Music Music Music Council's meeting and I'll ask the clerk to please call the roll. Mr. Ford? Here. Ms. Gordon? Here. Ms. Henson? Here. Mr. Kay? Here. Mr. Lane? Here. Ms. Lawless? Here. Ms. Audie? Here. Mr. Myers? Yes, ma'am. Ms. Cutchfield? Here. Mr. Stennett? Yes, ma'am. Ms. Akers? Mr. Beard? Present. Mr. Clark? I'm here. Mr. Ellinger? Here. And Mr. Farmer? Thank you. Thank you very much. This is a time for an invocation, and I don't believe we have anyone here officially to do that, so I would ask that everyone please rise for a moment of silence. I think we have lots of places in the world that we can think good thoughts about. Thank you. Thank you very much. And I'll ask, let's see, Council Member Ellinger, did you want to make your motion before we get into the readings? If you don't mind, Vice Mayor and Council, in lieu of the mayor suspending the Rupp Arena district project and the meeting that we have scheduled for Monday, the special budget finance meeting scheduled on June 23rd at 6 o'clock. And I think we kind of set a straw poll around to see the will of the council. It looked like the council, outside of it, looked like two council members were in favor of going ahead and canceling that meeting. With that, I'd make a motion that we would cancel the special budget finance meeting on June 23rd at 6 o'clock. I have a motion by Councilmember Ellinger and a second by Councilmember Lawless to cancel the June 23rd special budget and finance meeting. The floor is open for discussion. Councilmember Stinnett. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Thank you, Councilmember Ellinger. I would make an amendment to that motion that we also, at the same time, put the issue of the $5 million that we've already allocated and spent on studying the project, as well as how we're going to pay back the $2.5 million into the regular Budget and Finance Committee meeting before we go on summer recess, so we can have that discussion. So move. Second. We have a motion by Councilmember Stennett, second by Councilmember Massadi to amend the motion to place the issue of the $2.5 million that we've already committed and the $2.5 million that is still out there to be paid back, correct? Actually, the total $5.5 million discussion. Okay. And to place that into the next budget and finance meeting. is there discussion on the amendment? Councilmember Lane? All right. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Yes, I am one of the individuals who felt it would be a good idea to go ahead and have the meeting on Monday, mainly because a lot of time has been spent on this project. It is really important to our downtown area, and the fact that we committed a lot of funding on that, And it seemed like having more openness and disclosure of all the details would just help the council and our stakeholders, the members of our city, the residents here, to get a better perspective on where we went off track and what we can do better the next time we go forward with this project. However, and this is a democracy, and it appears that I was one of the minority there, but I just wanted to get that point across, is that when something goes wrong, it can be an opportunity to figure out where you ran off the track and to make a change so the next time we do it will be a much smoother process. So I would encourage my council members to maybe reconsider when they do the vote on this, and thank you. You're welcome. And the amendment is still on the floor about the financial considerations. Council Member Beard? I just wanted to let Council Member Lane know that he isn't by himself. Thank you. Council Member Ford. Thank you, Vice Mayor. To that end, I do agree with Council Member Lane, and I appreciate the position that he brought forth. Speaking to the amendment for the motion, I would ask, and I'm going to go with the will of the council, but it appears that what we're proposing to send to the regular budget and finance committee why couldn't we discuss that at the scheduled meeting that we already have for this Monday I just raised that point you know the budget and finance committee that we have scheduled for this Monday is for Rupp Arena specifically but I don't see the major difference in the timing but I just raised that as a question. I would ask law, when we set a special meeting, only the item on the agenda can be discussed to know whether you feel like that's the exact same item as what was on the agenda. I don't have the notice in front of me, But I would suspect it didn't say repayment of money. I think it just said reparina. So I would suspect that we would need to, if we're going to set another special meeting, I think it would have to be done with a different agenda because you have to go from the agenda you got. Thank you. Council Member Lawless. I was going to say I think the spirit, a huge part of the spirit of setting that meeting was the design, what's going on, how it's taken shape, et cetera, for both us and the public, not specifically repayment of the funds and et cetera. So that's my thought on it. Thank you. Councilmember Farmer. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I'm just interested in the spirit of the amendment. and specifically the timeliness aspect. If this is something that's that important, would we not go ahead with the Monday night meeting instead, rather than if this part of this group of issues is that important to have it? I guess would that meeting be next? When is the next budget finance meeting? It was going to be on Monday, I guess. What's the immediate outcome or the spirit of the motion? the amendment excuse me council member stinnett you made the is he posing a question to me well you since you made the motion i i didn't hear a question i heard commentary the urgency what's the urgency no urgency just a minute and put it into committee so that issue can still be discussed and taken up by the council because i think money has been spent I think there's a balance to what was allocated, and I think there's some questions about that balance and what will happen to it. So I think that's the urgency. I guess I felt from your commentary it had to do with being at the very next meeting before we went on break. I mean, would we resolve something before we went on break? The motion is the next budget and finance meeting. Okay. And if we have another one before break or after, it'll be at the next meeting. Very good. Councilmember Massadi. Yes, Commissioner Graham, I have a question, a follow-up, please. since we've received the questions and answers to you know most of the um criteria for that meeting on monday part of it was financing so would that be what council member ford say that it's all it's already been discussed anyways and why couldn't that be considered part of the meeting why would we have to have a whole nother meeting i i don't have that in front of me so i'm little bit at a loss but i think the main thing on the main thing for open meetings would be the the actual agenda of the meeting posting and i don't know if i have that that was not part of that see i mean with the special meaning you have to post what you're actually going to talk about you can't bear off of that posting so i think you need a little and again i'm i don't have that docket in front of right i'm just saying the financing was part of it because i know know there were several questions that council was asked about financing I don't think it was listed on the agenda though if I'm remembering that and that that's the part that the open meetings law looks at they don't look at like the list of questions and answers I don't think was part of that posting was it so that's what and that's what the open meetings law would do that doesn't mean you couldn't set another special meeting post the agenda again or something but That's what would be looked at. All right. Thank you. Councilmember Myers. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I guess I would ask, how much time do we have to have to re-advertise the meeting? So if we wanted to change the agenda, we've got plenty of time to do that and still keep on that schedule, don't we? Since it's a committee meeting, you just have to do it 24 hours before the meeting. So if you wanted to have the meeting on Monday, there is enough time to do a new special meeting notice. Right. And I guess the thing that I would add to that conversation as far as the financing goes is that the personnel that are being paid right now to work on this project, are they going to continue to be paid, or does that cease at the same time that the project ceases? Mayor, welcome. I think that would be a decision by the Lexington Center Corporation in what would be typically called a closed-down procedure so that all the work can be efficiently processed. Sure. So there would be a responsible period of time, which they're examining. Okay. Thank you. Councilmember Kay. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Commissioner, since you're still there, I think we're maybe confusing two things. My understanding of the motion and the amendment, the motion is to cancel the meeting, not to postpone that meeting. We could do that and simply cancel a meeting, and that just takes it off our agenda. That's true. The amendment simply says, and we want to put onto the agenda for the budget and finance the question of the funding and so on and so on. And I think, actually, we might want a broader agenda for budget and finance, but we can do that. We could add that as well. But right now, there's no problem with canceling the meeting, putting that item or other items on a regular meeting agenda. That's correct. Okay. Given all that, I see no reason why we'd have to have a special meeting. We'll have plenty of time to discuss these issues. I think there's a lot that we do want to discuss. We want as much openness and transparency as possible. But I see no reason to have a meeting on Monday night, so I'll support the amendment and the motion itself. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Thank you. I see no other speakers. So voting to the amendment now. Oh, we have a new speaker, Council Member Lane. I would just like to suggest if we do elect to cancel the meeting on Monday night that we have it either a work session, a council meeting, or a committee of the whole because I feel like every member of council should be able to attend the meeting. Granted, anybody can sit in on any of the meetings, but actually make it a more official broad-based meeting for the council rather than just restrict it to the Budget and Finance Committee. So that's my thought. Thank you. And I think just to remember, Council Member Ellinger had said, had we held the meeting on Monday, everyone would be recognized for the quorum. So, Council Member Ford. Thank you, Vice Mayor. So with that clarification being made, so was monday's meeting this is important was monday's meeting a special meeting of just the budget and finance committee or was it a special meeting of the budget and finance committee of the whole which has basically been enacted for the last two months since we've been doing our budget work uh budget committee of the whole is all 15 of course and budget is just 10. can anybody make that, what was Monday's meeting? Was it a Cal meeting? When I made the motion, I made the motion which passed for a special budget and finance committee meeting, and then Councilmember Ellinger agreed to recognize all 15 council members for the quorum. So it was a special budget and finance committee. Okay. And he emailed that to all the council members. Okay. Thanks, vice mayor. You're welcome. Now I see no one else who wishes to speak. So now we'll be voting on the amendment, which has to do with putting the financial issue into the next budget and finance committee meeting. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? And if you'll log in your vote, please. Council member Farmer, did you want to give your vote? His screen isn't working. Is your vote yes or no? My vote is yes. Okay. So that's 12 yeses, 2 noes. So that motion passes. And now the main motion on the floor is to cancel Monday's special budget and finance meeting, Monday the 23rd, with the attached part that says we'll put the financial issue into the next Budget and Finance Committee. Is there any discussion? I see no one logged in. So all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? And please log in your vote. Aye. I'm sorry. I can't make it work for you. Okay, that motion passes 12 to 2. Thank you very much, and again, welcome back, Mayor. