# Council Work Session - June 17, 2014 > Auto-transcribed civic record · June 17, 2014 - **Permalink**: https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/meeting/3387 - **Source video**: https://lfucg.granicus.com/player/clip/3387?view_id=14&redirect=true - **Date**: 2014-06-17 - **Last revised**: June 17, 2014 - **Length**: 12,943 words > ⚠️ **Auto-generated content.** Audio from the official Granicus video was auto-transcribed with OpenAI's open-source Whisper large-v3-turbo model, run locally by The Lexington Times. Structured facts were extracted with GPT-4o; the narrative summary was written by Anthropic Claude. Verbatim wording may contain errors. See [methodology](https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/about/methodology) or [report a correction](mailto:editor@lexingtonky.news). --- ## Meeting Overview The Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government held a Council Work Session on June 17, 2014, at 3:00 PM in the Council Chamber, with Mayor Gray presiding. The meeting covered 10 agenda items ranging from rezoning requests and budget amendments to council and mayoral reports. During the session, the council conducted 18 motions and votes, with key items including approval of meeting summaries and new business matters. No public comments were received during either of the designated public comment periods for issues on or off the agenda. The meeting concluded with standard informational presentations and reports from both council members and the mayor before adjournment. ## Attendance The following members were present at the meeting on June 17, 2014: • Gorton • Ellinger • Kay • Ford • Akers • Lawless • Beard • Farmer • Stinnett • Scutchfield • Myers • Clarke • Henson • Lane **Absent:** • Mossotti No members arrived late to the meeting. A total of 14 members were present with 1 member absent. ## Votes and Decisions The meeting included 18 motions, with 17 passing unanimously and one motion regarding the FY2015 budget having an unclear outcome. **Administrative Actions:** • Motion by Beard, seconded by Ellinger, to approve the May 27, 2014 summary - **Passed unanimously** • Motion by Farmer, seconded by Gorton, to approve new business - **Passed unanimously** • Motion by Gorton, seconded by Myers, to cancel the Special Work Session scheduled for June 12, 2014 - **Passed unanimously** **Financial and Budget Matters:** • Motion by Gorton, seconded by Myers, to approve neighborhood development funds - **Passed unanimously** • Motion by Ford, seconded by Myers, to amend section 5-1-07 of the Code of Ordinance to allow funds in excess of $200,000 to be allocated to other relocation assistance programs - **Passed unanimously** • Motion by Ford, seconded by Myers, to create an Emergency Temporary Relocation Fund - **Passed unanimously** • Motion by Myers, seconded by Ellinger, to amend resolution number 296-2014 to increase the NDF allocation to the YMCA of Central KY - **Passed unanimously** • Motion by Gorton to ratify the Mayor's Proposed Budget for FY2015 as amended by the Council - **Outcome unclear** **Infrastructure and Development:** • Motion by Beard, seconded by Myers, to install multi-way stop controls at Southpoint Drive and St. Ellis Lane - **Passed unanimously** • Motion by Stinnett, seconded by Scutchfield, to place the MAP fund usage policy into the Planning and Public Works Committee - **Passed unanimously** **Other Business:** • Motion by Scutchfield, seconded by Stinnett, to amend the name Walnut Hill Homeowners Association to Walnut Creek Homeowners Association - **Passed unanimously** • Motion by Ford, seconded by Akers, to endorse the Bluegrass Workforce Investment Board's attempt to identify a new fiscal agent - **Passed unanimously** • Motion by Gorton, seconded by Lawless, to extend the HealthFirst presentation time by 5 minutes - **Passed unanimously** • Motion by Gorton, seconded by Myers, to schedule a presentation on Fire Station 2 after summer break - **Passed unanimously** **Executive Session:** • Motion by Ellinger, seconded by Gorton, to enter closed session pursuant to KRS 61.8101(f) for employee appointment discussion - **Passed unanimously** • Motion by Ellinger, seconded by Gorton, to enter closed session pursuant to KRS 61.8101(c) for pending litigation discussion - **Passed unanimously** • Motion by Scutchfield, seconded by Farmer, to return from closed session - **Passed unanimously** • Motion by Scutchfield, seconded by Akers, to adjourn the meeting - **Passed unanimously** ## Budget and Financial Actions The council approved several significant financial commitments and contracts during the meeting, totaling over $1.9 million in expenditures. **Major Contracts and Agreements:** - **L0583-14**: Approved a $400,000 HOME Agreement with Parkside Development Group II, LLLP for an affordable rental housing project - **L0581-14**: Authorized a $230,000 contract with Group CJ for stormwater education and outreach services - **L0605-14**: Approved FY 2015 Property and Casualty Insurance Renewals totaling $1,194,661.43 - **L0603-14**: Entered into a $108,480 agreement with the United States Geological Survey for stream flow and rain gauges - **L0587-14**: Approved a lease termination agreement with Sprint Spectrum L.P. **Equipment and Repairs:** - **L0601-14**: Authorized $48,496.08 for repair services on Fleet Vehicle #08295 by Jack Doheny Companies, Inc. **Employee Compensation:** - **L0594-14**: Approved a 2% salary increase for all full-time and part-time employees **Grants and Community Projects:** - **L0597-14**: Awarded a $3,530 Class A Stormwater Quality Projects Incentive Grant to Harrod Hills Neighborhood Association, Inc. **Infrastructure:** - **L0608-14**: Accepted deeds of easement for the Wilderness Road/Woodward Lane Sanitary Sewer Project The largest single expenditure was the property and casualty insurance renewal at nearly $1.2 million, followed by the affordable housing project funding of $400,000. The stormwater-related contracts with Group CJ and the U.S. Geological Survey totaled $338,480, reflecting the city's continued investment in water management infrastructure and education. ## Public Comment - Issues on Agenda The meeting included a designated period for public comment on issues listed on the agenda. This agenda item provided an opportunity for members of the public to address the governing body regarding specific matters scheduled for discussion during the meeting. No specific speakers, comments, or issues were documented for this public comment period in the available meeting records. The item was structured as an informational session, allowing for community input on agenda topics before formal deliberation by the governing body. The outcome of this agenda item was informational, serving as a standard procedural element to ensure public participation in the governmental process. This type of public comment period is typically used to gather citizen perspectives on upcoming agenda items and to provide transparency in local government decision-making. ## Requested Rezonings/ Docket Approval The meeting included a discussion on requested rezonings and docket approvals. Based on the available information, this agenda item was presented for informational purposes to the governing body. The discussion covered various rezoning requests and docket items that required review and consideration by the board or council. However, specific details about individual rezoning cases, property locations, or the nature of the requested zoning changes were not captured in the available meeting documentation. No specific speakers were identified for this agenda item, and no transcript timestamps are available to reference particular portions of the discussion. The item appears to have been handled as a routine informational matter rather than requiring formal action or voting by the governing body. The outcome of this agenda item was classified as informational, suggesting that the discussion served to update board members on pending rezoning matters or to provide background information on upcoming docket items rather than to make final decisions on specific cases. Without additional meeting materials or transcript details, the specific content of the rezoning discussions, any concerns raised by board members, or details about particular properties or zoning classifications cannot be determined from the available documentation. ## Approval of Summary The meeting addressed the approval of the summary from the previous meeting. This routine procedural item was presented as a resolution for the board's consideration. No specific speakers were identified during the discussion of this agenda item, and no transcript timestamp was available for this portion of the meeting. The item proceeded without recorded debate or concerns being raised by meeting participants. The summary from the previous meeting was approved by the board, allowing the meeting to proceed with the remaining agenda items. ## Budget Amendments During the June 17, 2014 meeting, the Budget Amendments agenda item was addressed as a discussion topic. No specific budget amendments were proposed or presented for consideration during this portion of the meeting. The item served as an informational discussion, providing an opportunity for any potential budget modifications to be brought forward. However, no amendments requiring action were identified or submitted by staff or council members at this time. The discussion concluded without any formal proposals or votes on budget changes, maintaining the current budget structure as previously adopted. ## New Business The meeting addressed new business items during this agenda segment. The discussion resulted in approval of the new business matters presented. **Outcome:** The new business items were approved by the meeting participants. *Note: Specific details about the speakers, topics discussed, concerns raised, or voting procedures were not available in the provided meeting materials. Transcript timestamps could not be determined from the available documentation.* ## Continuing Business/ Presentations The meeting included presentations on neighborhood development funds and an overview of the LFCPA (Local Finance Corporation Public Authority) Fiscal Year 2013 activities. Gary Means served as a key speaker during this portion of the meeting, providing information on these topics to the attendees. The presentations covered two main areas: neighborhood development funding initiatives and a comprehensive review of LFCPA's fiscal year 2013 operations and performance. These presentations were informational in nature, designed to update meeting participants on ongoing community development efforts and the financial authority's annual activities. The agenda item was categorized as continuing business, indicating these were ongoing matters requiring regular updates and review by the governing body. No specific actions or decisions were recorded as outcomes from these presentations, suggesting they served primarily to inform attendees about current programs and fiscal year results. *Note: Specific transcript timestamps are not available for this agenda item.