doing some research and bring all that together. But my quick question is, as a third iteration of this, could it be that we do a 30,000 or 35,000 square foot stand-alone building that we own and maintain, and then instead of doing the 20,000 square foot, do two 10,000 square feet and make those the satellites with the Ys? Does that work? I'm not asking for a yes or no. I just, as we do our research, if we can look at that as an option as well, that would be great. We can definitely do that. we can put together some costs for that as well. Okay. Thank you very much. And one more thing. Eventually, whatever we do, there's a potential to sell the current facility and its property, right? Which would also offset the cost of whatever we end up doing. That's correct. That's something I should have mentioned. There may be an opportunity to realize something like $2.5 million out of the current site. I think we can get more than that out of it. but I think that's probably a baseline minimum conservative number. Sure. And there's also opportunity there to lease the existing site, and that could provide some real long-term benefits as well towards the new center. Sure. Thank you very much. Sure. Thank you, Council Member Myers. Council Member Mossad. Thank you, Mayor. I think Christy might be the one to answer this, if you don't mind. There's been a couple of concerns about an independent analysis. I know as far as Council Member Lane and I know Masadi stuff, so I think it's Moritano, is that correct? Okay. Had alluded to that. Can you tell me when you did the last, you know, how recent the study was as far as, you know, your survey and the components and so forth and how it was done? Sure. So the survey is available online, and I'm getting data in on a fairly regular basis, not in great numbers. But in great numbers, back in 2012 and 2011, we launched, and it was late in 2011 that we launched Ask Lexington, which was the community conversations. We had 44 conversations, 351 responses from that. And from that conversation, and it was open-ended, it was what kind of community would you like to see in Lexington? It wasn't all seniors. There were certainly seniors amongst the groups. And what emerged was services for seniors, safety, transportation, and neighborhood development. Those were kind of the top things within that group. But they also mentioned exercise, healthy living, walkability, things like that in the community that were important. As far as the seniors surveys, I alluded to at the last time I talked to you was our senior interns. We had 125 returned from the senior intern alumni. And from that, 62 of those participants currently participate at the Senior Center, and 63 of them don't currently participate. But things that they thought were important to the future were availability of amenities, especially restroom facilities, which I've been saying for a long time, but restroom facilities and exercise opportunities, but more importantly, a place for themselves, a place to gather, a place where it was safe, where transportation was available, where Wi-Fi was available. And then another question in that survey, and I'll gladly share these. In fact, I'll post them online as soon as I get back to the office or tomorrow if you'd like. What I also ask them is, what is your greatest concern for the future as you age? And many of them said mobility was super important to them, their ability to stay independent, to maintain relationships, and things like that. So we've done a lot of surveys. We really truly have not gone directly just to our seniors because we're looking at a center that's going to be to the future. I mean, we've been in this one 30 years. We anticipate being in the next one 20 years. And so we're really looking at those younger persons, the baby boomers, even the people who are caring for their aging parents now, as well as the input from the seniors. So I don't know if that answers your question, but that's how we got. I was just wondering what the representative sample was, and it looks like you've got a cross-section. It was a cross- I mean, truly, we talked with teen moms at our family care center. We went into the jail system and had conversations. We went into neighborhood meetings. We went into the Golden Corral. We did a community connectors conversation with the United Way community connectors. So we did have a nice broad cross-section. Okay. Second question, if you don't mind. Sure. I think today by email we've had some communications, and I just want to make sure my numbers are correct. Initially, you had stated that there was, as far as the amount of seniors annually that you serve, were about 776. Now, that can't be right. And then I got another email stating that you should be about 3,500 a month. That's correct, I'm assuming. And it's a matter of duplicated and unduplicated. And so when we talk about unique individuals, in the report that I think I sent to you for 2012 was 700 and something unique individuals just in that year since we've activated our data program. And those are unique persons. But I've got to tell you that many of the persons come in and receive three or four services. They may come and enjoy coffee and conversation in the library. They may go to bingo. They may go to history class. They may meet with one of the social workers. The piece that I've never really reported very adequately is the piece that our social workers do. And the people they're serving are people who may call. It may be referral sources. It may be social workers in the community. It may be grown children taking care of their adult parents. And they're seeing 200 to 200 or talking to and providing services to 200 to 250 seniors every month. So it's real hard for us to really, truly, adequately tell you, but on a day-to-day basis, there's about 128 to 130 different people in the building