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Forgive me for being a little bit tardy. I was at a LexArch event where they were celebrating the closing of their campaign. So where are we, Vice Mayor? We are ready for second voting. Oh, okay. And Council Member Lawless has a comment. Council Member Lawless or a question? Along the lines of our Monday night meeting, perhaps Council Member Ellinger would be willing to recognize all members of the council at the next budget and finance for the purpose of a vote and quorum. as you were. Councilman Ellinger, did you get that? If you would repeat that. Councilman Lawless, Councilman Ellinger has asked if you would please repeat that inquiry question comment. Vice Mayor Gordon pointed out that you said and sent an email saying that you would recognize all members of the council at the Monday budget and finance about Rupp. and I was wondering if you would be willing to do that at the next budget and finance meeting. Okay. Thank you. All right. Thank you, Council Member Lawless. Thank you, Council Member Ellinger. All right. We are at item Roman number four or five? Three. Well, I've got it. That's the second rating. It's all messed up, isn't it? Have a different one. All right, we're... Madam Clerk, when you're ready, you want to give us the second reading of ordinances, please? Thank you. Ordinance number one, an ordinance changing the zone from a high-density apartment R4 zone to a neighborhood business B1 zone for 0.441 net 0.515 gross acres for property located at 508 West 2nd Street, including dimensional variances. Collins-Wathen Properties, LLC, Council District 2. Number two, an ordinance changing the zone from a single-family residential R1D zone to a high-density apartment R4 zone for 0.9 net 1.1 gross acres for property located at 201 and 205 Burley Avenue, 1107, 1109, and 1111 Stilwell Avenue, including dimensional variances, Burley Partners, LLC, Council District 3. Number three, an ordinance amending sections 2250, 2251, 2253, and 2256 of the Code of Ordinances relating to the Domestic Violence Prevention Board to include a mission statement for the Board, update the types of domestic violence to be the focus of the Board, include a definition for violence and abuse, include a list of primary objectives, update the membership of the Board, provide that the members of the Board shall elect officers, that elected officers shall serve a four-year term and may not serve consecutive terms, and that the Commissioner of Social Services shall serve as the Treasurer, and to update the duties of the Board. Number four, an ordinance amending certain of the budgets of the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government to reflect current requirements in the Division of Traffic Engineering for funds in the amount of $1,900 from neighborhood development funds for traffic improvements at Glendover Road and Valley Road and appropriating and reappropriating funds, Schedule number 69. Number five, an ordinance of the Council of the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government authorizing and approving the execution and delivery of a fourth supplemental lease agreement between the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Airport Board as the lessor and Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government as the lessee in connection with the issuance of the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Airport Board General Airport Revenue Obligation 2014 Series A revolving credit note, Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government General Obligation, evidencing a line of credit agreement by and between the Lexington Fayette Urban County Airport Board and Branch Banking and Trust Company in a maximum aggregate of principal amount not to exceed $10 million for the purpose of providing interim financing for certain airport facilities at the Bluegrass Airport in Fayette County, Kentucky. Number six. An ordinance amending certain of the budgets of the Lexington Fayette Urban County government to reflect current requirements for municipal expenditures and appropriating and reappropriating funds, Schedule number 66. Just make sure. Number 7. An ordinance amending certain of the budgets of the Lexington-Fayette-Urban County government to reflect current requirements for funds in the amount of $1,700 from neighborhood development funds in the Department of Social Services for the Senior Intern Program and appropriating and reappropriating funds, Schedule No. 70. And No. 8, an ordinance appropriating the revenues, expenditures, expenses, and interfund transfers for the General Services District Fund, the Tenant Relocation Fund, the Full Urban Services Districts Fund, the Police-Confiscated Federal Fund, the Police-Confiscated State Fund, the Public Safety Fund, the Municipal Aid Program Fund, the County Aid Program Fund, the Mineral Severance Fund, the Coal Severance Fund, the Miscellaneous Special Revenue Fund, the Police Confiscated Treasury Fund, the Fiscal Year 2015 Bond Projects Funds, the Sanitary Sewer Revenue and Operating Fund, the Sanitary Sewer Construction Fund, the Lexington Fayette Urban County Government Public Facilities Corporation General Fund, the Lexington Fayette Urban County Government Public Facilities Corporation Parks Projects Fund, the Water Quality Management Fund, the Water Quality Management Construction Fund, the Landfill Fund, the Right-of-Way Program Fund, the Extended School Program Fund, the Prisoner's Account Fund, the Enhanced 911 Fund, the Central Kentucky 911 Fund, the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government Public Library Corporation Fund, the City Employees Pension Fund, the Police and Fire Retirement Fund of the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government, the Medical Insurance Fund, the Property and Casualty Claims Fund, and the reallocation of bond projects funds on a divisional level by four control levels for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2015 for the Lexington Fayette Urban County Government and its agencies and instrumentalities, approving and adopting the capital improvement program for fiscal years 2015 through 2020 as a portion of the fiscal year 2015 annual capital improvements budget, and approving funding for the Lexington Fayette Urban County Tourist and Convention Commission from the transient room tax said funding to equal 99.5% of the revenue from the tax. Motion and second is there any discussion on the motion who is the motion was Farmer it's former man I second oh councilman Farmer made the motion and councilman Ellinger seconded and councilman Ellinger it looked like there was a discrepancy on the numbering did you remember those as we were going I think so yes sir I went through and checked just to make sure we had everything and we do okay so you made the the seven eight nine six seven eight just wanted to make sure you were paying attention there okay just checking okay because so the budget now is number is number eight okay thank you thank you council member ellinger is there any further any other discussion all right if not then uh madam clerk when you're ready please call Call the roll. Here we go. Mr. Ford? Yes. Ms. Gordon? I am happy to vote yes, particularly on my 16th and final budget. Ms. Henson? Yes. Mr. Kay? Yes. Mr. Lane? Yes. Ms. Lawless? Yes. Ms. Massadi? Yes. Mr. Myers? Yes. Yes. Ms. Gutchfield? Yes. Mr. Stennett? Yes, ma'am. Mr. Beard? Aye. Mr. Clark? Yes, ma'am. Mr. Ellinger? Yes. Mr. Farmer? Congratulations, Vice Mayor. Yes. Thank you. Thank you. Madam Clerk? Thank you, Vice Mayor. Thank you, Chief Administrative Officer, Sally Hamilton, and everybody working with you, Melissa and others. The vote reflects passage of the vote. And Bill O'Mara, where's Bill? Goodness. Forgive me for that. Council Member, I mean Vice Mayor. I also just wanted to thank Connie Underwood, who's worked with the council. Today's her last day. and we appreciate your help again. Thank you, Vice Mayor. All right, the vote reflects passage of the motion. Allows us to move on to ordinances for a first reading. Madam Clerk, whenever you're ready. I'm going to renumber as we go along here, too. Ordinance number nine, an ordinance changing the zone from a single-family residential R1B zone to a planned neighborhood residential R3 zone for 0.91 net, 1.00 gross acres for property located at 474 Stone Road, including a request for a conditional use permit to Little Beginners Child Development Center, Council District 10. Number 11, an ordinance changing the zone from a single-family residential R1D zone to a high-density apartment R4 zone for 0.92 net, 0.92 gross acres, and a neighborhood business, B1 Zone, for 1.01 net, 1.22 gross acres for property located at 2985 Liberty Road, including landscape variances, RML Construction, LLP, Council District 6. Number 11, an ordinance amending Section 229 of the Code of Ordinances related to the Arts Review Board to amend the definition of Arts Council from Lexington Arts and Cultural Council to LexArts, amending Section 2231 of the Code of Ordinances related to Arts Review Board to delete the phrase submitted by the local American Institute of Architecture chapter, amending Section 2232 of the Code of Ornances Related to Arts Review Board to replace Lexington Arts and Cultural Council with LexArts, amending Section 2233 of the Code of Ornances Related to Arts Review Board to delete the phrase submitted by Kentucky Chapter of the American Society of Landscape Architects, amending Section 2236 of the Code of Ornances Related to Arts Review Board to delete the phrase submitted by Bluegrass Chapter of Kentucky Society of Professional Engineers, amending Section 2-231A of the Code of Ordinances to replace the phrase Lexington Arts and Cultural Council with LexArts. Number 12, an ordinance amending Section 5-107 of the Code of Ordinances relating to the Relocation Assistance Program for Tenants to provide that any funds in excess of $200,000 remaining in the fund for the program may be allocated to other relocation assistance programs administered by the Department of Social Services. Number 13, an ordinance creating Article 8 in Chapter 5 of the Code of Ordinances of the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government to create the Emergency Temporary Relocation Assistance Program for tenants to assist tenants displaced from low-income rental housing due to conditions that render the housing temporarily unfit for human occupancy. Number 14, an ordinance amending Sections 2125, 2222, 225, 2253.2, and 2328 of the Code of Ordinances providing a 2% structure movement to the salary schedules applicable to classified civil service employees, unclassified civil service employees, including council staff, and a 2% increase to the maximum of the pay range of program assistant part-time, providing that all classified and unclassified civil service employees except seasonal employees in Account 332 who receive a satisfactory score on their performance evaluation pursuant to Sections 2129D and 22265 of the Code of Ordinances shall receive a 2% pay increase, amending Section 2332D of the Code of Orances, modifying the existing step structure for the positions of Police Chief, Grade 324E, and Fire Chief, Grade 324E, increasing the salary by 2% of one position of Friend of the Court, Grade 000, within the Office of the Circuit Judges, one position of ABC Administrator, part-time, Grade 000, within the Office of Alcohol Beverage Control, three positions of Law Clerk, part-time, Grade 000, within the Department of Law, three positions of skilled trades worker part-time, grade 000 within the Division of Community Corrections, one position of Park Patrol Coordinator part-time within the Division of Parks and Recreation, and 229 positions of Program Assistant part-time within the Division of Parks and Recreation, all to become effective July 1, 2014. Where are we? Oh, you did number 15. Okay. All right. Thanks. Are there any motions for walk-ons or suspensions? No? All right. Then, uh, Madam Clerk. Are you ready? Resolutions? Resolution number one, a resolution accepting the bids of Clint Chemical and Janitorial Supplies, Inc., Hearst Office Suppliers, Bluegrass Towel and Tissue, Bowman Paper Company, Pyramid School Products, Central Poly Corporation, Unipack Corporation, and Southwest Jefferson, Inc., establishing price contracts for janitorial chemicals and supplies for the Division of Community Corrections. Number two, a resolution accepting the bid of Classic Clean Pro LLC, establishing a price contract for custodial services for Sales Road Campus for the Division of Facilities and Fleet Management. Number three, a resolution accepting the bid of DC Elevator Company Incorporated, establishing a price contract for elevator and lift maintenance for the Division of Facilities and Fleet Management. Number four, a resolution accepting the bid of Tom Chestnut Excavation and Construction Services, LLC, establishing a price contract for fencing for Manowar Boulevard for the Division of Streets and Roads. Number five, a resolution accepting the bid of Harrod Concrete and Stone Company Incorporated, establishing a price contract for wet mix concrete for the Division of Streets and Roads. Number six, a resolution accepting the bid of Classic Clean Pro, LLC, establishing a price contract for custodial Services Central Kentucky Job Center for the Division of Facilities and Fleet Management. Number seven, a resolution authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute an agreement with Pearson VUE for GED testing for the offender population at the detention center at a cost not to exceed $6,000 annually. Number eight, a resolution authorizing the mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute a First Amendment to agreement with Granicus Incorporated to enable the legislative suite software in fiscal year 15 at an annual cost not to exceed $37,200. Number 9, a resolution authorizing the mayor on behalf of the urban county government to execute a statement of compliance for bridge posting requirements. Number 10, a resolution authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the urban county government to execute change order number 4 to the contract with H.W. Lochner for right-of-way services for the Newtown Pike Extension Project, increasing the contract price by the sum of $31,750 from $223,331.25 to $255,081.25. Number 11, a resolution authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the urban county government to accept a grant from the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet, which grant funds are in the amount of $120,000 federal funds, are for the LexTran five-year comprehensive operation