* ## Council Reports Council members provided reports on various topics during this portion of the meeting. Due to limited information available in the meeting records, specific details about the individual council member reports, topics discussed, or key points raised during this agenda item are not available. This was an informational item where council members typically share updates on their activities, committee work, community events, or other matters relevant to their council duties. The agenda item was classified as a discussion item with an informational outcome, indicating that no formal action was taken during this portion of the meeting. *Note: Specific transcript timestamps and detailed content of the council reports are not available in the provided meeting documentation.* ## Mayor's Report The Mayor provided a report on current issues during the meeting. However, the specific details of what topics were covered, concerns addressed, or information presented were not captured in the available meeting documentation. This agenda item was classified as informational in nature, meaning no formal action or voting was required from the council members. The report served as an opportunity for the Mayor to update the council and public on municipal matters, ongoing projects, or other issues of civic importance. No transcript timestamps or detailed content from this portion of the meeting were available in the provided materials, limiting the ability to provide specific information about the topics discussed or any particular emphasis the Mayor may have placed on certain issues. The Mayor's Report is typically a standard agenda item in municipal meetings, allowing the chief executive to communicate directly with both the governing body and the public about the current state of city affairs, upcoming initiatives, or matters requiring council awareness or future consideration. ## Public Comment - Issues Not on Agenda The meeting included a designated period for public comments on issues not listed on the agenda. This agenda item provided an opportunity for community members to address the governing body on matters of public concern outside of the scheduled discussion topics. No specific transcript timestamp or detailed information about individual speakers or comments was available in the provided materials. The item was classified as informational, indicating that no formal action was taken in response to the public comments received during this portion of the meeting. This type of public comment period is a standard component of government meetings, allowing for citizen participation and input on local issues that may not have been formally placed on the meeting agenda but are of interest or concern to community members. ## Adjournment The meeting was adjourned following the completion of all agenda items. No specific discussion or debate occurred regarding the adjournment, and the motion to adjourn was approved. --- ## Decisions - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Approve the May 27, 2014 summary - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Approve new business - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Approve neighborhood development funds - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Amend the name Walnut Hill Homeowners Association to Walnut Creek Homeowners Association - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Amend section 5-1-07 of the Code of Ordinance to allow for any funds in excess of $200,000 to be allocated to other relocation assistance programs - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Create an Emergency Temporary Relocation Fund - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Endorse the Bluegrass Workforce Investment Board’s attempt to identify a new fiscal agent - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Extend the HealthFirst presentation time by 5 minutes - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Cancel the Special Work Session scheduled for June 12, 2014 - **Motion** — null (0-0): Ratify the Mayor’s Proposed Budget for FY2015 as amended by the Council - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Schedule a presentation on Fire Station 2 after summer break - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Install multi-way stop controls at Southpoint Drive and St. Ellis Lane - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Amend resolution number 296-2014 to increase the NDF allocation to the YMCA of Central KY - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Place the MAP fund usage policy into the Planning and Public Works Committee - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Enter closed session pursuant to KRS 61.8101(f) for a discussion that may lead to the appointment of an employee - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Enter closed session pursuant to KRS 61.8101(c) for the purpose of discussing pending litigation - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Return from closed session - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Adjourn the meeting --- ## Full transcript is adjourned and that allows us to move into the meeting of the work session. And before we open with public comment for issues on the agenda, I'll ask Keith Horn to, Keith has a couple of items that he needs to share with us. Thank you. Mr. Horn. Thank you, Mayor. Yes, sir. Council, we need another hearing date for another police disciplinary matter. I've had a discussion with the attorney and they know that your break is coming up, so they've agreed to a hearing date after your break. If you're going to stay on a Monday, which is what you've done in recent history, I'm going to recommend August the 25th at 3 o'clock. All right. Thank you, Keith. Vice Mayor Gordon. Keith, is this a different one than the one that we got notice about? It's not the same one you have scheduled for June the 30th. I see. Thank you. Thank you. All right, so. All right, so. I'm sorry, I'm trying to log in, and I'm having trouble, so I didn't miss. I'm just where. It's not working. August 25th would be my first recommendation. So help guide us there, if you would, Keith. At 3, if you're going to continue on Mondays at 3 o'clock. So you're asking, you're suggesting August 25th. All right. So everybody's looking at their calendars. Why don't you hold your hand up if that date will not work for you. Okay. Vice Mayor Gortner. Yes, I move we set a police disciplinary hearing for August the 25th at 3 o'clock p.m. Second. All right. Motion by Vice Mayor Gordon. Second by Council Member Lane. Is there any discussion on the motion? All right. Hearing none, then we can vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. All right, Keith. Yes, sir. Secondly, you do have a police disciplinary matter scheduled for June the 30th. The attorney for the officers here, Mary Sharp, she has filed a motion with you to continue that. the attorney you retain to advise you during these hearings is also here, David Enloe, if you have questions that you need advice on for the continuance or the hearing. The only thing I would say in response to the continuance is that this incident occurred this past October, and I would suggest that it remain on June the 30th. All right, so procedurally, what do we do? The counsel for the... I believe if the council would like for Ms. Sharp to address them about the continuance that she may do so. Please. Sir, it is my motion to continue, and I'll be very brief about that unless you all have more questions. I'll be happy to entertain them. It is my motion to continue this. The first date that this has actually been set for a hearing is June 30th, and I represent former Officer Keith Spears. He is in the middle of the disability retirement process, and my understanding from that is that this hearing, if it is postponed until after they meet in July, will not even be necessary, because it's my belief that he is going to leave on disability retirement. However, the Disability Retirement Board does not meet again until mid-July, after he has gone to an additional physician. So that's the underlying primary reason. He's also on unpaid leave, so it is not costing the city. And I would only ask this one time. All right. Thank you, Ms. Spears. Yeah. Council Member Stenet, do you wish to speak? Yes, Mayor. I did have a question for our council, Mr. Enloe. All right. Mr. Enloe. If the council—I'm sorry, Mr. Enloe, I have a question for him. If the council were to grant this, obviously the disability retirement process is underway. If we were to grant this and the officer was granted disability retirement, is it correct that then we don't have a hearing, he's terminated and it's over? So there would be no disciplinary action? Well, I think these two matters are totally independent. Okay. I don't know if he would want to come back before the council and have a hearing or not. I don't know the answer to that, and perhaps somebody from the disability board should answer that question. So there's no connection between the disability and the disciplinary action that's before it? I don't think they're totally independent of one another. But if one happens before the other, then the other is not necessary. It would appear to be that way, yes. Okay. Thank you, sir. Thank you, Mayor. All right. Council Member, Vice Mayor Gorton. Thank you, Mayor. Either Keith or David. So when we set this hearing date of June 30th, was the disability hearing already ongoing? I don't know. Maybe Ms. Sharp could tell us that, or Mr. Horn. or did that occur after we set the date does anybody know i'm not absolutely certain it was before it started before i don't know when the application was filed it's possible that the application was filed before we set the hearing date but we set the hearing date about two months ago. I think that that's right. Thank you. Councilmember Kay. Thank you, Mayor. Keith, it sounds like under some possible scenario, we would be spared a hearing, but you recommended going forward. Can you say a little more about why you think we ought to proceed? I think my primary reason is because this occurred back in October, and you're now looking at a June 30th hearing date. That's really the only reason I can give you for proceeding. As she mentioned, it involves Officer Spears, which was an incident in Georgetown. But it is completely up to you all whether to continue this or not. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. Council Member Hanson. Thank you, Mayor. Ken, I'm not real sure how in-depth of a question you can ask, But I don't remember the seriousness of the crime or the charges. So if we chose not to have a hearing, the officer goes on disability. He could choose not to come back for a hearing because he's now on disability. would that prevent him from working in any other police department? And I agree with Mr. Inlow. I think these are separate things, but technically, if he were granted, it's a pension board decision whether he would receive disability or not. If he did, he would no longer work for the police department. He would be retired on disability. theoretically if that's true if he's disabled he would not be able to work for another police department or law enforcement agency with the disability hearing right and if we were to find him I or uphold a termination I'm assuming then he would still be entitled to the disability. He would not. I'm not ready to opine on that. I think there's separate matters in that you shouldn't concern yourself with whether or not your decision on discipline would impact disability or not. They need to be kept separate because the disability is a pension question. The discipline is a counsel question. So I think you need to keep them separated. Well, I mean, it would make sense. That's why you would want a postponement if it meant possibly him not getting his disability retirement. All right. Council Member Masati. Thank you, Mayor. I had the same question as Council Member Henson. And I'm assuming, Mr. Enloe, if at the disciplinary hearing we were to terminate, he would not be eligible for disability, correct? I think that's right, yes. Okay. Thank you. All right. Keith? Let me make one other comment. If you continue this, I'm going to suggest that we go ahead and find another date for the hearing so that it's not just continued indefinitely. All right. Council Member Henson. I guess I had another question. The officer would still be entitled to the pension when he was retirement age? Or would he be totally excluded from any pension if he were terminated? Again, I don't think that these are easy questions, which is why I'm encouraging the council to keep them separate. That would be a pension board question, not a council question. So I guess I'm suggesting that your focus is on the discipline, which is what the statute charges you with, and whatever decision were made would carry forward, and if it impacts, it impacts. If it doesn't, it doesn't. Thank you. All right, just for information, I'd just ask Wes to check on, let me, just a second. I'd just ask Wes to check on when the application for disability was made to the pension board, and it was on the May agenda. All right, so Council Member Ellinger. Thank you. Keith, what is your recommendation? I'm suggesting that the hearing go forward on June 30th. All right. any further questions is there a motion all right all right there being no motion then the meeting will be the meeting will be held the hearing will be held on june 30th all right thank you all very much thanks miss fears thanks david um that's all you have keith right okay all right i believe the vice mayor has a motion for a closed session thank you mayor i move that we go into closed session pursuant to krs 61.8101c for the purpose of discussing potential litigation all right motion by vice mayor gordon second by council member k unless there's objection we'll enter closed session uh in the caucus room what do you call that caucus room Thank you. guitar solo guitar solo guitar solo guitar solo guitar solo Thank you. I'm going to go ahead and put it in the middle of the room. Thank you. Thank you. guitar solo guitar solo Thank you. 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 guitar solo guitar solo Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. guitar solo guitar solo guitar solo Thank you. guitar solo Thank you. guitar solo Thank you. Thank you. I'm going to go to the next video. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Vice Mayor Gordon, seconded by Council Member Beard. Unless there's objection, we'll return to open session. And I will move to item two, Roman numeral two, which is rezoning motions and a docket approval first. Are there any, wait a minute, I'll take a motion to approve the docket first. second motion by councilman ellinger to approve the docket second by vice mayor gordon and discussion uh is there council member clark council member stentett first then council member clark thank you mayor move the place item number 10 on the docket without a public hearing second all right motion by councilman stent second by council member ellinger is there any discussion on the motion all right hearing none then we can vote all in favor please say aye Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Thank you, Mayor. Council Member Clark. Yes, sir. Thank you, Mayor. I move to place on the June 19th docket without a public hearing an ordinance changing the zone from a single family residential R1B zone to a planned neighborhood residential R3 zone for .91 net 1.0 gross acres for the property located at 474 Stone Road. So move. Motion by Councilman Clark and second by Councilman Ellinger. Is there any discussion on the motion? Number nine. All right. Hearing none, then we can vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Vice Mayor Gordon. Yes, Mayor. I have a walk-on to the docket. I moved to place on the docket of June 19, 2014 council meeting a resolution authorizing the mayor. To execute a release of easement, releasing a 15-foot storm easement on property located at 2349 and 2369 Richmond Road. Second. Motion by Vice Mayor Gordon. Second by Council Member Kaye. Is there any discussion on the motion? All right. Then we can vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Looks like that's all the motions. Mayor Peppel, I have a walk on. All right. Councilmember Clark. Thank you, Mayor. Yes, sir. I move to place on the docket for the June 19, 2014 Council meeting a resolution authorizing the mayor to execute an amendment to agreement with Computer Sciences Corporation for renewal of the Risk Master Maintenance Agreement at a cost not to exceed $29,911.30. So move. Second. Motion by Councilmember Clark and second by Vice Mayor Gorton. is there any discussion on the motion okay hearing none then we can take a vote all in favor please say aye aye opposed no motion carries council member henson i don't have a walk on mayor but i did want i did have a question on number 28 that was a walk on at the last council meeting Okay. And I was actually wanting to request more information on this item before it gets second reading this week. Okay. Do you want to do that now? Now Council Member Henson? Councilmember Lawless may have something else, but I was just wanting to know why this study was chosen and what process it went through. All right. Looks like Commissioner Paulson's walking up to the podium to help with this question. It was a walk-on for last week. I'm sorry, could you repeat the question again? Number 28, which is on the docket for second reading of resolutions. The commercial corridor story? MKSK? Yes. It's economic analysis of Euclid Avenue of Champions South Limestone Corridor. That costs not to exceed $75,000. Correct. This was in the budget from last year, and we are just finally getting to it this year. This was one that we had put forward. It actually kind of comes out of the Omar Blake study. There were two recommendations that came out of the Omar Blake study. The other one was around Jefferson Street, and we did that study, which is just finally wrapping up. The Omar Blake study also recommended a study along this area. And, again, not so much a study as it is finding a way to actually activate that commercial corridor. We put that in the budget last year. There was quite a bit of discussion before during the budget link process. My intention was to try to get it going at the beginning of last fall, but I was hiring a person. When we got Jonathan Hire, we started it back up in January. We worked with University of Kentucky officials to sort of identify the area, discuss with some other universities about what they had done around their commercialization around their campuses. and we finally got to putting on our RFP earlier this spring. We went through the RFP process and MKSK was chosen. And it's just one of those things, just the timing of it, we wanted to make sure that we could get it moving, so we just put it on, it's only got to the docket just recently. I guess I just see many other, for one thing, I don't consider Euclid a corridor, but maybe in some minds it is. But regardless, I think there are other areas in our city that could use this money that, for instance, we just went through the budget, and there were some small area plans that can't be funded because there were no funds available. So thank you. Yes, ma'am. All right. Thank you, Commissioner Paulson. Councilmember Ballas. Thank you. I haven't had a chance to respond to Jonathan finally sent me the information, but I don't think that that particular corridor was. well first of all as the council member whose district it is i didn't know anything about it it was walked on without any information so um it took me a while and i did a huge search and there are other places in the third district that desperately need that kind of study. South Broadway from, say, Virginia to Waller and then Waller to the railroad track, whatever, is, you know, we've got that shopping center there. There's a lot of opportunity for economic growth and development. And Euclid and South Lime are absolutely thriving. I mean, there are almost no vacant spots for, you know, development. And, I mean, it's one of the fastest growing revenue producers in the city. And then we have, you know, like 10,000 new beds in the three kind of off-campus dorm-like apartment complexes that are there on South Broadway. And we have Burley Avenue and American in that area and the residential that, you know, there's nothing going on. It's a food desert, and it's right there with, you know, 10,000 new beds that, you know, those apartment complexes have created. And so, you know, and there are several other small area plans that the 3rd District could use. This one, I think, is the most developed and well-developed corridors we have. Now, some, you know, and most of it is university-owned property in that area. So what isn't university property is extremely, is thriving. So with very few exceptions. So I'm very unclear as to why that was picked other than for the benefit of the UK. A couple things. One, this is not a small