at any given time. Okay, that's what I needed to know. Thank you very much. Thank you, Council Member Scotchfield. Thank you, Mayor. I don't really have a question, but I do. Obviously, we've had lots of information come in over the last couple weeks, and I've kind of gone, oh, well, that's a great point. And I think nobody on this council has taken a look at this and not said, I've got to take a look at what everybody needs. The reality is we're going to make people mad no matter what we decide. In 20 years when we're talking about building the next one, we're going to be talking about what we did wrong now. But the reality is everybody on this council I know is trying to make the right decision for our seniors because we are the future seniors. And, you know, I do, you know, I've listened to everybody talk, and I respect everybody's decision, and we're trying to take everybody's opinions and needs into account. But one thing that I've learned from being on council for just the six months, with every decision I make, I make somebody mad. And so, you know, we are trying to do the best thing we can do. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Council Member Scotchfield. Council Member Stennett. Thank you, Mayor, and thank you, Commissioner Mills, for the updated presentation. It's true, you know, since February we've had a lot of, I should say, outside conversations. Different options have been presented in many different ways, not just through dialogue with the Y over a trip, but in many other arenas we've had dialogue, including at the own Senior Assistance Center. You've had ideas flushed out there that have been emailed to Council. So everyone's talking about this. I think it's important for the citizens to understand once and for all that not one person in this Council not one person has said, we don't want a new center. So when someone comes to the microphone and says, you all have to build us a new center, we know that. We want a new center for you. I've been on council the last eight years talking about this whole issue. When we started studies, we went back to 01 information, so we know the importance of it. We realize that. But what we also know is, and I've said this two years ago, and I said it last year in our meeting when this came up, is we want the gold standard for senior citizen centers. We want to do the best we can at this given time for our seniors. And when we shortchange ourselves and pigeonhole us in one option only at this juncture, at this time, and say we only want one center, 45,000, that's it, that's what we have to do. Well, two years ago we said differently. We said only 30,000 square feet. So what's changed between then and now that says we need a bigger center? What says we don't need two 30,000 square foot centers in our city to be fair to each side of the population? We were given a chart at our last social service meeting that said seniors by the numbers, and these were supposed to be all the zip codes above 3,000 seniors in those zip codes. Well, there's one big one missing. That's the 40505. It's missing off there. Well, we've got the real chart today, and it's the third largest senior population in our community. Number one is 02 zip code. So as the gentleman said earlier, if we really want to get serious about location, and I think that's the first thing this council needs to decide is location, the heaviest part of our senior populations are in the 02 and 05 parts of town, The east side, not the Turf and Mall side, not the Springs Inn side, and definitely not the Beaumont. And then if you go by density, calculate the number of residents and that portion of which are seniors. Again, the O2, Mr. Farmer's District, and my district, the O5 that I share with Council Member Ford. So we really need to hone in and get our facts, and that's what today's all about, is getting the right information. We've got the right chart now. We know by census data where our seniors are living. And I've said this before and I'll say it again. We shouldn't be building on where they're at today. we should be building on where they're going to be. Because you said it right, Christy. 30 years, this could last us. So I think today, going forward, we need to do a couple things. We need to hone in on a location. We need to, and I would ask the administration, to explore the why possibility. Because there's been a lot of misinformation said about the why proposal. That proposal, let me remind the council and the community and the people in this room right now, we haven't weighed in on it. We haven't even entered a negotiation with the why. That's just a first attempt at a proposal. That's not unlike anything else we do in government. We always have people bring us proposals. Then we sit down and have true talks. We get down on what we call the weeds, and we iron out those details. So none of those details that have been presented have ever been set in stone, have ever been endorsed by anyone up here, including the mayor. But what we should be doing is not leaving any stone unturned. We should be exploring every option because, again, going back, we want the gold standard. We want to set the standard. I don't care what the other counties are doing. quite frankly, they can build a 50,000 square foot facility. That doesn't correlate with the quality of service we can offer in either a 10,000 or a 50,000 here in Lexington. Lexington is different. We do have 300 plus thousand people. We need more than one center, period. One center will not be fair to any part of town and will not be justified with anyone in this community who's not currently using the center. You know, I felt bad for Christy and her staff having to sit up here two weeks ago and tell us we can't accept any more people. But we want to because their hearts are in it. I watch her. She tears up anytime someone talks about the