analysis long-range transit system analysis project, the acceptance of which obligates the urban county government for the expenditure of $30,000 as a local match to be provided by LexTran, authorizing the mayor to transfer unencumbered funds within the grant budget, and authorizing the mayor on behalf of the Irving County Government to execute a subrecipient agreement with Lex Tran for project development and implementation. Number 12, a resolution authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the Irving County Government to execute a Ninth Amendment to agreement with AmeriNational Community Services, Inc. for loan servicing for the home and CDBG housing rehabilitation and home ownership programs to extend the agreement through June 30, 2016 at an additional cost not to exceed $75,000. Number 13, a resolution authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the urban county government to accept a grant from the Kentucky Justice and Public Safety Cabinet, which grant funds are in the amount of $2,307,270 Commonwealth of Kentucky funds, are for police training incentive funds, the acceptance of which does not obligate the urban county government for the expenditure of funds, and authorizing the mayor to transfer unencumbered funds within the grant budget. Number 14, a resolution authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the urban county government to accept a grant from the Commission on Fire Protection, Personnel, Standards, and Education, which grant funds in the amount of $2,274,830 Commonwealth of Kentucky funds, are for training incentive funds for firefighters, the acceptance of which does not obligate the urban county government for the expenditure of funds, and authorizing the mayor to transfer unencumbered funds within the grant budget. Number 15, a resolution authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the urban county government to execute Amendment No. 3 to the agreement with Bluegrass Area Development District to accept additional federal funds in the amount of $16,051 for operation of the Lexington Senior Citizen Center. Number 16, a resolution authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the Irving County government to execute and submit a grant application to the U.S. Department of Justice to provide any additional information requested in connection with this grant application and to accept this grant if the application is approved, which grant funds are in the amount of $213,624 federal funds under the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program are for the purchase of equipment and training for the Division of Police, the acceptance of which does not obligate the Urban County Government for the expenditure of funds and authorizing the mayor to transfer unencumbered funds within the grant budget. Number 17, a resolution authorizing Dean Dorton Allen Ford, PLLC, to conduct a financial audit of all Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government funds for fiscal year 2014 for an amount not to exceed $149,000 fiscal year 2015, subject to sufficient funds being appropriated and authorizing the mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute a letter agreement and any other necessary documents with Dean Dorton Allen Ford PLLC related to the audit number 18 a resolution authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the urban county government to execute and submit a grant application to the Kentucky Department of Education Division of School and Community Nutrition to provide any additional information requested in connection with this grant application and to accept this grant if the application is approved which grant funds are in the amount of $79,000 federal funds and are for participation in the child care food program at the family care center, the acceptance of which does not obligate the urban county government for the expenditure of funds, and authorizing the mayor to transfer unencumbered funds within the grant budget. Number 19, a resolution authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the urban county government to execute an amendment to agreement with the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet for extension of the Share the Road Media Campaign Project through December 31, 2014 at no cost to the urban county government. Number 20, a resolution authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the urban county government to execute and submit a grant application to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and to provide any additional information requested in connection with this grant application, which grant funds are in the amount of $84,600 federal funds under the 2014 Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program and are for the purchase of training props for the Division of Fire and Emergency Services Training Academy. Number 21, a resolution authorizing the mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute an engineering services agreement with GRW Engineers Incorporated for the design phase of the Manowar Boulevard and Pink Pigeon Parkway intersection project, the Manowar Boulevard and Alumni Drive intersection project, and the Manowar Boulevard and Richmond Road intersection project at a cost not to exceed $209,108. Number 22, a resolution authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the urban county government to execute and submit a grant application to the Bluegrass Workforce Investment Board to provide any additional information requested in connection with this grant application and to accept this grant if the application is approved, which grant funds are in the amount of $130,000 federal funds and are for a workforce preparation project for the Division of Youth Services, the acceptance of which does not obligate the urban county government for the expenditure of funds and authorizing the mayor to transfer unencumbered funds within the grant budget. Number 23, a resolution authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the urban county government to accept a grant from the Kentucky Department of Military Affairs, Division of Emergency Management, which grant funds are in the amount of $103,118.71 federal funds, are for support of emergency preparedness activities in Lexington Fayette County, the acceptance of which obligates the urban county government for the expenditure of $103,108.71 as a local match, and authorizing the mayor to transfer unencumbered funds within the grant budget. Number 24, a resolution authorizing the mayor on behalf of the urban county government to execute an agreement with Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield for providing administrative services and stop-loss insurance coverage relative to health insurance plans PPO1, PPO2, HSA1, and HSA2 for a one-year term beginning January 1, 2015 for the Urban County Government. Madam Clerk, excuse me just a minute. Council Member Massadi has a question regarding number 25. Thank you, Mayor. Can someone explain to me the reason why we're using a consultant for a promotional process in the Division of Police? I thought that was done internally. Number 25. Good evening. We have used CPS for several promotional processes. This is for the assessment center. that has a number of complexities that go along with it, and they administer that for us. So this has been used before for the Division of Police? Yes. Okay, that's not something new. All right, thank you very much. All right. Meredith, go ahead whenever you're ready. Thank you. Thank you. of Parks and Recreation, which shall be applicable to all parks of the Lexington Fayette Urban County Government. Number 27, a resolution ratifying the probationary civil service appointment of Jonathan Sutton, evidence technician, grade 112N, 23.554, hourly in the Division of Police, effective June 16, 2014, ratifying the permanent civil service appointments of Michael Craven's attorney, grade 117E, 1,957.28 biweekly in the Department of Law, effective May 18, 2014. Stephen Gehoffer, nuisance control officer, grade 111N, 18.174, hourly in the Division of Code Enforcement, effective May 4, 2014. Alicia Lyle, administrative specialist, grade 110N, 16.615, hourly in the Division of Human Resources, effective May 18, 2014. Carrie Bradford, financial coordinator, grade 112N, 16.059, hourly in the Division of Grants and Special Programs, effective April 21, 2014. Aubrey Burton, Equipment Operator Senior, Grade 109N, 16.354, hourly in the Division of Waste Management, effective April 6, 2014. Larry Hall, Equipment Operator Senior, Grade 109N, 15.207, hourly in the Division of Waste Management, effective April 13, 2014. Eric Eason, Engineering Technician, Grade 111N, 14.596, hourly in the Division of Traffic Engineering, effective May 18, 2014. Council Member Lawless wishes to speak on number 28. Yes, sir. Thank you, Mayor. I would like to make a motion to remove number 28 from the docket. Second. Motion on number 28 to remove, and there's a second. Is there any discussion on the motion? I guess it looks like Commissioner Paulson's on the pathway up to the podium. Anyone else wish to speak? Councilmember Farmer? Just the reason for the cancellation. What's the, yeah, I guess the question is the purpose. I was getting ready to say that. Okay. Um, this, um, last week you told me that I had voted on it when I said I'd never seen it and it's in my district. And the fact is, I'll pass this out to some folks. The only vote we made was the link report out where it's not mentioned at all. It just says your budget was accepted as the mayor's proposed budget. So that being said, I had not voted on it. there are, and the Omar Blake study focused far more on the neighborhood sustainability and community than it did this corridor, and it talked about several corridors. I think that if there's an opportunity to change the geography and scope of that to something that would be of more value to our community, as well as the residents and the businesses, I could support that. But as is, it seems that nobody had any information about it, or at least I didn't. And it's my district. And I feel like it's $75,000 for commercial corridors, probably two of the most healthiest active commercial corridors we have, certainly in the 3rd District. So for that reason, I feel like it needs better examination and more input from people other than UK. It's not one of the priorities of the Planning Commission studies or task forces. It never went before the Planning Commission. So, you know, there was one paragraph in the 240 pages of the link section of the budget, but what we got, which was well done, it is not mentioned. So I just wanted to clarify that I did not, in fact, vote on it. But I think it is an unfortunate use of $75,000 when there are other studies that could be done either in the third district or in other districts. So that is my reason for asking to remove it. All right. Council Member, do you wish to speak? I'm just here to answer questions. Okay. Council Member Stennett? Well, I was going to wait for Commissioner Paulson's response. Well, I'll just say. I'm glad to chime in. Real quick. Jonathan did put together kind of how this went. It was a request in the 2014 budget. In the link packet, Jonathan kind of pulled this out. There was on two occasions it was sent to all council members with a paragraph. I request $85,000 in professional service that will be split amongst two projects. First, approximately $70,000 will be used. Consulting services for a U.K. commercial corridor study. A recommendation came out of the Omar Blake study that will focus on developing a plan to enhance the commercial corridors along Limestone and Euclid Avenue. So that's where this came from. That's how it was discussed before, and I know it has been informally discussed a few other times. That was a paragraph in the 240 pages. And I know that it was also heavily discussed in the budget link about when those things were. Well, and that's why we have budget links. Right. How many council members read every 250 pages of each budget link's budget line by line? Vice Mayor Gordon. Thank you, Mayor. Commissioner, did you say when that email was sent to council members? I don't have it. Jonathan might be able to pull up when it was, but it was sent back when the 2014 budget link packet was sent out, specifically about, I believe, just this planning budget, but I'm not sure I can get that from Jonathan. So it was an email outside of the link report? What I have from Jonathan, a quick timeline, the FY 2014 budget link packet, which was sent to all council members on two occasions, included the following description that I just read. Okay, thank you. All right, any further? Any, Council Member Farmer. So, if, I guess the motion is to pull this, would that affect its, how would pulling it affect whatever? Well, it would, I don't know what pulling, I don't know what the next section, pulling it for what, I guess I'm not sure, because it sounds like it's not pulling, It sounds like it's pointed to, if I can read what Council Member Lawless is saying, is she would prefer that the study not be done, not necessarily that it's just get pulled. If it was pulled to have some form of discussion, I'm not sure what that next step would be. But in terms of a second reading, the second reading would allow us to move forward with the study. I think she did mention something about the focus being more residential. Potentially. But I'll let her speak. Never mind. Councilmember Farmer, I just wanted to clarify, if this contract isn't executed, then those funds lapse and go into fund balance. Thank you very much. Okay. Councilmember