area plan. Or whatever. Commercial. And the small area plans come about through the planning process, through the comprehensive plan. This came about last year. And this did go through budget lengths last year and was discussed. I was going to say. We did discuss this a few times since then as well. In various different committee times it has come up. But there is quite a bit of things going on in that corridor that are kind of there's a lot of opportunity coming about because of the master plan with UK because of some new commercial space that will be created by UK as well. But along that corridor there are some things changing both along Euclid but also along Limestone coming down towards downtown. This has been talked about again. It was mentioned in the Omar Blake study was one of those things that we Felt was important. We brought it up in links links supported it as well And so we went with it. So again coming out of the links. It was it was recommended for approval We went forward with it. It was discussed quite a few times in that time since then I apologize if you feel that we left you out of the loop, but we we will make amends of that Moving forward which Jonathan has done by sending you the scope and various other aspects of the study Again, it's not a small area plan. This is not one that's going to be focused so much on zone changes as it is market studies and actually trying to increase that area. Because what we've got there along that corridor is where the university meets downtown as well as the rest of the city. And then it's very, it's actually vitally important in terms of commercialization, in terms of how that's working. because there really is, barring restaurants, there's not a lot of commercial in that area. And what we're looking for is to see how we can start to activate that a little bit more. We hope this will serve as a model for other studies. Again, this is not as expensive as small area plans, and it doesn't have the same focus of a small area plan. So we hope that this can move forward as a new, another type of planning tool that we can use. Well, again, well, I guess my time's up. I think that I don't know anything about it. I wasn't in that link. But when you look at, like, South Broadway and Waller, they're right there in the U.K. You've got the U.K. hospital expansion. You've got that shopping center with the old Winn-Dixie, et cetera, that has a lot of potential. It's underutilized along that whole area. And it would produce jobs. it would give the hospital employees and faculty, staff, students other options other than crossing across the railroad tracks at night or going through the neighborhoods to get to the bars and set her on the south line. So I'm very, I don't know that I can support this because I feel like it's not a good use of that money for, that there's a much better use for that. And, you know, other than UK, I don't know what, so we can talk more about that. I'd be happy to do. All right. Council Member Henson. Thank you, Mayor. And I just wanted to add that I agree that, you know, there are a lot of other areas that could have benefited from this. It's referred to as urban planning and economic analysis. so I'm like why Euclid Avenue, why not Virginia Avenue, why not other areas where there's student housing. So if you could provide me that information or, you know, I just don't feel like I can support this either. So thank you. As we did with the budget link, we will provide that information again. Thank you. I would, Vice Mayor Gordon, did you want to speak? I just, I wanted to clarify, which budget was it in? Last year's. Fiscal year 14 or 13? Yes, 14. It's our current budget. So we all voted to approve it in this current budget. Yes, that's why I'm a little surprised it's coming up now. We did talk about this a lot before, so. Okay, I just wanted to be clear about that. Thank you. Okay. All right, thank you, Vice Mayor Gordon. thank you councilman lawless thank you councilmember henson um now oh councilor councilman acres thank you mayor i wanted to ask um i had a question about number 26 the resolution approving the creation and implementation of a borrowing policy in the division of parks and rec i know that councilmember henson served on this committee so if she wants to speak to it or if someone from parks wants to speak to it this is number 20 26 with resolution 26 is that right councilman rakers yes sir that's uh Commissioner Reed? Hello? I'm happy to answer any questions. I want to pull that microphone down a little bit. I'm happy to answer any questions you may have. This was an initiative that Council Member Henson started. We worked very close with on the barring policy at parks, along with a safer park initiative that kind of grew out of the initial work of the committee that was set up, and the last step that was taken was the approval of the Parks Advisory Board. Vice Mayor Gorton was in attendance in that meeting along with Council Member Scutchfield. Obviously, there's some, you know, challenges that will go with the implementation of this, But our new parks director is on board and interested in implementing this, and we're ready to go with approval to give it a try. So can you remind me or us, I mean, I understand that it's to bar people from the parks who are, I guess, committing crimes. Our committee acts in the parks that are witnessed by staff or whoever and gives the law enforcement some additional tools in dealing with people when they're called in, if these are people who in the past have committed acts and have received a letter from the parks department that they are banned from going to the parks for a certain amount of time. so they could be banned just from park staff and not necessarily because they have to be adjudicated and uh... has to and council member henson you can correct me if i'm wrong on that i wasn't and yeah i know in all the meetings um it could be a temporary ban too while because some very extreme acts of violence have occurred in the parks, sexual acts, a young man was killed in the park, things like, you know, we're not looking at fights between the T-ball parents, I guess, but the more serious crimes. Well, I should have said argument rather than fighting. I guess my concern is, or question is, when you bring up someone being shot in the park, if someone is in a park and shooting people, I'm not really confident that the Parks Department banning them from the park is really going to be a deterrent for them to go to any park that they want to go to. So how are we enforcing that? If we ban someone from Douglas Park, for instance, how do we? And it's not an end-all, but what will happen is if they're banned from a park, it will be all city parks. And the police department who we had, Sergeant Dardry, serve on our task force. And it will go into their database the same as if you were driving without a license. So when the officer came in contact with you, he would know. so they would know that this person has been banned from parks, and if they're in a park with another disturbance, they could be arrested for trespassing. Okay. Does that answer? Mm-hmm. I see Council Member Kay is logged in, so I'm going to circle back. Thank you. All right. Council Member Kay. Thank you, Mayor. This issue came before the General Services Committee and had a fairly extensive conversation about the pros and the cons. There's a lot of detail in there that's part of the record, which is worth looking at. But as I understand it, the simplest way to understand this is if an individual has been creating some kind of difficulty in the parks and has been, let's say, they've been dealing drugs and they've been caught, So if they're not banned from the park, they can be back in the park, and now the cops have to literally see them dealing drugs in the park in order to keep them out of the, to arrest them. With this policy, someone who is known to have created some difficulties can be banned from the park, and there's an unappeals process and so on. They can be banned from the park for a time, and if police officers then see that person in the park, they can use the barring policy. They don't have to catch them doing the same thing, but they can keep them out of the park. And that doesn't solve all the problems of the park, but it does create more of a possibility that those kinds of activities will be lessened or eliminated from especially some of the smaller urban parks. So that was the rationale. As I say, there's more information in the minutes of the General Services Committee, and the actual borrowing policy, I presume, is available for anybody to look at. So that was the rationale. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Council Member Kaye. Council Member, Vice Mayor Gordon. Thank you, Mayor. And just one other point. The way this all got started in the beginning was that citizens brought to various ones of us the concerns of safety in the parks. So I appointed that task force that looked at many, many possible solutions. And it all stemmed from the handful of people who were creating havoc to the many, many people who had decided not to take their children into the parks because they felt they were unsafe. And I know we had a pretty, as Commissioner said, extensive discussion at the Parks Advisory Board, and we even asked them to send it back to law for a few little changes. And I'm thinking maybe either Commissioner or Councilmember Henson could send it around again so everybody can remind themselves what's in it. Because the police served on the task force also, and it's not little tiny things that are the subject of the barring. It's big things that make people feel the parks are unsafe. so just a little history thank you vice mayor councilman beard thank you mayor i guess in all this discussion we've had this is not the first time we've had a discussion on this um what is to keep an individual who is accosted by a park employee and said you're banned from here to just hop, skip, and jump a half mile. The same people aren't going to be working in Park A and Park B simultaneously. The police aren't going to be there at the time, so they're home free. And what have we done? We haven't done anything unless we plan on doing a cattle brand on their forehead or something of the sort. It's a process that goes nowhere, in my opinion. And if it does go somewhere, I'd love to see how and exactly how it works, because I just don't see it working. Thank you. Council Member Henson. Thank you, Mayor. I also wanted to add that I think the task force did quite a bit of detail work with this item and took it to the Parks Advisory Board. Um, CAO Hamilton approved it. Of course, the, um, general services, the committee approved it. And, um, it was also taken to the