good deeds out there. I know your heart's in it, but I want to deliver on making your heart bigger and getting a better facility so we can service those people. That's why a survey citywide is important. We want to talk to the seniors, not just who are there, but who are the ones who are not there. What will get them in the doors? What do we have to build to get them in our doors? That's who we need to talk to. Because if we're going to grow, let's grow right. Let's explore the why option. And, Mayor, I would ask that while we're on break, you all sit down, if you have the opportunity, to sit down with the Y and explore those options. So I don't want to make a formal motion, but I think we should have that information and come back to the council with a true proposal. But let's make decisions when we come back. Let's hone in on a location. Let's hone in on a number of sites and hone in on the Y situation. How does that best fit our needs? So I think everyone on this council, once again, wants a new center. We all want to do it the right way, but we deserve to explore all of our options. We can't leave any stone unturned at this juncture. We're not too far down the path. That's why we all agreed to $5 million. And I'm glad that we did, and I think it's the right thing to do. And I want to thank Christy, you and all your staff. Thank you for the work you all do out there, because that's the true heroes in all of this. Day to day, we don't see it. We don't go out there every day. I've seen the Thanksgiving dinner where you couldn't seat any more people. I've seen those times. But thank you for the work you all have done out there. Thank you, Commissioner Mills, for your heartfelt and passion on this issue, because I think we have a lot to work with, and I want to be thankful in this community that we do have funds, that we can build something going forward, and we do have a council who's paying attention. And we have citizens who are coming down here to make sure we're paying attention. That's a good thing. But we can get it done working with the mayor and administration and the Y, making sure we can rule that out or invite them into our circle and work with them. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Council Member Stendhal. Council Member Kay. Thank you, Mayor. I want to really follow up on a fair amount of what Council Member Stinnett has already said, but starting with the belief that there's nobody on this council who doesn't want the best for all the seniors in the community. There's going to be one or more buildings. There's going to be services. We want it to be the best it possibly can be. My concern has been, and I've stated it before, that we're not, as Council Member Stinnett said, foreclose options before we've looked at them. We know what we have, and we know what we can deliver now, and we know the value of that. What we do not know is what we could have. We have not fully explored all the options. And I would hate to see us, after 10 years of thinking about this, to move forward precipitously before we have the data, before we have the understanding, before we know what all the options are so that we can make the best choice possible. Having said that, I do have a couple questions also about the presentation. The first is this same slide about the seniors by zip code. What's the age cutoff? It's 60, according to census data. So that is 60 and above? That's correct, 60 to 85 and above. Federal definition. Right. Federal definition. And recently I did a study of the baby boomers, which are ages, well, they don't match with the census numbers, but they're 49 to 67. And I have the data for 50-year-olds to 69-year-olds in Fayette County, and the total number is 61,770. I also have the data of the seniors who are currently participating at the center and what zip codes they come from. If you'd like this information, I'll gladly send it to you. I think that information would be very helpful. Sure. Because it isn't just the people who are in that cohort now, but it's the people who are going to be in that cohort. So I think we need to know more in terms of location. The second question, this may be more for Craig, The two-building example in which you say that it would require an additional 11 staff, et cetera, what are the assumptions that you make about the staffing that lead you to believe that you'd need 11 more? That's actually a Christy question. Okay. A couple of the new positions. Currently, we don't have a facility manager. We don't have anybody taking care of the building. We have a temporary person who cleans less than six hours a day, five days a week. And so currently we don't have anybody doing light bulbs. I was there one day, and there was a human fluid spill in the restroom, and we just take care of it. And so what we said is if the building was greater than 15,000 square feet, and we wanted to maintain it in any kind of way that was meaningful to our people, is that we would need two people who would work split shifts to be there. So a person early in the morning to mop before people get there and a person that stays later in the day to mop after everybody's left. Title III requires a manager, a senior center manager at any senior center facility that receives federal funding, which our center does. And so that was our, we have that one person. But if we added a second site, we would have to have a manager. Okay, so just if I can. So presently, the satellite programs that we run, we don't? We don't get federal funding. They're all supported by general fund, and they're all part-time programs. Okay, so what else are you assuming about the need to staff if you have two buildings? So we would need to have a center director. We'd have to have somebody on the switchboard. We'd have to have transportation assistance like we currently do. We would need a social worker or somebody to meet the social services needs. We'd need to have activities there, which Parks and Recreation currently provides for us at our current center, in the form of part-time program supervisors leading activity. And so those were some of them. Thank you. Okay, that's helpful. Well, I think, just to kind of reiterate, I think there are many questions. I think, in my mind, there still needs to be answered before. I would be prepared to make a decision either about a single site or multiple sites or where that's, if it's going to be a single site or two, where they would be placed. So I hope Council will continue to have an informed conversation about this topic. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Council Member Kegg. Council Member Ford. Thank you, Mayor. I want to thank staff for bringing us this information. A lot of the information, I think, is data that has been provided to us previously. And I want to say that one of the speakers kind of alluded under public comment as if there was no work done in regards to data collection, in regards to studying. And we've come quite a long ways in the information that we have. The new data that I recognize in this report does examine the two-building component. And what I would like to say is that last week's conversation talked a lot about escalating costs, and it had a lot of concern about the operating costs, and we should be concerned with that. But maybe it's just me, but if you build a facility from $12 to $15 million from the ground, there will be operating costs. Our job is to contain those costs and run them as efficiently as possible, but that should not be a deterrent in and of itself to building a new facility. The question I want to come back to is not to totally go against the discussion of possibility of partnerships, but right here and now in time, as we proceed to go on council break, Last August in earnest, we started consultants' work on site selection. We spent almost $40,000 on site selection, and it appears to me we're almost acting as if that activity never occurred. And it seems to me that we don't have any finality on that activity. I do understand this. I will say this. I recognize that a consultant's work is just that, it's study. We're not bound or committed to those sites, but I don't recall us truly, definitively examining those sites. And if somebody could speak to where we are right now in regards to the consultants' $40,000 and counting consultancy work on site selection, it would be real helpful to me right now. we've incurred those costs. We've spent them on four sites, I think. And we did additional site work on the Continental Inn, I believe, as a part of that. And you all have a final report. And I know you get a volume of information. I have that saved on a flash drive because it's a very long report. And if the council would like it again, I'd be glad to send it forth again. but looking at best practices these folks have done 53 centers in over 30 states they are experts in geriatric design with what we had to work with and all our due diligence they came down with three sites that met everything one of those sites now has a development plan on it by a private developer so that option is now gone to us I would say that if real estate picks up and people start acquiring properties, we may have put that money toward those sites and we've got to go back to the drawing board. Because, you know, I know that you don't want to rush into anything. But the current center is overcrowded. Commissioner? So I'm just saying, as we've got three sites, we have two left. But the question I have for the administration and council, what I know is not a question. We have yet to go to retire into executive session to discuss location. We haven't done that. And in honesty, as we subsequently have moved from the Social Services Committee on June 18th, I thought that's where we were going today. Not to make a decision, but to talk about real estate. We haven't done that yet. And we're dragging our feet on that discussion. I'm not asking us to run or rush into a premature decision. But I am asking us to stop kicking the can down the road. And if we go into executive session, if we were to go into executive session and say none of these sites meet our liking, let's say that. Let's move on to the next thing and go to the next drill. But we're recycling presentations. We're asking for a continued study. And more importantly, I'll close in the last 17 seconds I have is, we're hearing folks, but we're not listening. All the seniors in Fayette County have not spoken today, but a great representation has. And they have said, thank you kindly, counsel, for you've got to make the tough choice. But this is not what we want. we want what was on the table before. Now, that's our purview in regards to what we want to do, but from District 1, I just want to say that I'm hearing and I'm listening, and I'm hoping that we can get to some decision-making here pretty soon, particularly on-site. And I would think it would be appropriate for us to retire into executive session if we have time in the interim of this work session and council meeting at 6. Thanks so much, Mayor. All right. Thank you, Councilman Ford. Councilman Beard. Thank you, Mayor. I think I'm coming down on the side of the suggestion that Councilmember Stendent made. It's nice to know who lives in 40502 or 40504 or whatever, but it's not demographically accurate at all because it goes across all types of folks and ages and their ability to move and such. And I still think there's a lot of information we can get from the Census Bureau. And we ought to dig as deep as we can dig to get everything we can get so that we feel comfortable with making a decision. And we can sit and talk around this horseshoe until the cows come home, but we really need to get moving on this because the