Ford. Thank you, Mayor. I have just a question procedurally. Did this item, you know, most of the things that end up on our council docket are vetted through work session. Did this item go through a work session? Can anybody work a session? Just for clarity, did this item go, was this item introduced to us at our previous work session? I do not believe it was. Okay. Thank you, Commissioner. And the other question I have is procedurally, and I guess I'll pose this to Council Member Lawless. Your motion is to remove it from the docket. Well, not necessarily Council Member Lawless. I'll maybe to the law department. Is there a distinct difference between pulling it from the docket and actually voting it down? In effect, what does pulling it from the docket do with it? It does not allow us to give second. It doesn't allow us to pass it tonight. But is that the intent that you want, Council Member Lawless? Do you want us to vote it down, or do you want us to pull it temporarily from the docket? We can vote it down, and we can always, if the money goes back into the general services budget, then we can always reallocate it when we do our fund balance and make it specific to another corridor or another study. And what I said about Omar Blake was that the majority of his report was about neighborhood stabilization and those kinds of things. There was a piece in there about three different corridors around the U.K., not just this one. I think it would be wise for Commissioner Paulson to refresh the council on the strategy. I think this is kind of fragmented right now, and it's been more than a year since this was introduced, and it followed on a strategy. Correct. And I think one thing that we've got, miscommunication, is this is a small area plan, and this is not what this is. This is not something that's to discuss zone changes or anything of that sort. But this is about a commercial corridor that is in transition. There is a lot of investment going on by both the U.K. and others in that area, And it's the idea that, again, coming out of that Omar Blake study, how can we help shape that investment in that area to help activate that? This is one of those first types of studies we would like to try to do that we could see moving forward as well for, say, Southland Drive and helping to activate that commercial corridor more as well. It will be more of a how do we get the market? What are the things that would go in in that area? Again, looking at it from an aspect of there is, again, a great deal of investment going on, a lot of changes in that area, trying to link a strong part of the community with the downtown area. That was the original idea. And, again, it did come out of recommendations from Omar Blake. There were a lot of recommendations that came out of Omar Blake. One of them was also the study that was done over off Jefferson around BCTC. So this is just another one that we are attempting to move forward with. And, again, we felt that this was a good study to move forward with them and, again, thought this was an issue that had been decided about a year ago. It wasn't decided by this group. You apparently took it to the link. Well, all right. Council Member, let's see. Who have we got on here? I got a minute left. Can we speak to this issue? Yes, sir. I got just one minute left. I want to clarify. The question that I raised about the issue being on work session, that wasn't a gotcha moment. That wasn't a trap question by any means. The fact that it is on the docket for second reading tonight does indicate that it's been on for first reading, and it's been published and noticed. Just for clarity, and I should know this, how are items such as this brought to the docket? This is an administrative question. How are items like this brought to the docket outside of work session? Is it because of purchasing of services? Can somebody from the administration answer that? All right. This is just a learning moment, Mayor. I apologize. It is for me, too, after seven years. Todd? Yes. We did an RFP for the commercial corridor study. I think we had four or five people submit, had a selection committee, selected MSK2, and then it gets blue-sheeted in Legistar, goes through the administrative review process through finance, Derek's office, law, all of those people, and then the contract gets put on the docket. But this is the – I mean, it was at a work session. So, I mean, it went through the normal process. So I think it did get walked on at the first work session. Yeah, got walked on, got walked on at a work session. Yeah. Very. Okay. Very good. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. Walked on. Wait a minute. There's a clarification or confirmation or verification. Council member Farmer, I think, has empirical evidence. I was asked to walk it on by the administration at the last meeting. I was glad to walk it on. I was also asked to participate in the RFP process that separated out the winner from the losers. I see. All right. Thank you, sir. So the process has been confirmed. And the reason we walked on was a blue sheet issue we had with getting it on there and just trying to make sure we could get it done before the end of the year. Okay. All right. Thank you. So Council Member Henson? Thank you, Mayor. I guess I have two problems with this. One is that how do we go about choosing a corridor in need and deciding which corridor needs this study when I do know that there are other commercial areas that are setting vacant in the U.K. area. So, you know, that bothers me. That part bothers me, but I could probably be convinced that, you know, or given a better understanding of the scope of this study. But the thing that bothers me the most is that the council member for this district was not involved in any of this. It was walked on at a council meeting. We receive nothing ahead of time, and I'm going to make it a habit probably if we do, as council members, if we do not receive something ahead of time to look it over, I will not vote to place anything on the docket. So, you know, I kind of think it probably slipped through the cracks or whatever. But the thing, you know, again, I'll say the thing that bothers me the most is that the council member was not involved. And I certainly wouldn't want that to happen to me. So thank you very much. I guess all I can say is there was no intentional. We were not intentionally ignoring the council member in any way. And I think that seems to be the way I'm perceiving this right now is that we have done something intentional to avoid discussion of this, and that is nothing further from the truth. And I guess that's kind of where at this point I'm getting a little – I'm not really sure how to respond to that. But that was never the intention in any way. We did not ignore other necessary corridors. There's lots of corridors that need a lot of work. This is one we chose because of the potential there, again, coming out of the Omar Blake study. and because of its close connectivity to downtown and close, again, all the work that is going on in that area right now, investment, heavy investment from both the U.K. and others. So that is why it was chosen. Again, there's no malice in any way, shape, or form, no intent to avoid any public discussion. So I apologize if there is this perception that there was to be that, but that is not the way it was intended. All right. Thank you, Mayor. And, Derek, I don't mean that it's intentional, but just I think or that anybody was doing anything underhanded. But I do think just as a common courtesy to us, we should be involved in things. You know, it's maybe a lesson learned. So thank you. Council Member Lane, since Council Member Lawless, since you've spoken a couple of times on the issues, you'll allow Council Member Lane to speak. Thank you, sir. Commissioner, I just would like to say that I can understand how some council members could be a little bit disappointed or upset the way this was handled. But I think it was the crush of the budget and not anything you did intentionally. And I would encourage you to take this with a grain of salt and not take it too personally because I think you've done a great job. And I like your professionalism, the way you handled yourself in the meetings. And so I just don't want you to take this too seriously. But I think it is important that the council does receive the information in advance because we're all part-time servants of our constituents, and, you know, we come to the meeting. We need time to organize our time and review documents before they come in. And, you know, candidly, you know, I was trying to get $100,000 approved for a fire station study, and we were unable to find that money whatsoever. And then this got walked on. Now, I realize it's in a different, you know, budgetary area, but to me the fire station study would be a lot more important than this one. And if I hadn't known about it, I might have tried to switch that money around. So anyway, but I thank you so much, and I hope you take what I've said. I really sincerely mean it. You've done a great job, and I can understand why you could be a little agitated, but I don't believe you should take it personally. I think it's just the system broke down at the end of the budgetary process, and it was a little bit awkward here. Thank you. I'm sure you're thinking that's out. Okay. Council Member Beard. I can matter for purposes of clarity. It's the emergency beacon letting us know there's a thunderstorm going on. Should we leave? Can we leave? Council Member Beard. The Corridors Commission, we keep on discussing corridors like Southland Drive or Euclid Avenue or whatever, which are not actually corridors as the Corridors Commission looks at it. I don't know whether we need to go to a capital C corridor and a lowercase corridor, if we like to use that word. But I don't see this intermingling these and confusing everybody about who's got what and who's on first base as it relates to the Corridors Commission. and I expected maybe some word from the Corridors Commission Chair somewhere along the line. Maybe he could agree with me. Is that an invitation? Or not. Is that an invitation? Okay. All right. Commissioner Paulson, do you wish to add anything at this juncture? No. No? I'm not sure to answer your question. Free at last. Thank you so much. All right. Council Member Ellinger. I know, Ms. Lawless, did you want to, you were ahead of me, or are you going to wait until we're done? She's already. Okay. Commissioner Paulson, you said the issue about timing. Could you elaborate on that, please? Well, I think we were just trying to get the money spent before the end of the fiscal year. So we were trying to walk it on. You mean committed? Correct. Committed before the end of the fiscal year. And as the motion stated, it's not being tabled, but is it being withdrawn? Is that the? I was going to say, but it's the reason we've gone there. That's the thing I know. Whatever. Yeah. It's like that. And I guess I just want a clarification on the motion again. And it's for the commercial aspect. Are the neighbors, are they against this? Or is that the issue? Or they're just not aware of it? I've heard from quite a few constituents who are confused by it. And it was not sent to my information from Jonathan. and is that back in late May or early June, the 240-page packet was sent to all members of the link. and again, I feel like the $100,000 study for the fire station, which I supported, and that there are other things that it can be used for. So that was over a year ago that the link looked at it, but it wasn't in the report out that the link specifically. and that's the only time it was discussed. I guess, could you go through in a brief what the scope is, what's going to happen, and why are the neighbors against it? Because I got some emails, too, about that they were against it. Well, I think there's one here. I think there's a neighbor that are here that might want to. Yeah, if you want to call her. Certainly, if she wants to give some feedback on why the neighbors are against it. My name is Amy Clark, and I live at 628 Castle Road. Can you hear me? Yes. And I thank you for calling me up. One of the things that concerns us is simply that there hasn't been any opportunity for public comment or deliberation. We're just learning about this. I usually coordinate with eight people, a dozen people, when there's something that seems to be of interest. And I was still learning this morning when and whether it was put forward by whom and so on. So one consideration is public involvement. I have sent a letter. It's in your email. But if I could have the slides, and I'm not going to go through a bunch of slides, but I think a map would be helpful. It's a great idea to have a corridor study. It's a great idea to capitalize on the needs of the students to bring economic prosperity, greater economic stimulus to all our university areas. If you look at the map here, this is actually from Omar Blake, because as I've just learned in the last day or two, this is Omar Blake's inspiration, the U3 group. He's saying, if you look at the two middle circles, one centers on apparently the library at UK, and the other centers on, I think, the classroom building. So he's saying, here's a half-mile walk radius. This is where we want to have walkable business and retail and so on that the students can use and enjoy or as near as possible. Next slide. There's a sequence of four of these. Okay. Then he suggests, oh, if you could back up, please. Okay. All the red is commercial, commercial zoning at present. all that red. Now watch what happens to the red in the next