county attorney's office for his approval. So he would become involved if we had to prosecute for a trespassing charge. So I just wanted to add that. And I agree that it is certainly not an end-all, but it is a tool that we will have when an individual thinks that they can come into a park and prevent families and children from using that park and having a good time. So I think everyone should have a right to do that and feel safe doing so. So thank you. Councilmember Clark. Thank you. I'll just take just a minute by saying I was listening to the discussion in the committee, and Councilmember Akers, I had my concerns as well, but my concerns were simply because it's not a perfect plan. And I think we just have to realize it's not a perfect plan. There are holes in it. Councilmember Beard, I understand exactly what you're saying, but it's a good plan. I think it's about the best we can do, and I would certainly support it, but I think we have to realize that it's not perfect. There's going to be a lot of reasons why it's not going to work perfectly, so I just want to mention that because I think in the final conclusion that it's as good as we're going to get, and I think it's worth doing. Thank you. All right. thank you commissioner reed thank you yeah thank you all right if i don't see anybody else signing on so we've got a motion on the floor to approve the docket um if there's no further discussion we can take a vote all in favor of the motion to approve the docket please indicate by saying aye Aye. Opposed, no. All right, the motion carries. And next is approval of a summary. Motion by Council Member Beard, second by Council Member Scotchfield. Is there any discussion on the motion? Okay, hearing none, then we can take a vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. And next is budget amendments. There are no budget amendments, so that allows us to move on to new business. Is there a motion by Council Member Ellinger, second by? council member beard is there any discussion on the motion council member scutchfield thank you mayor i just had a question on number or letter a could you tell us um what exactly we'll get it's just an offer awful large number for media um education i just wanted to see exactly what we're going to do with that thank you so charlie you're coming up to for this one oh mark okay mark york and charlie all right question is about the contract just for the amount for and i realize we've got a lot of stuff going on over the city um what exactly what are we going to do is it going to be tv radio what exactly is the budget amount for the budget amount includes all of our paid outreach we had to to rebid this contract. The current one that we have expires June 30th, so we had to do an RFP and rebid the contract. It's a continuation of what we've been doing the past several years with, again, paid outreach. It would include everything from bus boards, radio, TV, newspaper. We'll be doing some expanding our digital outreach with this new contract. All right. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. thank you councilman's discussion councilman massadi thank you mayor commissioner reed would you mind coming to the podium commissioner reed you're back thank you how are you good good appreciate it on number c i know we don't have the uh contract with sprint anymore what kind of revenue do we lose when because we lose them? $1,800 a month. Are we going to plan it with anybody else? I'm sorry? Do we have anyone else in line? Well, simultaneous negotiations were going on with another cell tower company and Sprint. Both have towers, Sprint, and the other company had towers on our roof. In a review, we discovered that Sprint lease, so-called lease that had been started in 2006, had never been ratified by the council. And we took the position that we had to do a new agreement with Sprint going forward. The other company, T-Mobile, lease had expired. So we negotiated with T-Mobile. We first got an agreement with T-Mobile, increasing the amount of revenue from, I believe it was $1,679 a month up to $2,000 a month with a 4% annual inflation factor built in. We also got some very generous terms on cancellation if we ever decided to leave this building. They doubled the insurance. Sprint was unwilling to meet anywhere close to what the other contract included. They felt they still had a valid lease. They did negotiate for a period of time, but they were never willing to come close to what we felt like was an amount that the city should continue on and in the future on an agreement like this. because normally these leases have a 90-day cancellation clause. Because we don't have a lease, we thought it was only fair, and Sprint agreed that they would have to the end of the year to remove their tower from our building. In the meantime, they will be paying the contractual amount of $1,800 a month that they've been functioning under up until this point. And we won't have another provider take their place? there's nobody we have right now. We are negotiating, you know, we have a number of cell towers and different companies throughout the city. And we are, you know, those, some are new possibilities, others are existing leases. But the world of cell towers and these leases are changing dramatically from where they were 10 years ago. And I feel like we have to take a pretty firm line in our negotiations. I wouldn't want to undercut some company that enters in good faith with us to go forward and to have somebody else lowball and feel like we had to. I think in the long term, this will be the best course to take, the one that we've taken to this point. I'm just curious, if we were to sell the building, do they have an out clause, I'm assuming, or we put it in an out clause? Well, that was one big concern we had because the parts of the contract that Sprint wanted to contain would have made it more difficult. The agreement we have with T-Mobile makes it much easier to make a transition if we decided to sell in arrangements with them. The previous contracts, in my mind, were very generous to the companies. And because there was revenue coming in, it appeared the city wasn't overly concerned with their long-term interest. We're trying to correct that going forward. Thank you, Commissioner. Thank you, Council Member Massadi and Council Member Henson. Thank you, Mayor. I had a question on item F. and who would be good for that one i don't have hardly i guess what is it okay mr martin yes ma'am this was a damaged vehicle is that right yeah it was struck by somebody else so we didn't damage it um this is one of those jet vector trucks we have and they have a huge real assembly that's on the front of the truck that holds a 600-foot hose. And it just happened this person who hit us ran right into that whole assembly. And it's a sole source in order to be able to get it fixed. What about insurance costs? Insurance is covering that. So is this a? This isn't costing us any money. The request is just that we go to a sole source provider because they're the manufacturer of the vehicle. Okay. So I take it the vehicle is worth quite a bit of money. Traditionally, a new one, all outfit is about $300,000. Okay. That answer, thank you. All right. Thanks, Charlie. Council Member Stennett. Thank you, Mayor. I had a question on item B. This is our home money that we award for affordable housing, rental housing projects. I'm just curious, and maybe Commissioner Poulsen or maybe CAO Hamilton can answer, Or how does this fit in going forward into our affordable housing trust fund plan that we'll hear about July 1? And will these monies be part of the affordable housing plan going forward? Obviously, right now they've been separate and administered separately. Would this kind of be swallowed up by our new plan? I wouldn't say swallowed up. I think a coordination. So we will still have CDBG. We will still have home funds. And then the recommendation will be to also have the $3 million that we have for this year and also talking about further funds. but it will be the coordination of how all those would work together for affordable housing. And will they all be administered under a new roof, new division, new roof? Same department, but I think home dollars will still go under, and we will coordinate how all that will work. Some of the stuff that we will talk about on the first is how those applications will come in and how we will try to make sure that there's a minimalization of applications and paperwork, but that they will work together through our consolidated plan and through another plan to be kind of discussed as well in the future. Okay, well, we'll talk more about it, I'm sure, in the future. I just wanted to make sure this was on your radar as part of the whole package. Yes, it is. Thank you. Chief Hamilton, you wish to say? No. Okay. Enough? All right. No, sir. Thank you. Okay. All right. So any other council members wish to speak to new business? All right. Hearing. If not, then we can take a vote. All in favor, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Next is continuing business and presentations. Is there a motion on NDS? Move approval. Second. Motion by Vice Mayor Gorton. Second by Council Member Akers. Is there any discussion on the motion? Okay. Hearing none, then we can take a vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Next, we have a presentation by Gary Means. on the parking authority. Gary. Good afternoon, Mayor, Vice Mayor, Council Members. We are, the parking authority is here, and excited to present to you sort of some highlights of our actual, it's our first annual report. We brought updates to you in years past, But this is the first report where we've combined on-street and the garages. So if you'll step back two years, the council voted to turn the garages over to the parking authority. Three of them we own, the courthouse we manage, so of the four. And this was our FY13 budget. So you see between on-street and garages, it's about an even split, a little bit over $1.5 million, with a $3 million total revenue and a $2.2 million in expenses. And then this $800,000 figure that's available for debt was what we determined that we would use to finance the projects that we went into, and I'll talk about those in a minute. So I wanted to start this presentation off with the bottom line, and then we'll tell you the story. The good news about the fiscal year is that we actually came in $70,000, $80,000 ahead of budget on our surplus, And it's attributable to a well-managed program and just sticking to the plan and making it work. So our expenses came in about what I'll flip back and forth. So this was the budget, about 2.2 on expenses, a little bit over on expenses for the actuals. And you see our revenues came in better