baby boomers are coming, and they're coming in two years. and so if we can do that you all have done some good great work in fact but it's pretty tough Lexington has become a big city footprint now not counting the county I'm talking about the urban services area and some people wouldn't show up at all if they had to go to wherever on Harrisburg Road or such. And so I think we need something on the north side of Lexington somehow. And I don't know how we find it. It is possible. I put them out. They'll love this one. Lexmark has been known to give land away. You've got a lot of excess land over there. Where the Hope Center is. We currently have a satellite center over at Black and Williams, which is Georgetown and Booker. And there's a senior program there now. And just not to interrupt you, but as I look at our statistics here, we have representation at the senior center currently from every zip code. So there's at least the lowest numbers are in the areas where there happens to be the lowest number of seniors residing, which is 40507. There's only 295 seniors, and we have six seniors participating from that zip code. The next is 315 seniors live in 40510, and we have two seniors participating from there. And in 40516, there's only 393 seniors, and we have three seniors. But the largest is 40503. We have 144 seniors. The next is 40502 with 108. 40517, which is quite a distance, kind of, from the current location, we have 121 seniors who come from that zip code. So, again, I have that data, and if you could tell me more specifically from the Census Bureau email or whatever, we'll try to get more data for you. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Council Member Beard. Council Member Lane. Thank you, Mayor. The first thing I'd like to say is that I am totally in favor, and I do support a new senior citizen or senior citizen centers, as the case may be. I still feel that the number one question should be, what are the needs of the seniors? I don't know that the surveys that we've done are statistically reliable and actually reflect a cross-broad section of our community. So the number one recommendation I would make would be that we engage an outside research firm. And there are a couple of companies here in Lexington, the Matrix Group and Preston Osborne, that do these kind of surveys. I think we need to do a study of the seniors, and maybe the age group would be somewhere between 50 and 70 because the people that are 50 today may be 70 years, 20 years from now, and they'll be using the center at that time. Factors like education, income, age, marital status, how many people would be interested in even using the center, health factors, transportation. There are some of the other factors that get involved in whether the center would be used and whether it should be a neighborhood center or a central location. The other thought that I've been having is if we spend $15 billion to build a center and we spend $400,000 to $500,000 a year to operate it, the real estate portion, the utilities, maintenance, repairs, janitorial, and then you have $600,000, $700,000, $800,000 a year for the operating expense for the center. We're talking about investing somewhere between $50 million and $60 million in the senior citizen center over a 20-year period, and I believe we're going to spend that kind of money that we need to do our due diligence and make sure that we're making a good investment. A couple of other thoughts I was having listening to the conversation. is that one of the clients that I represented in the past in the real estate acquisition is KinderCare Child Learning Centers. And in some cases, they have located a center, and over a 20-year period, all of the young people got older, and not that many young people moved back in. So they had an aging of their neighborhood. Well, the same thing could happen for Fayette County. Some of these zip codes have a lower percentage or population of elderly people, and some have a bigger one. And so over their 20-year period, we're going to have an aging population. So even though maybe today an area doesn't necessarily need a neighborhood center, they might need one in the future. So we have to sort of look at the future growth of the population of seniors. I guess the other thought I wanted to throw out is with regard to site acquisitions, another client that our firm worked with was the United States Postal Service. And what they would do is they would pick a geographical area and actually run an ad saying the post office wants to acquire real estate within this area. And then they would actually ask property owners to submit property that might be available for sale. And then basically we get a conditional agreement contingent upon approval, final approval by the post office, so that before you've spent a lot of money doing research on individual sites, you would have a written contractional agreement that would give the city the option to purchase a property. There are some things like that that I think we need to be looking at. And, you know, if I can help you all in any way, I would be happy to help you if I could. But I think we do need to move forward, but I think rushing too quickly and committing that much dollars over that period of time without having a really good idea of what is best for the seniors. I think we have to think of it as seniors are our customers, if you want to look at it that way, and we're providing a service to them, we need to make sure that we've got it at the right location and the right product that they need, just like any other business would do that if you were putting a retail business in, you want it to be targeted to your demographics. I think we need to do a little bit more work in that area. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you. Councilman Lane. Councilman Lawless. Thank you. I'll try to keep this brief. First of all, Council Member Stennett talked about 40502 being Council Member Farmer's district and somebody else's, I think. But the third district is 40502, 40503, 40504, 40507, and 40508. So that being said, you'll see if you put all those together, that's where a lot of the seniors live. And it's because our city's on that hub, spoke layout, which has created a lot of problems for bus travel and all sorts of things. But I do want to say, I think there was maybe an inference made that the administration and the council members aren't listening. And I believe we are all listening. We may all not hear the same thing, but we are listening. and it has been studied and the Tate's Creek sidewalk was brought up and now it's going to cost X percent more and it's like why? Why is because when it was first started out and studied, et cetera, and certain citizen groups tried to stop it, et cetera, it's been six years and prices have gone up. Same with the Lyric Theater. The first design of the Newtown extension was in the 60s. So we can't always get every piece of information. Hiring a polling firm is very expensive. And I think you all really did a lot of outreach going to restaurants where seniors would be and other centers. and the longer we study it, the more that it's going to change. It's going to change. Why was it only X number of square feet, you know, eight or ten years ago and now it's this many square feet? It's because things change. And so this is a fluid process and it's going to continue to change. What I also hear very strongly from everybody that has been vocal and I happen to be one of those seniors, thank you, and I hope to be able to go to it before I die. So, you know, you can process the hide off an elephant and all you've got is a skinless elephant. So I think we do need to do due diligence. We do need to look at options. But one thing I hear over and over and over again, And I think the YMCA has provided some services. But to make a capital investment in building a YMCA that provides some services to seniors until 3 o'clock without. And I think they were kind of put on the spot being called in maybe even before they had fleshed it out. and I'm not saying a partnership, but I hear we want one building, we want to be safe, we want a sense of community, and we don't want to have to watch out for getting run over by slippery little children. So thank you very much, and I hope we can just all take a deep breath and move forward and know that we'll never have every answer to every question possible, and we spend a lot of money looking for those questions. So we know the need's there. We need to find a site. We need to juggle the numbers and see what kind of community partnerships like the YMCA and also look at what services can be provided that may be covered by Medicare or Medicaid in the new center that we do not have now, which would be a source of income. Thank you, and Godspeed. Thank you, Councilman Lawless. Councilman Myers. Thank you, Mayor. I guess if I could ask David M. I can't pronounce your last name, so I'm going to call you David M. When you first presented to us before, the opportunity was to put a satellite at each one of the Ys. And I asked the question, but I haven't heard an answer, and I don't know if there is one yet, so if there's not, that's okay. But is the opportunity there still to partner with the Y if we were to build a standalone facility and then only do, say, two satellites? Or does the Y need us to do four satellites to make this work? We haven't had any discussion to date with Commissioner Mills or anybody else on the staff. We certainly welcome that opportunity to explore those options. Yes. So from your perspective and your board's perspective, if we only did two satellites, that's not a deal breaker. necessarily? Not necessarily, no. Okay, thank you. I guess where I want to move to is when I listen to what people are saying, what I haven't heard is we only want one building. What I've heard is, and correct me seniors that are here if I'm wrong, what I've heard you guys say is we want the government to ensure to us that they will have at least one standalone facility that they own and operate to ensure that the services and programs that are currently being provided, those that are needed in the future, you'll have a guarantee from your government those things will happen. Okay, I'm seeing some thumbs up and some heads shaking yes. So the site selection, personally, I really don't think it's as big an issue as we're making it. Wherever the site's going to be, the seniors are going to go to it. We can't put one on every corner. So I'm going to make the motion that what we do as a government today, the takeaway that everybody will have is that we commit as a government to building one standalone site, period. Now, I shouldn't say period because that makes it sound like something different than what I'm saying. Okay, that being said, the opportunity to partner with the Y is still there. One of the examples given was two buildings, a 35,000 square foot, I think, and a 30 or 35, and then a 20. And I asked the question if we could do the 30 or 35, and then two 10s, partnerships with the Y. At the end of the day, what I want to do is say to our community that we will, at the end of the day, at least own and maintain one senior citizen center owned and maintained by this government. partnerships are on the table whatever we can work out for satellites is still on the table but at the end of the day we have one LFECG owned and operated senior citizen center at a minimum so moved it's motion by councilor Myers second by councilmember Ellinger is there any discussion on the motion. Restate? Maybe, yeah. Restate? Restate. You want me to restate? Yeah, Councilor Myers, would you restate the motion, please? Okay. I move that this government today commit to