slide. He's focusing on two areas that he thinks have the greatest potential for commercial development to serve the students on the basis of these radiuses, these circles, which are about campus, on-campus centers. And notice that one of them is outside that area, that half-mile radius. It's nudging up against it on one side, and that's the Chevy Chase area. That's the tail end of our Euclid commercial corridor that's the subject of the study. If you put another tangent circle exactly symmetrically opposite it, that would be about Broadway in Virginia. And that Broadway in Virginia corridor is hurting for economic stimulus. Next slide. those little blue dots are what he adds by way of saying there is new residential development these are high density apartment complexes it looks to me like the pair on Angliana and maybe the one where Tatters Halls was I'm not really sure which they are what I can tell you is that isn't the half of the new high-density student dwelling places on that side. In general, if UK builds on campus the additional dormitory space that is already permitted, we have an extra 4,000 beds, and they are more nearly on the Euclid side of things than they are on the South Broadway, Red Mile side of things. However, commercial development has built about 10,000 bedrooms over the last decade on the other side. So our feeling is that it's really the opposite side of the railroad tracks that's absolutely hurting for student retail, hurting for that stimulus, and where we really would prefer to focus it. And now if you just jump to the last two slides. The text. Mayor, I see my time is up, but I don't mind giving when I come back to let her finish up if you want, because I know she has two more slides. So there's a couple of people, and I think Diane probably will, Ms. Lawless will probably give up some time too to let Amy finish. this is what Omar Blake showed from other communities where we have this really neat stuff this high density it looks like student dwellings on top and retail below this is serious money this could really be economic stimulus and my question for you is if you can count the lanes you probably can't if you look at the side of that tall building at the corner there. There's like four lanes of traffic in one direction. Is this the kind of development that might be very welcome on South Broadway at Virginia Avenue, at Waller Avenue, and the next slide as well? Or does it fit better in a Euclid context? Is this the kind of stimulus we seek? Which is the better place to do a study? And in closing, I would just say that Omar Blake did not, if you go back to the, there's a text of what he says, advises for commercial corridor development. He says we need a study to identify the appropriate places to locate this commercial development. He doesn't happen to mention Euclid, for example, or South Limestone. And other than that, I can tell you what others are thinking and talking about. But those are some of our concerns, and I thank you for calling me up. All right. Thank you, Amy. Councilmember Massadi. Thank you, Mayor. Commissioner Paulson, I'm a little confused, but from what I understand, this was done not in this year's budget but in last year's link process. Correct. And I may be wrong, but I'm assuming this is a good thing to happen where we're going to have public input like Ms. Clark just beeped out here. But like Ms. Clark just said, the stakeholders will be at the meetings, the neighbors will be at the meetings. And I do appreciate Councilmember Law's position, but I kind of feel like this is a good thing. I mean, this is what we're trying to do is try to make this corridor more. Correct. And again, I think one of the perceptions here, this is not student-focused only. One of the reasons that we've chosen this area is because it is the dividing line between students and a huge amount of student growth, a lot of university investment, a significant amount of commercial investment with New Kroger and other things there. And on the other side of Euclid and in the Chevy Chase neighborhoods is where there is non-student housing, a lot of non-student housing. And the thing here that we're looking at is to try to find that market that is not just going to be student-focused, but is going to help us find a market that will help serve that whole entire area. I understand. I don't want to repeat, but I'm assuming the most important element of this is the public participation part. And there is, within that, within the scope is a stakeholder interviews. There is public participation. EHI is a subcontractor on this to do public participation. This is a good thing. And this is generally the way we go with our studies, which is the scopes are one part, but public participation is part of the studies. And I'll just quickly say I do not disagree that there are other areas in this around University of Kentucky that are in need of study, but I think there are different types of study. Again, this is not a zoning study per se, such as other areas where we have seen a great transition from warehouses towards student housing. So I think those may be a different kind of study as well. Okay, thank you. And I guess I will defer to Council Member Lawless. And if you have another area that you think is more significant that needs study, or this is your district. I think, well, I do have the scope of the RFP, and it includes a total, I think, of four hours of interviews with stakeholders. It doesn't identify who those stakeholders will be. So it's just so vague, and it was walked on on June 5th, and that was the day we had you and Vice Mayor Gordon were gone, and that was the day we had the three hours of individual counsel requests and the end of the links. And then about halfway through the meeting, Kevin and I both left. I mean, Council Member Stinnett and I both left. And I left because I didn't know this was being walked on or I would have stayed. I left when. All right. So that being said, I would like, and I don't necessarily think that you intentionally left me out, Commissioner, but I was quite offended when you stood up there and said, well, you voted on it, because I didn't. But anyway, that being said, I feel like it could be much better utilized in that it would be that it's important to have some input by any council members whose district it is on these things and that we got it. Council Member Lawless, we appreciate it. I'm sorry to interrupt, but your time has expired. I might have expired, too. I understand. But I think it's important, because all these alarms are going off, and Rick is in the room, it's worthwhile to, I'm not asking, we're in a designated storm shelter, right? Yes, we are in a designated storm shelter, and we have a severe thunderstorm warning until 1930 or 730, so we're fine. Okay, thank you. You'll continue to hear the alarms, because Noah continues to put them out. Okay, thank you. Thanks, Rick. All right. All right. Does anyone else wish to speak? Council Member Ellinger? Yeah, thank you, Mayor. Ms. Clark, did you have any other comments you wanted to make? Because we kind of cut you off there at the end. Again, I appreciate your inviting me because I do have a list of public bodies, elected officials who, as far as I know, did not have an opportunity to review this or choose this study or its scope or methods or anything. And this is in a letter in your email, but I know you don't hang on the email and read every constituent letter every minute. It's worth noting that the proposed commercial corridor study is not among the 48 plans, projects, and studies in the implementation chapter of the 2013 comprehensive plan. And I sat there during the meeting on this in February when they voted on the implementation, this list of 48 projects. And one of the topics of discussion was a different sort of plan, a small area plan, which does not necessarily focus on commercial and business opportunities, although it may. And there were several planning commissioners who said, well, what about this project and what about that project? And where are we going to get the funding for these needed projects? So, planning commission. The study proposal was not requested or developed through the Urban County Planning Commission. I don't believe it had anything to do with the Town and Gown Commission or the Corridors Commission, nor did I see it in the Infill and Redevelopment Committee. And as far as we've been able to determine, it was not referred by the Planning Committee of Council for action. There was no vote, no motion, no discussion. I'm not even sure that the Division of Planning staff had a very active role in it and of course we have long-range planning and they spend a lot of time and trouble identifying needed projects because they see people coming with development and the problems they have. So I would appreciate very much if this were either delayed to give an opportunity for involvement of the citizens and our officers, council members and commissions or at least for my purposes, if you change the scope to Broadway between Waller and Virginia, along the Waller and Virginia, there was in 2009 a study of commercial development, infill and development, and Waller was one of the 16, the Waller Shopping Center was one of the 16 sites targeted for infill development. So there has been some good work to follow up on, I think, in studies already made. Thank you. Now, I've got two minutes left. Council Member Lawless, I guess I want to know what the motion says. Are we going to delay it, or the next council meeting doesn't look like it's until July 1st. This is our last one we have before the fiscal year, it looks like to me. The motion was to remove. Well, then she said something about table, too, so I just want to. Well, the motion was to remove it. I can withdraw the motion if it's the pleasure of this body, and we can vote. And if we vote it down, we can always reallocate the money after the first of the year. And there's been time for people to have some input about how it could best be used. I guess the one thing I would ask is if that happens, then does your district then lose the opportunity for that? And we just go into the general fund then? Yes. And I would be more than happy to – I was going to try to amend it, but I was told by our – that because the RFP and the scope had already been, that we couldn't amend the geographic or scope of the project. Is that an accurate statement, Commissioner, that we can't change the, that she can't amend that? I would say at this point the scope has been done and we've already had a review, so I would say yes, we would not amend the scope at this point. So you've gone through the RFP process? We've gone through the RFP. We've had people submit. The RFP process was driven by the budget. Correct. So you're a year into the budgeting and then the procurement phase of the project. Correct. Right. Vice Mayor Gordon. I move to call the question. Second. Motion to call the question. and a second, is there any discussion on the motion? All in favor of the motion to call the question, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. All right, we'll call the question. All in favor of the motion to, I'm understanding it is a motion to remove number 28. All right, everybody clear on the motion? Okay. All in favor of the motion to remove, please indicate by saying aye and voting electronically. Those who oppose, nay. Has everyone voted? Yes. They're checking to see how everybody else is voting. All right. Motion to remove passes. All right. Vice Mayor Gordon. So, Council Member or Commissioner, do you anticipate this coming back at all? or Council Member Lawless? I really hadn't even thought about it. So if you give me time, I'll think about it while I'm on vacation next week. Then I'd like to go ahead and make another motion that if, in fact, this project does not come back, that we direct planning to use it for the next small area plan on their list. Let me make sure. Did everyone know? Everybody was clear on that vote, right? The vote was to remove. So a yes vote means to cancel the project. Is that the way that you all understood it? Because, Harry, I didn't know whether you were on the links. That's what I just noticed. I didn't know whether you interpreted that vote that way. No, that's not the way I interpreted it. This was to pull it from this docket. That's what I understood. Would it have the effect? So does the vote have the effect of canceling the project? Yes, Mayor, it does. This is the last council meeting of the fiscal year, and so the only way to encumber the funds was to approve this contract. These dollars relapse and go into fund balance, And then if there is fund balance in October, we could discuss how to use those dollars. I don't know that at this point without a budget amendment that we can direct how these dollars are to be spent in 2015. All right, okay. All right, where are we? We have a motion? No, I think there was no second, and I'm okay with rolling on to fund balance. All right. Since it failed. Council Member Lawless. I'd like to make a motion that this money be, if there's a way we can do that, if we can reserve this money for a study of some sort in the university area when we've had time to. but no okay is that a motion Mr. Bill Mayor if I could just clarify the 2015 budget has had two readings and has been passed this is not in the 2015 budget tabling this removes it from the expenditures for 2014. So these dollars lapse into general fund. The repurposing of those dollars is appropriate in October after we close the books and see how much that fund balance is. One can direct to budget amendment and