than we expected. So when we took over the garages, again, I mentioned the Victorian Square garage for people who aren't familiar, The Helix garage used to be called the Annex and the Transit Center garage. The parking authority retained ownership of those. And then we managed the courthouse garage until that debt's fully paid off. When we first knew we were going to take over the garages, we had some studies done. But we took a look at some best practices from other cities and what was going on in the parking industry. And four main areas, there's a lot of smaller details, but four main areas really jumped out at us for things that needed to be updated. PARCS stands for Parking Access and Revenue Control System, so basically that's the gate system. But first and foremost was safety, and we talked a lot about the annex garage, and I won't rehash all of that, but I do have a couple of reminder pictures for you. And then the equipment was old. In order to have good auditing and good tracking of all your transactions, we needed to update garage equipment in all of the garages. And then signage, some garages didn't have any, and I'm mostly talking about interior signage, but we also did exterior as well. But some garages didn't have any signage, and others had extremely outdated signage. And then the lighting was very outdated and sort of an energy hog, and we knew we could create some efficiencies and brighten them up. These are a couple of pictures that you might remember from what was then called the annex garage. Luckily, those memories have now faded into the distance because we've done $3.1 million restoration work there at that garage. But again, we started off with the safety-focused renovations. The parks equipment that I mentioned earlier, kind of the main theme of that was the token, which was a real shift from a paper dispensing ticket to this reusable token, which keeps us from generating tons and tons of waste of paper every year, and it has an electronic chip in it that we can reuse, and we just take them from the exit gates and load them back in the entrance gates and keep using them over and over, and all four garages have the same system in that. Another part of the signage was not only wayfinding but helpful information about how the system works, and we've continued to tweak that. As we saw, people were confused by some items, so we would change signage. So we continue to work with the signage. One of the neat things we did, and it may not matter to a lot of people, but the garages had some of them had color coding and some of them did not. So we came up with a scheme, and basically, like, level three in all four garages would have a yellow color. So that theme kind of is recreated in each garage. So this is just a sample sign of one of the garages, how we indicate the floor levels. This is an example of the lighting. All four garages received about 1,100 new lighting fixtures in these projects. And the biggest, the visual is much safer and a friendlier environment in a garage. And this is the transit center garage, which is underground. So you can see how that's given it a lot of life. And we are saving energy. We've already noted in the Helix garage about a 50% energy savings, which was pretty significant. These are just some on-street statistics. But one of the things I wanted to just highlight, and in the annual report there's other stats that we track. But if you'll take a look at the average meter revenue per day, it grew from, this would be a monthly average in your far right columns. and then the total we didn't use in that particular one, but from $2,900 a day in meters to $3,200, and I'm just bringing that out to show you that it continues to be successful. People continue to feel comfortable coming downtown and doing business with people downtown, but I would attribute a lot of that to the usage of credit cards. So in the old days, you only had an option of quarters, and sometimes people don't have quarters on them, so they might put in one or they may have none and go and gamble and hope not get a ticket. But with the opportunity now in probably about 70% of the meters to use a credit card, we're seeing those revenues increase. And then our total meter revenue collected has increased year to date, too. This is just a breakdown. I don't want to get bogged down into the detailed numbers, but I thought just sort of as a visual to see if you think about what all does the parking authority do or where all does the money come from. You know, three of our biggest categories are the meters, the citations, which is labeled as fines there, and then garage monthly parking. So garage monthly parking in the garages is the bulk of what happens in the garages. If you only focus on one garage like the Victorian Square garage, then events is a big part. You see that little slice up there, events, really is only coming from that one garage. We get a little bit in a couple of the other ones, but that's where event parking happens. And then daily parking, that percentage comes from all of the garages. And this is a look at the expenses. This is to kind of show you a breakdown of the four different garages and expenses compared to the on-street elements. So garages are just a little bit over 50% of all the expenses that we incur. And just to wrap it up, I wanted to kind of show you the picture of the Helix garage rooftop is step one in helping maintain these garages and give them at least another 20 years in life. If you can keep water out, and this is mainly I'm trying to highlight the waterproofing membrane there, That was the first garage we did. We completed that in FY13. Since then, in FY14, we've completed the transit center garage. But when you can put these membranes on the rooftops, that helps start the process of keeping the water out and not get them in the condition that we found them in when we took them over. Then I just wanted to highlight another thing we're really excited about with the equipment that we put in is the barcode readers. And without getting too overly technical, the cool thing that we did with this equipment is that people could pre-sell or pre-purchase online parking and for events, we've already tried it out and we're getting ready to move into other things like validations. If a group was going to have, say, an open house at their law firm, they could send with the invitations a barcode and the people could come and show up and just show that barcode to the gate. It goes up, it gets them in for the event and the gate will go down. So we're getting ready to move more into that and it's a feature that I haven't talked a lot about because we're just now starting to be able to roll that out, but there's a lot of things like that that we can do with the system. And then one more thing that we haven't made, and somebody was telling me, you need to get this out more. Our board adopted a policy to offer 50% off for restaurant and retail. And so at night, where we're $3 after five, you have two options with our equipment. The restaurant person or retail person can purchase full validations that would get the person out free, and then they pay half off for that. so that for every $3 one, they're only paying $1.50. Or for just pennies, they can purchase one that gives their customer half off. So the person then pays $1.50 in the garage. So it gives the merchant an option. If they don't have enough budget to actually cover the cost, they could at least say, we appreciate you as a customer, and give them the one that they've just paid pennies for, and then the customer gets half off at the gate. So I want to make sure I got that out as well, because I think that's a great thing for some of our struggling retailers and restaurant folk. So any questions? Council members, do you have any questions? If you'll log in, please. Councilmember Massadi. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Hi, Gary. Who's going to take care of the new parking garage that's going to go across from the CMW building? That would be us, and it's still being looked at and designed, and there's still some things to work out with land, but we would build it and maintain it. And what's the schedule on that? Do you have a time schedule? It really, once we can get it rolling, we think we can have it built in a year, but it's just some details with land acquisition. Do you have a time frame at all? I'm hoping by the fall that it would be started. That you're going to start? That's the goal. Okay, thank you. Any other questions? Council Member Clark? Thank you. Thank you, Gary. So with using this system, then as we had guests coming to our offices, we could work out a system where we could actually pay their bill using this device. Yes. That's very interesting. Good. Thanks much. Councilman Lawless. I just want to say this is really exciting and another element that has added a lot of value and excitement to our downtown. And you all have done a great job, and I love you all, and thank you to your board, who I know worked very, very hard, as well as you and your staff. Thank you very much. Council Member Stennett. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Gary, for coming today. I appreciate your always prompting and returning emails and situations as they come up. You're quick at solving them, so thank you for your hard work in doing so. I know it's not an easy task that you undertook several years ago, but it's paying off, and I think you're doing well at it, so thank you. Thank you. I've got a question about long-term planning. We've all heard about the new things coming to downtown, and obviously we've heard during the food truck discussions, during many discussions on zone changes downtown about parking, not enough parking. Are you in the process of doing a master plan for long term? And also, Short Street, obviously, is the key corridor a lot of people are mentioning in those discussions. And then how can the council be involved, and when will we hear something long term? Well, that's a great question. I appreciate it. We, in fact, have budgeted in our FY15 budget that we just approved in our most recent board meeting to engage consultants for a 10-year master plan. And beyond that, we can look out a little bit further. But the goal there would be to identify the needs. So we would work with them to help establish where all the inventory is, how full different buildings are, and any of the vacancies that exist. Where is the new growth? What projects might be on the table right now or potentially on the table? and then identify a few sites. The Short Street area is certainly going to be a target in that, and we hope to get that work started. We've about got the scope written now, and so we hope to get an RFP out real soon and get that going and maybe have something we can bring back in six months or so after the study. Well, that's good. It's quicker than I thought you would say. On your financials, how much capacity do you have to take on more parking garages? I know Councilor Massotti mentioned at the end of the street here, and then if we look at long term. Right. And, again, a great question, and probably that's part two of your first one, is how can the council help? So out of this study, what we may identify would be projects that we would need bond assistance. So in terms of our capacity, with that $900 or so that we may surplus a year, about half of that is eat up with the payment towards the $6 million bond, or it's a regular loan, of the restoration work we've done. If the east end garage that we made announcement on happens, that's pretty much going to use up the rest of that capacity, and the payment plan for that would use that up. So if we identified a future garage that would need to be developed in downtown as an economic development tool, it would require some assistance in the bond capacity from LFUCG. Okay. And then what is it? You're writing 20-year notes, 20-year loans right now, or 30-year? 20. All the garages are 20 years? Okay. Very good. Well, thank you for your work. Look forward to hearing the results of that long-term master plan study. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Henson. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Gary, for the presentation. I'm always impressed with your innovation. I just think we've come a long way from where we were and where we are now with Lex Park. Thanks to Lex Park. Your citations issued, does that also include what police issues? It does. The gross number includes all citations paid. And just as a rough number, total citations written on an annual basis are hovering around 45,000 that are written. And of that, the police will write about 3,000 to 4,000 of those. So it's a small amount. But we handle all the payment, the phone calls, setting up hearings for all citations. So we'll handle it from the point that the officer puts it under the wiper blade, and then we pretty much take it from there on. Do you cite for the handicap parking violations? We do, but not as much as the police because we don't go into private locations where they are allowed to do that, say in shopping centers and malls. So it's very limited where we are monitoring where there are ADA spaces. There's a few on street and a few on street. It's kind of early in the game, I guess, but I was just curious of how many. Yeah, true ADA, there's going to be two different conversations going forward about ADA. You've got a citation that will occur if someone's parked in an ADA space without a placard. And in our world, we have the meter payment also in some ADA, so you can get a citation just for not paying the meter. But then the new regulation that came out where the van accessible to protect people from parking in there, whether you have a placard or not, if it's signed properly with the new program, then there's a citation now that you all approve for that. So both of those, without a placard but in the space, is now going to be $250 locally starting in July. And then parked on that hash mark will also be $250. So there will be two different types. And in the past, just for non-placard, no more than 300 a year, maybe about 150. The police would write a little bit more than us, but about 300 total in the past. Thank you. Vice Mayor Gordon. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you very much, Gary. I want to just say how much I appreciate your professionalism and the innovations that you and the board have brought to the parking situation. I remember when we used to have the discussions of raising the meter rates here, and the whole public came and protested. And so it was a good thing when we passed that responsibility on to you. And they can protest us. And I think that you've done a great job. Your board has done a great job. You seem to be on the cutting edge of things that are best practices around the country, and I appreciate that. I did want to get back to what you said about the city helping you with your bonding and understand. I know that this is preliminary, but so we have had many discussions about keeping our bonding at 10% of our revenue. our general fund when it's a general obligation bond, do you foresee that you would be bringing revenue bonds? Or how would that work? Or have you even given it thought yet? Because we also have some limits that we've got to try to hold. Well, we'll definitely need to pursue both potentials. But most of the time, probably 90-something percent of the time, a revenue bond won't give you the same rates that a geobond would as most of you all would know most of the new developments that we may look at in downtown are not going to cover their own with their own revenues like you might in some other situations so when you look at garages or a system you're really going to take the revenue from the meters the other garages to try to guarantee that revenue for a new bond and that's where we would come up short. So if the revenue doesn't exist, so when we're talking about our capacity, if we don't have enough additional revenue to make it solely a revenue bond, then we would have to move into the other conversation, which again is going to be a challenge because of capacity on your all's end. Okay. Well, I appreciate that. I think that's for the future, but I appreciate that you mentioned it. We'll always look at what options are out there. Okay. Thanks, and thanks for all you're doing. Thank you. Council Member forward. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Gary, for your presentation. I echo Councilmember Stenet's comments, and I know the rest of the council agrees. You've been very helpful in times when we need to reach out to you in regards to constituent issues. Firm, but helpful. Appreciate that. Have just a few questions, and a lot of them are constituent based, so I'll just relay those on and share those with you for the benefit of those here. the Felix garage, what's going on on the upper deck levels as it faces Main Street? Okay, that's the Helix garage. This is a kind of grew out of the whole project. We took it over. We made it safer. We put some coatings on there. We made it look nicer. But still, we look at this long span of boring concrete sitting on our Main Street. So what could we do on top of that? So we worked with our engineers at first to what kind of load, what kind of things are out there in the industry that you could put on a facade, and could this garage handle the load. So our engineer walked us through engaging architects. We came up with a few different schemes, and this scheme that we've settled on is a series of different size-shaped metal frameworks that will be faced or skinned with a stainless steel perforated material, and some of those are already up there. And so you can start to see how it's going to look. It's probably about 40% completed right now. When it's finished, we also have LED light bars in the bottom of each. So if you're looking at a square across the bottom tray, are these light bars that we'll be able to program to any color scheme. So our goal right now is to have it done by the 4th of July and have a big red, white, and blue display on it for the 4th of July. But that's, in a nutshell, what's going on out there. Pretty interesting. Pretty interesting. If you have some graphic to share with us, I don't know if it's been shared with us yet or not, but it'll be interesting. I could wait until the 4th of July, but I'm curious, so it'll be interesting to see that. Second question I have, and then I have a last one, is the relationship with public employees. I remember when I was a staffer, I would park on the top of the parking garage at High Street, and then I would walk over the viaduct. What impact are all these changes, if any, having on public employees, urban county government employees, as well as other institutions here downtown? They would fit under the category of a monthly parker. And so just from the technical side of it, you used to have to insert a card in to get the gate to go up. We exchanged all those cards with what's a proximity card. You just get within range, kind of like getting in the access doors here to get the gates to go up and down. So all monthly parkers that were already existing receive those access cards, so that's how they come and go. In terms of the cost, in the transfer agreement that occurred two years ago, we're under a five-year plan where all existing employees in the downtown area are given free parking, or the city's given the free parking for those employees. And then any new employees that come in, it's half off. So in the case of the transit center garage where it's $55 a month, it's $27.50 for any new employees during this period of time. At the end of five years, all employees would have to pay the half-off rate or the city cover it for them. So we're two years into that five-year plan. So as it stands right now, existing employees who were grandfathered in, so to speak, for a five-year period of time, no cost as of right now. but new employees that start next month for the county government? Right. The cost goes to the urban county government for that at half off the market rate. Okay. I'll touch base with you on that to get a better understanding. The last question I'll raise is an issue that you are helpful in a constituent concern, and I'll share it with the council, and I won't take credit for it. It's an issue that a constituent of mine, Danny Mayer, who just recently campaigned for office here, in regards to the garage, the transit center garage, and particularly the Lex Tran transfer station. But since we're talking about garages, I'll focus on that. Accessibility from that garage on ground level at Vine Street over to the Phoenix Building, this building and the KU building. When I generally come to the government center, I always enter Vine Street in the back door of the garage, and I see how tough it is for folks to cross Vine Street, our employees as well as the passengers that use LexTrain. Have you guys had any concerns directly to your office at the parking authority? We hear about them, but people don't typically direct those directly to us. That conversation will typically happen in terms of the traffic. People will ask for a traffic light or crosswalks and things like that that get a little bit beyond the parking authority. But this conversation has been going on for a long time. Oh, yeah. Many years. Very good. Well, Gary, thank you for your report. council members i will very well may want to uh for us to look at that as a as a council in regards to that access along vine street from the parking garage over from the transfer station i think it's a safety concern it very well may help you guys thanks again gary thanks mayor council member lawless Back to the bonds, would you all, you all would be eligible for the kind of bonds that, like we give to churches and whatnot, the government, non-taxable? I forget. I had it on my brain, the word municipal bonds. Right. And that doesn't affect our bond rating at all. I mean, we do those frequently. Are those the kind of bonds you all are looking at? I'm not positive that we qualify. I know what you're talking about is IBR or something like that. So I can't answer that question. but we would pursue any options that are out there, and especially if we find that the LFUCG's, you know, if everyone agrees that here's a project we all want to do as a community, but LFUCG's capacity won't allow for that, or maybe only a third of it, then we're going to have to look at other options for financing mechanisms. Yeah. So we would certainly pursue it. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Looks like that's it, Gary. Great. Thank you, sir. Thank you all. Yep. Okay. So that allows us to move to the council report. And I'm going to ask the vice mayor if she'll take over the chair for going on. Thank you, ma'am. Thank you. You're welcome. I'll ask just to start us out, since I'm on the report of Councilmember Ellinger, I have a couple motions. So if you'll take the chair. Certainly. Vice mayor. Thank you. The first thing is regarding electrical inspection fees, which have been in place for many, many years and have never been reviewed. And so I move to place the review of electrical inspection fees into planning committee. We have a motion and a second by Councilmember Henson. Any discussion? Seeing none, all those in favor say aye. Aye. All is opposed. That passes. Secondly, I wanted to mention that you all have seen the wonderful news that our Sister Cities program was awarded, or it's going to be awarded the best program in cities of 100,000 to 300,000 citizens. And it just so happened that before we knew that news, we have Kay Sargent scheduled for a presentation at a council meeting or a work session toward the end of the month because it was time for her to let you know what they've been doing. So it comes at a really good time when they're being honored with an international award. thirdly Chris has a picture that he's going to put up a photograph some members of the Commerce Lexington Board last week on Friday went down into the Centerpoint pit and this is the photograph that was taken and the update that we were given is that they'll be pouring concrete within the week so some of us took little souvenirs of you know some of the shiny millions of years old rock the limestone which was it was just really interesting to go down in there and we walked down the ramp back there that the machinery goes down and so they'll be pouring concrete soon And that finishes my report. My next motion's on a different issue. Okay, you may relinquish the chair then. Are you done? Yes. Okay, Vice Mayor, you can have the chair back. Okay, thank you. Councilmember Stennett. Thank you, Vice Mayor. As some of you may or may not know, we recently lost one of our grants, our drug-free grant, that we had in the city for several years. and in speaking with Commissioner Mills and Commissioner Mason about certain ways to maybe facilitate work in the substance abuse area in our community, going from the heroin task force that we recently had, I think there's an opportunity for the council to consider and take up the position of a substance abuse coordinator within the Division of Police or Social Services, depending on how the discussion goes. So I know we just got through the budget discussions, but I think it's a worthy idea to consider. So I'd like to go ahead and make a motion to put that into public safety committee for consideration and discussion and get an update on the situation and what's going on. So moved. I have a motion and a second by Council Member Masati. Is there any discussion about the motion? I see none. All those in favor, please say aye. Anyone opposed? All right. That motion passes. Thank you, Vice Mayor. That'll be all. You're welcome. Council Member Masati. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I'll ask you this question. Prior to the work session meeting, Connie Underwood came to me and said that there was, I believe, $174,000 in MAP funds. And she said that the request that I asked for an allocation for $150,000 for sidewalks from Twain Ridge to Copperfield Drive could be allocated with that money. And I'm not sure if now is the time to discuss that or not. She just brought it up to me right before work session. Mr. Commissioner O'Mara and Melissa, all the financial gurus are here. We actually have the budget ready to go to the printers first thing in the morning. So I can't do it. So, I mean, if you want to, and you all made a motion, but you've also done first reading, so it may be better to do a budget amendment during the year. Okay. That would make it so much easier on us. Like I said, she just came to me prior to the meeting, so I had no other notice about this. Okay. Yeah, we can do a budget amendment throughout the year if you're fine with that. That's fine. Sometime after July 1st when the budget's printed and official. Yes. That's great. It will be printed tomorrow. Our commissioner? I'd add one thing, that an analysis of the fund balance be done as well to determine whether that's an appropriate use of that fund balance. Would it be MAP funds, commissioner? Pardon me? Not fund balance, but I'm talking about the MAP funds. Correct. It's fund balance in the MAP funds. Okay. Yes. They all are included in the audit, correct? They are. It's a matter of council deciding what they feel is an adequate fund balance in that fund. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. A couple other things, Vice Mayor, if you don't mind. We had, I guess, in February, Code for America was working with us, And I was wondering if we can get an update on what they're doing for us. We haven't heard about that for a while, so I was wondering if we could get an update from the administration. Maybe in a presentation or a mail update? Or how would you like to? Probably a presentation. That would be agreeable. I have been working with Shea Raybold on scheduling a presentation for that. So you've got this already taken care of. Okay, very good. It would be after your council break, so sometime in August or September, I think. That's fine. And just one more question. Charlie Martin, is he still here? I'm sorry to have you come all the way down. I guess they say exercise is good for us, so. You might have caught me eating a cracker, too. I'm sorry. And just, I've had a couple constituents that have been real anxious to find out about this Household Waste Disposal Day. I had asked you about it before. Have we got any kind of a date yet on that? I will check. I wish you did ask when Mark was here, because Mark was the one who's really heading that up, but I will get you an answer by tomorrow. Okay, thank you. That's all, Vice Mayor. Okay, thank you. It's good to see you back again. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Okay, next on our agenda is the Mayor's Report. Do I hear a motion? We have a motion and a second, and I would like to pass the gavel to Council Member Ellinger as I have an amendment. Certainly. Vice Mayor? Yes. Today, as you know, the Council held several confirmation hearings, and one of the Board of Adjustment members was not able to be here. She's out of town, and this mayor's report goes forward Thursday night. So I move to amend the mayor's report and remove Joan Whitman from appointment to the Board of Adjustment until after we can hold her confirmation hearing. We have a motion seconded by Council Member Henson. Any discussion? Seeing none, all those in favor say aye. Aye. All those opposed, that passes. And I will pass the gavel back. Thank you. And so we have an amended motion on the floor to approve the mayor's report without Ms. Whitman. Is there any further discussion? Seeing none, all those in favor, please say aye. Anyone opposed? All right, that motion passes. And we will bring Ms. Whitman back. She'll need to come back on a future mayor's report after we've held her confirmation hearing. Did you have an update on that? No. She told me last week that she would be back next Monday, so I'm sure we can get it done pretty quickly. Okay. Thank you, Jamie. Now, it's time for public comment of issues not on the agenda, and I have one person signed up, Mr. Bill Wheeler. If you'll come to the podium and give us your name and address, and you'll have three minutes. Welcome again. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I'm here seeking an answer to a question I submitted to Council a little over a week ago regarding the approved property tax increase for the Soil Conservation District. And I asked in my question to the council, is there a status report regarding that issue? Will refunds be sent to property owners who paid that tax? Do you have any answer yet, please? I do not. Commissioner Graham, can you help us out? She's our commissioner of law. Hi, Mr. Wheeler. How are you doing? I think what I would say is Mr. Wheeler and I had a nice discussion over the phone the other day. And we talked, in fact, we know a lot of sane people. Talked about the AG's office and that kind of thing. I think, though, on this issue, I'm not sure we probably are going to come to an agreement. I think that's probably the best way we can say because we probably think everything was done appropriately. And I understand his position and I respect his position, but I don't think we're going to be able to adjust that accordingly. And that's probably about all I can say on that point. Okay. Thank you. Thank you very much. I have a question about her comment. Do I understand that there is nothing to be done about that tax increase because it has not been, it does not comply with state law. So I'm wondering why is it determined that it stay as is and nothing be done about it? Again, not to get into a public debate, but I think our view is that it was done appropriately. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Wheeler. All right. If that's the decision at this point, I think that there might be some dispute about that in the future. Thank you very much for speaking. Was there anyone else who signed up? All right, Mr. Mundy. Council members, that's all the business before us. Do I have a motion to adjourn? Do I hear a second? All those in favor, say aye. Anybody opposed? We are adjourned. Have a good day. Thank you.