building a brand new LFCCG-owned, maintained and operated Senior Citizen Center at, I don't think I'm going to put Square Foot in there because I think that's variable. And then at the same time, we explore additional satellites with different types of partnerships that may come available to us. So moved. Second. Motion by Council Member Myers, second by Council Member Ellinger. Is there any discussion on the motion? Council Member Ford. Thank you, Mayor. Council Member Myers and members of the Council. Council Member Myers' motion very closely reflects the motion that was brought forth from the Social Services and Community Development Committee at our meeting on June 18th. It provides for a demonstration of commitment, but it demonstrates some flexibility to be willing to work in partnership. I support the motion. Thank you, Mayor. Any further discussion? Further discussion on the motion? All right. Hearing none, then we can take a vote. All in favor of the motion, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Thank you, Mayor. Well, I'll just get reelected. All right. All the seniors, they vote. Back to the... Okay. All right. Councilman Stent, do you wish to speak? All right. Thank you, and thank you, Councilman Myers, for bringing that motion. And I know everyone's excited, but what that doesn't do is it doesn't say that location's not out of why. It doesn't say where that location is. It doesn't say there's two identical locations. So that's what we don't need in this conversation. But let me ask a question. Commissioner or CAO Sally Hamilton, where are we at on location? Are we in negotiations at all? Would it be appropriate to Council go into closed session, as Council Member Ford alluded to? I know we just passed the motion that says one location, but I know several of us are looking at multiple locations as a possibility as well, or more than one, I should say. But where are we at on that? Do we need to go into closed session today? Mayor, can I do a point of clarification, please? Thank you, Mayor. I want to make it clear. What I said was a standalone. So when someone says that this could be connected to the Y, the one facility, that's not correct. That's not what the motion was. That's not what we wrote on. LFCCD will have at least one standalone facility that they own and operate. And then the partnerships are out there. How do we go forward with those? Thank you, Mayor. And since this is my time speaking, Mayor, let me be clear that that stand-alone facility could be on Y property, period. It could be right next door to it. So that's my opinion, Councilman Myers, and you made the motion. It passed, but that motion doesn't obligate us to that. That's the only thing we can do going forward. It can be on Y property. So, C.L. Sally, you want to answer my question? Yes, sir. Kevin Atkins and I are here today and prepared to talk about one particular site and its cost. So do we need to go on closed session? I would appreciate it. All right. We've got a motion by Council Member Ellinger, please. Council Member Ellinger. Thank you, Mayor. I move to go into closed session pursuant to KRS 61.8101B for the discussion of acquisition and or sale of real property. An open discussion will likely affect the value of the property. Motion by Council Member Ellinger, seconded by Council Member Akers. Unless there's objection, we will enter closed session. I got him. Everyone, thank you for being with us. Can we take a five-minute break? Yeah, let's take a five-minute break and then come back. Thank you. guitar solo guitar solo Thank you. Thank you. guitar solo Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I'm sorry. Thank you. guitar solo Thank you. guitar solo guitar solo Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. guitar solo Thank you. guitar solo guitar solo Thank you. I'm sorry. Thank you. guitar solo Thank you. All right. Hello, everybody. Let's try to take our seats and proceed. We've still got a busy agenda tonight. We've got a council meeting that we've got to get to. Jim, here you go. Greetings. Thank you, sir. Welcome. All right. We are ready to go to Council Reports. Do you need a motion to come out? We had a motion and we got that covered. Yes, sir. Thank you. Now back into open session. And we've had a motion and a second, and we've moved back in closed session. All right, we're able to move now to council reports. Any council member who wishes to offer a council report, please sign on. All right. So, no council members wish to offer a council report? No. Oh, okay. All right. Here we go. We're on a roll. All right. There is no mayor's report tonight. Mr. Monday, has anybody signed up for public comments for issues not on the agenda? We've had all the, we've had, you know, the number before. The same is the same. We speak for what they just went over. The council has first. Okay. It's on the agenda. Well, we've already signed. Let's see. Let me take a look at who signed up. Does anybody wish to speak that did not speak before? Or items not on the agenda. Motion adjourned. All right, I don't have anybody. All right, we have a motion. Just wait a minute. Mr. Mundy, have you got? That may be for the council meeting. All right. They can re-sign up for the council meeting. All right, I'm going to entertain a motion to adjourn. Motion by Council Member Standard. Second by Council. I've said I understand. We can speak at the Council meeting. Okay, Charles has always spoken. Don't speak at the Council meeting. We have a number of people who have signed up. We have available time in the council meeting. I ask if anyone wishes to speak now, and I didn't see any indication of that. Okay. All right. So, Council Member Stennett, the motion to adjourn. Is there a second? Second. Second by Council Member Ellinger. Is there any objection? Hearing none, then the work session is adjourned.