use the fund balance if one wishes. Council Member forward. Thank you, Mayor. Speaking to the action that the council just took, and I did not vote just to state my position, I did not vote to remove it in the motion that Vice Mayor Gorton just brought forward. And understanding Council Member Lawless is frustration, but also understanding all the work that Commissioner Paulson and the process through RFP has got us to this point. The most ideal situation, I'll just try to make it plain, would be to pass what's on the docket tonight and to consider what Council Member Lawless has raised as a concern about other areas, perhaps in the district, that could benefit it. And then we perhaps make that a priority for the fund balance discussion in October. With this as the platform of the concern that Council Member Lawless has raised, as opposed to having competing interests in her district, in the third district, that probably can benefit from both studies if the resources allow it. That's just my thought. The only way we would get there is if somebody from the prevailing side would be so inclined to have us reconsider the previous vote. and perhaps I should have said that earlier but that seems like the best win from where we are right now. Thank you, Mayor. All right, thank you, Council Member Forrest. Anybody else wish to speak? I was kind of confused before Chris said. I think, what was that, Chris? You want me to say it again, Mayor? Yeah. Council Member Ellinger? Yeah. is to approve what is on the docket tonight in the fiscal year 14, which ends on June 30th. This is already scheduled for second read, but to take seriously what Council Member Lawless has brought up in regards to the concern brought by a district member and to consider other areas in her district that she's highlighted. So not to penalize one area against another. That's the premise, but it would take, I think, Mayor procedurally, somebody from the prevailing side to vote to reconsider the previous council action. It's a two-part step, it seems like. Do you understand? I think so. I guess my question would be for the commissioner. All right, we've got a question for Commissioner Paulson. There's a list, and I'm third on the list. Well, now I got put up the first down. Okay, now I'll go ahead. Is the scope not already done? It is. So would we be able to do what Council Member Ford? I think we'd have to completely redo the scope. I mean, I'm not sure how that would work, but the scope was written for that area. No, Commissioner, if I may, Mayor, what I'm referencing is it would take a reconsideration of the previous vote, which is to move forward with what you've brought us forward, with what you've brought, which is already ready for this area. And then if it suits the council in the fund balance discussion and going forward, your office can work more closely with Council Member Lawless to identify those other areas that she mentioned. But this recognizes all the work that has already gone in to what you have on the docket for second reading. And it would be wasted if the action stands to keep it, to pull it off the docket. I guess, though, I think this goes counter to what Council Member Lawless, the representative of this district, is saying, because I'm not sure she wants this area, the one that is the one that she once looked at, and I think she wants another one. But he's saying if we go ahead and approve this, then we have to do what the scope is already approved for. That's number 28, and I don't think that's what you want. Well, I think what I heard him say was, Council Member Ford, is that we approve it with the making another commercial or small area plan in the district a priority with fund balance. And I will say in the six years I've been on council, there has not been a single small area plan in the third district. And they are so badly needed, and many of them have been recommended by. But I think what he's saying is we have to do this one, and then we would do another one is what Councilman Ford is saying. So we do this and include another one. But it's my understanding by the discussion that this was not the one you all wanted done to begin with. And that's why it was being removed. Right. But then if we do what he says, then we still have to do this one. And then you'll do another one. So I don't think this is it. I would prefer the money be used in a more efficient way for our community. Well, everybody wants to be courteous, I'm sure. Let me just make a point. It can't be, though, because the budget was passed last year. And I think what Commissioner Paulson was saying, he wasn't trying to be rude, Councilman Lawless, when he said you voted on it, but you voted on the budget, which included this in the budget. So that represented the strategy. Well, you know. Okay. So, is anyone on the, I think what Council Member, my understanding of Council Member Ford's comments were that you're encouraging anybody who might be willing on the prevailing side to offer a motion to reconsider. That's correct, Mayor, to deal with this issue right now. Right. And the reason for it, my interpretation of this is, first I was going to ask Commissioner Paulson to not be timid and not be bashful, but advocate for why this is important. And again, I will try to reiterate that again, and I thought that I have. Put that microphone up close to you, please, sir. You're going to lose $75,000 that you've gone through the procurement process for that is in the 3rd District that might not be what everyone today wishes that it would be if you were to dial back a year. But it is a planning exercise that was recommended by the Omar Blake model. Correct. Right. And if you don't proceed with it, then you do not get the benefit of this investment and you will not get the benefit then going forward of a possible investment in another plan for the same area, possibly the Broadway area that Ms. Clark has suggested. Now, am I missing something? Yeah, you're right. And again, I thought that we had tried to lay down the benefits of what the study is to an area that's undergoing a tremendous amount of investment, both public and private, and the need to help try to identify how we can help increase that marketability for both non-students and students. And I think this is one of those crucial areas where you have a very good mix. You've got a good dividing line of where that is. Again, without the study, I mean, the money will go away if it's not approved. And I'll just say this again. Small area plans are approved by the Planning Commission. They come out of the comprehensive plan. So to go forward with one, those are Planning Commission decisions that are done throughout the comprehensive plan. Right. And this is separate. This was known about by the Planning Commission during that and by staff as they were going through this. This is a different type of study. and it was designed to benefit differently than a small area plan. Those other areas that you are mentioning are more ripe for a small area plan because there are real zoning issues involved there where they are not here. This is a different type of study than we've done before designed to help guide the investments that are in that area, in a crucial area, so that it is not so student-focused that you squeeze out the interests of others. And that's really the whole purpose of doing this study in this area. Okay. Council Member Clark, looks like you're... Well, I'm not showing it. All right, Council Member Stenet. Yes, go ahead and recommend... All right, Council Member... I'm sorry. Council Member Stenet. I appreciate Council Member Ford's spirit of his motion, and I do think it needs to be reconsidered. Unfortunately, I can't be the one to do that, but I will say this. I remind my council colleagues, number one, we do not know what the fund balance is. number two if this item or any item in the third district was requested during the budget process it wasn't on our list of any additional studies in the third district that we just considered three weeks ago and the last three weeks we've been debating all of our individual projects so to say we're going to put someone at a priority in a district in fund balance discussion to have a problem with that i think all projects that we already have put on our list that we need for our district are already on that October. We can add things to it, but I'm not going to give a priority to one district. So I disagree with the second piece of what we're trying to do, but I think this needs to be reconsidered tonight. I think it's the right thing to do. I think the district needs it. I think there's other things, Councilman Lawson, you could have requested in the budget this year. Or in October, you can request again. So keep that in the back burner, but I'm not going to give priority to one project tonight. Councilmember Clark, thank you. I missed you. Councilmember Stanton. Sorry about that. Is somebody else before Councilmember Clark? No. All right, Council Member Clark. Mayor, as on the side of the affirmative, on this motion, I'd like to ask for reconsideration of the motion, whatever that process is. Motion to reconsider by Council Member Clark and a second by Council Member Stennett. Is there any discussion on the motion to reconsider? They don't have to be on. All right. All right, all in favor of the motion to reconsider, please say aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. All right. All right. Sure. All in favor of the motion to reconsider. Please say aye and vote electronically. All right. Motion to reconsider. passes 11 to 3. all right now is there a discussion on the motion to reconsider okay that was a motion now we need a motion the motion is to remove that's the one we're reconsidering right all right is there any discussion on the motion the previous motion further discussion on the previous motion Is everybody clear on that? No. No. Not clear. We're reconsidering the original motion to remove. All right. And I'm asking for any further comment on that motion. Council Member Ford. Thank you, Mayor. I move to amend. the motion to remove. And the amendment is twofold. It's to pass resolution 28 that is on the docket for second reading. And then secondly, it is, and this is going to Council Member Stenet, to consider, I'm taking the word priority out, but to consider the areas for additional study that Council Member Lawless has brought up in future budgets. I can make that simpler. I can remove the second part. The amendment, Mayor, is to pass, to adopt, is to give second reading for passage for Resolution 28. Let me give some help here. What are we... Glenda? Glenda? Janet? Yeah, there you go. Turn that microphone on. We've got some procedural things we need to probably inform the council about regarding the way that motions to reconsider are always a little bit different. So I'm going to let Glenda explain. What I think you all did, and correct me if I'm wrong, you voted to remove it from the docket, and that passed. And then someone on the prevailing side voted to reconsider that, which puts it back on the docket. So now we're at the point to where it would get second reading. It's back on the docket. Okay. As such, Mayor, my motion is not in order or necessary, and I'll remove it. All right, so we don't have any discussion then now on it. We just vote after the second reading, right? And then you could, I mean, anybody could speak to the issue then, right? All right, unless you want to make an exception, do you want to speak to it now? what what's it okay councilman i'm not sure if i agree with our council there i hate to say that but you made the the motion to reconsider in that past that we were going to reconsider it but now we have to now we have to debate the motion and i don't think that we still have to vote on the the motion and what you're saying is because of that now that doesn't matter what we already voted on we just made a vote we just voted to reconsider and we agreed to that it just like well there was a there was a motion we thought your motion to reconsider was putting it back on the docket to give it a second reading and maybe we misunderstood died yeah that's no wait a minute i'm unclear on it too i think we're all let's let's review the motion was to reconsider and that passed all right so we were reconsidering the motion that had just passed which was so it now we were reconsidering the motion that passed originally so wouldn't we be Having to vote on that again? The one that was removed? So it gets a second read? No. No, it would get a second read after we reconsidered. After we reconsidered. Right, that's what I mean. Yeah. I think they were a step ahead. You don't have to agree with the chair or the council member, anybody else. All right. That's fine. I think it's kind of like calling the question. We vote to call the question, and then we make that vote. now we got to go back to the original motion and now we have to discuss that motion all right okay so we are y'all okay with that all right okay council member myers thank you mayor um i voted originally to remove this from the docket but it was really because the council member of the district wanted it seeing the councils move the other direction i will say that it took me two years to get the funding in place to do a small area plan and so i i value the importance of once you get that money in place that you take advantage of it so my hope is that as we reconsider this if we vote to put it back on the docket that the council member in the district can be involved in that process there'll be plenty of of citizen participation which i there always is and that they can come up with something that's going to work for everybody so i guess i'm saying i would encourage us to vote to go ahead and do this because the money's hard to come by and it took me like i said two years to get our small area plan money thank you i remember yeah councilmember henson thank you mayor i just want to make sure that i have an understanding that if this goes back on the docket, it is approved as is with the area in place. We cannot change to another area. I was going to make a suggestion on that. okay i but i guess i i just have a real concern about the way the area being studied was chosen and but again i hate for the district to lose the funds and no study at all take place so those are my thoughts and this is just a question i'm in line consistent with what Councilmember, if Councilmember Scutchfield, if you'll allow me to make a suggestion. And it's not really a suggestion, it's a question. It's a question to procure, it's a question to Todd, it's a question to Derek. What Amy was talking about, and I suspect what Councilmember Lawless, my interpretation is that an examination of other areas would be welcomed, would be worthwhile. What prevents an expansion of the scope once the work, the engineering work or the analysis work, is initiated? Yeah, I understand, right. Having the funding approved, but once... I think you could expand the scope, but it seemed like the path that we were taking was to move the study from this area to somewhere else. If you were going to stay with the basic area that we've got in the contract, you could expand on that. But if you were going to move it to another area, that would be considered a major change, and you'd probably have to go through another RFP process and go through that selection again. Okay. Commissioner? I'm just going to echo those same comments. I mean, I think we can expand the scope. It's depending on how far we can expand that scope. Right. And that might be a consideration during if there is fund balance considerations. Is that true or not? Could it be considered at that point in time? Yes, that would be fine, Commissioner. Yes, council can consider how to use fund balance and look at the economic contingency fund. that can look at one-time projects. This would be a one-time expense. We just wouldn't want to use it for ongoing expenses like additional hiring or things that are recurring in nature. Okay. Council Member Scotchfield. I had a... Council Member Henson. I wanted to ask a question if this seems, if this is okay with Council Member Lawless. I can't believe you all tried to take this study away from the 3rd District. No, it's a terrible thing. And I'm begging you to use this money to study something that is so well developed. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Scotchfield. Thank you, Mayor. I think we the first initial reaction was the third district council member didn't know much about this and we didn't have input. And I think that was the initial reaction of most of the council members. And I don't think anything was intentional. I think it just, you know, in the course of business. But looking at this, this is economic development for third district. This might not be exactly where we want to do things in the long term. Your priority list, Council Member Lawless, might not be this district. But it's definitely included within the area that came up on the study, correct? I don't think we turn down and not do it because it can only do good things for the third district and for you. I do just ask that we have input because if something like this were coming through in 7th District and I didn't know anything about it, I'd want to have a little bit more information. And that's all. But thank you. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you. Council Member Scotchfield. Council Member Kay. Thank you, Mayor. I would agree with Council Member Scotchfield. I think the question for the council right now is do we want to fund, leave this on the docket and fund it or not. We're not in a position to reallocate the money. We're not in a position to change the scope. It's either leave it on and they get funded or take it off and there's no funds. The other comment I would like to make is just to clarify. My understanding at the moment is that the status is that it's on the docket. We have a motion to remove. If that motion passes, it gets removed. Otherwise, it simply stays on the docket. So I was about to call a question, but Council Member Clark. Thank you, Mayor. I'm sorry. I missed that. Council Member Clark, what was it? About Council Member Clark. Okay. And then. Yes. Thank you, Mayor. I would just agree with Council Member Kay. I think that's appropriate. I'd also like to apologize to my colleague here beside me because I know this was a really important issue, and I think it was probably more about process than it was about the specific location. And I apologize for my vote because I have to tell you that during most of this discussion, I was on the phone with my wife who said our house had been hit with lightning, she thinks. But the firemen were there, and they say they don't see any damage. so I wasn't really with you. I'll explain that. But anyway, I do think this is important. I think we probably need to leave it, and I probably voted the wrong way, even though I appreciate the discussion. I think the discussion's been very good for us as a council. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Council Member Clark. All right. I think Council Member Kaye was going to call the question. unless there's objection i'll ask for council member myers um thank you mayor council member k said that we're not in a position to expand this i don't think that's accurate we don't necessarily want to expand it tonight but we have heard from both the commissioner and from our purchasing agent that we can expand this so i'm not suggesting that we do that tonight but i don't want to leave it on the table that we're not in a position to do that thank you all right all right all right and then we can take a vote on the motion to remove to remove all right all in favor of this vote electronically again all in favor of the motion to remove please vote aye and all opposed no all right is everybody clear on this All right. So this allows for a second. The vote fails. All right. So this allows for a second reading, then, Madam Clerk, on number 28. Resolution number 28, a resolution accepting the response of MSK2 LLC to RFP number 25, 2014 commercial corridor study and authorizing the mayor on behalf of the urban county government to execute the consulting services agreement with MSK2 LLC to provide urban planning and economic analysis of the Euclid Avenue, Avenue of Champions, and South Limestone Corridors pursuant to the RFP at a cost not to exceed $75,000 for the Department of Planning, Preservation, and Development. All right. Thank you, Madam Clerk. Motion by Vice Mayor Gordon, second by Council Member Kaye or Farmer? Council Member Kaye. All right. Is there any discussion? All right. Madam Clerk, you may call the roll. Mr. Ford? Yes. Ms. Gordon? Aye. Ms. Henson? Yes. Mr. Kay? Yes. Mr. Lane? Yes. Ms. Lawless? Yes, on all but 28. Thank you. Ms. Massadi? Yes. Mr. Myers? Yes. Ms. Gutchfield? Yes. Mr. Stennett? Yes, ma'am. Mr. Beard? Aye. Mr. Clark? Yes, please. Mr. Ellinger? No 128, yes, and the rest. Is that it? Thank you. Mr. Farmer. Yes, I'm all. Thank you. All right. Thank you, Madam Clerk. The vote reflects passage of the motion. It allows us to move on to resolutions for a first reading. Meredith, whenever you're ready. Resolution number 29, a resolution accepting the bids of Ozark Materials, LLC, and Ennis paint incorporated establishing price contracts for traffic marking paint for the division of streets and roads number 30 a resolution accepting the bids of fowser environmental services llc and mccoy and mccoy laboratories incorporated establishing price contracts for laboratory testing for the division of water quality number 31 a resolution accepting the bid of wood connection llc in the amount of forty four thousand six hundred dollars for restroom construction at fire station number five for the division of fire and emergency services number 32 a resolution accepting the bid of Johnson Controls Incorporated, establishing a price contract for cooling tower maintenance for the Division of Facilities and Fleet Management. Number 33, a resolution accepting the bid of Melvin Jones Excavating LLC in the amount of $47,036.71 for the K-9 facility pump station wastewater system improvements and authorizing the mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute an agreement with Melvin Jones Excavating LLC related to the bid. Number 34, a resolution accepting the bid of Primus Electronics in an amount not to exceed $26,000 for digital radio service test monitor for the Division of Police. Number 35, a resolution ratifying the probationary civil service appointments of Tracy Thurman, Director, Grade 121E, 2009-96.24 biweekly in the Division of Waste Management, effective June 30, 2014. Jonathan McCoy, Vehicle and Equipment Mechanic, Grade 110N, 15.563 hourly in the Division of Streets and Roads. Michael Cook and Stevie Brewer, both Trade Supervisor, Grade 113N, 26.023 hourly in the Division of Parks and Recreation, all effective June 30, 2014, ratifying the permanent civil service appointments of David Dawkins, Microcomputer Support Specialist, Grade 113N, 19.471, hourly, in the Division of Police, effective May 4, 2014, Russell Cook, Director, Grade 122E, 3290.56, biweekly, in the Division of Revenue, effective May 12, 2014, Patricia Slaughter, Administrative Specialist, Grade 110N, 20.912, hourly, in the Division of Waste Management, effective June 15, 2014, Angela Lieber, Human Resources Analyst, Grade 115E, 2004, 2.80 biweekly in the Division of Human Resources, effective June 30, 2014. Ratifying the unclassified civil service pay increase in the office of the Urban County Council, James Waddell, Aid to Council, Grade Z02, from 1,961.52 to 2,059.61 biweekly, effective May 5, 2014. Ratifying the approved council leave for Timothy Lee, Equipment Operator Senior, Grade 109N, in the Division of Waste Management, beginning June 17, 2014 through September 16, 2014, ratifying the voluntary demotions of Erica Butler and Stephen Florence, both telecommunicator, grade 111N, 14.029, hourly in the Division of Police, effective June 16, 2014. Number 36, a resolution authorizing the Division of Human Resources to make a conditional offer to the following probationary civil service appointment. Thomas Garner, Traffic Signal Technician, senior, grade 112N, 19.058, hourly in the Division of Traffic Engineering, effective June 23, 2014. Andrea Brown, attorney, grade 117E, 1766.72 biweekly in the Department of Law, effective August 11, 2014. Charles Edwards, attorney, grade 117E, 1802.08 biweekly in the Department of Law, effective August 4, 2014. Nicole Wright, telecommunicator, grade 111N, 15.242 hourly in the Division of Police, effective June 23, 2014. Jennifer Carey, Program Manager Senior, Grade 120E, 3098.64 biweekly in the Division of Water Quality, effective August 25, 2014. Number 37, a resolution authorizing the mayor on behalf of the Irving County Government to execute agreements with Girl Scouts of Kentucky's Wilderness Road Council, Inc., 2250. Casa of Lexington, Inc., $3,700. Walnut Creek, HOA, $1,000. Lex Arts, Inc., $5,950. Praultown Neighborhood Association $575 Dunbar Advisory Council Incorporated $950 Fireworks for AT Children's Project $500 New Life Day Center $900 Fayette County Fatherhood Initiative $2,050 Imani Family Life Center Incorporated $575 Lexington Humane Society $2,000 Eastland Parkway Neighborhood Association $1,500 Faith Beads of Kentucky Incorporated $500 Iglesia Nueva Vida Incorporated $500 Pine Meadows, Cardinal Hill, Mason, Healy neighborhood $1,500. Neighbors of Bryan Station Incorporated $500. The Palomar Townhome Association Incorporated $500. The Pasadena Neighborhood Association Incorporated $1,800. Historic Woodward Heights Neighborhood Association $500. Mental Neighborhood Association $500. Aylesford Place Neighborhood Association $4,000. And the Southland Association $500 for the office of the Urban County Council at a cost not to exceed the sums stated. Number 38, a resolution authorizing the mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute an agreement with Springbok Software for Phase 2 implementation of an OLF business tax revenue collections recording and reporting system at a cost not to exceed $725,250, subject to sufficient funds being appropriated in the fiscal year 2015 budget. A resolution authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the urban county government to execute a professional services agreement with the Summerall Group LLC for assisting the Division of Community Corrections with negotiation of a new per diem for housing federal prisoners at a cost not to exceed $25,000. Number 40, a resolution authorizing the Division of Community Corrections to procure professional services from Cunningham's Consulting Services, LLC, a sole source provider to provide engineering services for the development of the RFP and bid specification book for the new boiler water softening system and plumbing modifications at the Division of Community Corrections and authorizing the mayor on behalf of the urban county government to execute an agreement with Cunningham's Consulting Services LLC at a cost not to exceed $35,756. Number 41, a resolution authorizing the mayor on behalf of the Irving County Government to accept a donation from Kentucky's Division of Emergency Management of five light towers for use of the Division of Fire and Emergency Services, the Division of Police, and the Kentucky Horse Park Police at no cost to the Irving County Government. Number 42, a resolution authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the Irving County Government to execute an amendment to agreement with the Kentucky Department for Local Government for extension of the Detention Center Energy Savings Performance Contract Project through December 31, 2015 at no cost to the urban county government. Number 43, a resolution authorizing the mayor on behalf of the urban county government to execute an agreement with EHI consultants for an Armstrong Mill West Small Area Plan at a cost not to exceed $104,775. Number 44, a resolution authorizing the mayor on behalf of the urban county government to execute an amendment to lease agreement with Denham Blythe Company, Inc., effective May 19, 2014, for property located at 100 Trade Street, Lexington, Kentucky, to amend the renewal terms and further authorizing the mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to exercise the option to renew the lease for an additional period of one year in an amount not to exceed $8,350.04 per month plus utilities. Number 45, a resolution authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute an agreement with Kentucky Community and Technical College System Fire Commission for the construction of a mutually beneficial modular facility at the Fire Training Center and Academy, 1355 Old Frankfort Pike, Lexington, Kentucky, to be primarily used as the Area 15 Office Headquarters and for classroom training purposes at no cost to the Irving County Government. A resolution authorizing and directing the Mayor on behalf of the Irving County Government to execute and submit six grant applications to the Kentucky Office of Homeland Security and to provide any additional information requested in connection with these grant applications, which grant funds are in the amount of $716,425 federal funds under the 2014 State Homeland Security Grant Program and are for the purchase of hazardous material detection and mitigation equipment, $57,500, and tactical medic personal protective equipment, $580,500 for the Division of Fire and Emergency Services and the purchase of equipment for the Hazardous Devices Unit, $22,350. the Emergency Response Unit, $24,465, and the Air Support Unit, $19,610 for the Division of Police. Number 47, a resolution authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the Irving County Government to accept a grant from the Kentucky Division of Emergency Management, which grant funds are in the amount of $555,630 federal funds and $88,901 Commonwealth of Kentucky funds, are for purchase and demolition of four residential properties on Lone Oak Drive, Clays Mill Road and Lafayette Parkway, the acceptance of which obligates the urban county government for the expenditure of $96,309 as a local match and authorizing the mayor to transfer unencumbered funds within the grant budget. Number 48, a resolution authorizing the mayor on behalf of the urban county government to execute a memorandum of understanding with Fayette County Public Schools for transportation services for the family care center's students and their children for the 2014 summer school session at a cost not to exceed $6,228. Number 49, a resolution authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the urban county government to accept a grant from the kentucky emergency management agency which grant funds are in the amount of 39 000 federal funds and 6 240 commonwealth of kentucky funds are for the purchase of a generator for the emergency operations center the acceptance of which obligates the urban county government for the expenditure of 6 760 as a local match and authorizing the mayor to transfer unencumbered funds within the grant budget number 50 a resolution authorizing the mayor on behalf of the urban county government to execute a certificate of consideration and accept a deed conveying permanent sanitary sewer and temporary construction easements from owners of record for the property located at 562 Wilderness Road for the Wilderness Road-Woodward Lane sanitary sewer project at no cost to the Urban County Government. Number 51, a resolution authorizing the mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute an agreement with American Red Cross for CPR certification cards for the Division of Police Employees at a cost not to exceed $4,081. Number 52, a resolution authorizing the mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute a memorandum of understanding with Kentucky National Guard Counter Drug Task Force for administrative, operational, and investigative support. Number 53, a resolution accepting the response of Keller, McIntyre, and Associates, LLC to RFP No. 7, 2014, Lobbying and Representation Services, be and hereby is accepted and authorizing the mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute a professional services agreement with Keller, McIntyre, and Associates, LLC to provide service to the mayor. This is related to the RFP at a cost estimated not to exceed $75,600, $6,000 per month plus reasonable expenses fiscal year 2015. Number 54, a resolution authorizing the Division of Community Corrections to purchase a superior boiler model Seneca 13X-1250 from Bluegrass Hydronics and Pump LLC, a sole source provider, and authorizing the mayor on behalf of the Irby County Government to execute any necessary agreement with Bluegrass Hydronics and Pump LLC related to the procurement at a cost not to exceed $80,000. Number 55, a resolution authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute an amendment to agreement with the Kentucky Emergency Management Agency for extension of the Versailles Road Campus Storm Shelter Project through June 30, 2016 at no cost to the Urban County Government. Number 56, a resolution approving and authorizing an assistance agreement between the Lexington Fayette Urban County Government and the Kentucky Infrastructure Authority to provide $1,930,000 of loan funds for the Blue Sky Wastewater Treatment Plant Acquisition and Elimination Project. Number 57, a resolution authorizing the mayor on behalf of the urban county government to execute a letter of agreement with the Lexington Air Traffic Control Tower for designation of discrete transponder codes. Number 58, a resolution authorizing the Division of Traffic Engineering pursuant to Code of Ordinances Section 1886 to install multi-way stop controls at the intersection of South Point Drive and St. Elias Lane. Number 59, a resolution amending resolution number 296-2014 to increase the allocation for YMCA of Central Kentucky $2,000 and to delete the allocation to the Aviation Museum of Kentucky $1,000 at a cost not to exceed the sum stated. Number 60, a resolution authorizing the mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute agreements with Girl Scouts of Kentucky's Wilderness Road Council Incorporated $350, The Southland Association, $500. WGPL Neighborhood Association, $3,000. Carnegie Center, $250. Baby Health Services Incorporated, $300. Movable Feast Lexington Incorporated, $1,000. Big Brothers Big Sisters of the Bluegrass Incorporated, $225. Bluegrass Technology Center Incorporated, $350. YMCA of Central Kentucky, $400. Hope Center Incorporated, $450. The Nest, $300. Southern Heights Neighborhood Association, $400. Bellawood Neighborhood Association Incorporated, $200. Lexington Leadership Foundation $500 Squires PTA $500 Lexington Humane Society $2,000 Central Kentucky Radio Eye $1,050 Lex Arts Incorporated $1,500 and Victory Christian Church $1,250 for the Office of the Urban County Council at a cost not to exceed the sum stated. A resolution authorizing the Mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute a contract for services with Group CJ LLC for Stormwater Public Outreach and Education for the Division of Environmental Policy at a cost not to exceed $230,000 fiscal year 2015. Number 62, a resolution authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute a home agreement with Parkside Development Group 2, LLLP, for use of home funds for construction of affordable rental housing at 1052 to 1056 Cross Keys Road at a cost not to exceed $400,000. Number 63, a resolution authorizing the mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute a lease termination agreement with Sprint Spectrum LP contract 3802, Resolution 15497 for space used for cellular equipment on 200 East Main Rooftop, resolving the dispute over the validity of a lease extension. Number 64, a resolution authorizing the mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute an agreement awarding a Class A neighborhood incentive grant to Herod Hills Neighborhood Association Incorporated for stormwater quality projects at a cost not to exceed $3,530. Number 65, a resolution authorizing the Division of Water Quality on behalf of the Urban County Government to authorize and obtain repair services for LFUCG Fleet Vehicle Number 08295, 2008 International Straight Truck Vector Unit by Jack Toney Companies Incorporated, a sole source provider, at a cost not to exceed $48,496.08. Number 66, a resolution authorizing and directing the Mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute an agreement with U.S. Geological Survey for the continuing and ongoing maintenance and operation of existing stream flow and precipitation gauges at a cost not to exceed $108,480 fiscal year 2015. Number 67, a resolution authorizing the mayor on behalf of the urban county government to accept the proposals for fiscal year 2015 for excess liability insurance from and to execute any necessary contracts and documents on behalf of the urban county government with the following insurance companies and or their respective broker, J. Smith, Lanier & Company, Lexington, Powell, Walton, Millward. Aviation from Old Republic Insurance at a cost not to exceed $8,772.11. General Auto, Public Officials, Law Enforcement, and Professional from American Alternative Insurance, Munich RE, at a cost not to exceed $513,900. Property from Affiliated Factory Mutual FM at a cost not to exceed $323,643.04. Cyber from National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania at a cost not to exceed $28,614 Pollution from AIG Specialty Insurance Company at a cost not to exceed $19,954.28 and workers' compensation from Safety National Casualty Corporation at a cost not to exceed $299,778 all subject to sufficient funds being appropriated Number 67 I just did that one. Number 68, a resolution authorizing the mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute a certificate of consideration and accept a deed conveying permanent sanitary sewer and temporary construction easements from owners of record for the property located at 2143 Wilderness Court for the Wilderness Road Woodward Lane sanitary sewer project at no cost to the Urban County Government. Number 69, a resolution authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute an amendment to agreement with Computer Sciences Corporation for renewal of the Riskmaster Maintenance Agreement at a cost not to exceed $29,911.30. Number 70, a resolution authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute a release of easement releasing a storm easement on property located at 2349 and 2369 Richmond Road. All right. Thank you, Madam Clerk. Are there any motions for walk-ons? Council Member Ellinger. I have a suspension. I don't have a walk-on. Well, let's see. Have we got any walk-ons first? No walk-ons? All right, then we'll take suspensions. All right, Council Member Ellinger. Thank you, Mayor. At the request of the administration, I make a motion that we suspend the rules and give second reading to number 38. Second. All right, motion by Council Member Ellinger and second by Council Member Myers on number 38 to suspend the rules and get a second read. Is there any discussion on the motion? Then we take a vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Council Member Myers. Thank you, Mayor. At the request of the administration, I move to suspend the rules and give second reading to number 42, 43, and 46. Thank you. Second. All right, motion by Council Member Myers to suspend the rules and give a second reading to 42, 43, and 46. Second 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. Vice Mayor Gordon. Thank you, Mayor. I move to suspend the rules and give second reading to number 37 and number 59 and 60. Those are all neighborhood funds. Motion by Vice Mayor Gordon, second by Council Member Lawless on 37, 59, and 60 to suspend for a second read. Is there any discussion on the motion? All right. Hearing none, then we take a vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Council Member Scutchfield. Thank you, Mayor. Motion to suspend the rules and give second reading to number 67. Motion by Council Member Scutchfield, second by Council Member Myers on number 67 to suspend for a second read. Is there any discussion? Hearing none, then we can take a vote. All in favor, please say aye. aye opposed no motion carries council member ford thank you mayor i move to suspend the rules and give second reading to resolution 48 summer program has started at the family care center so moved motion back council member ford second by vice mayor gorton on number 48 for suspension and second reading is there any discussion hearing none we can take a vote all in favor please say aye Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Thank you, Mayor. Yep. Thank you, sir. Council Member Lane. I'll make a motion to suspend the rules and request a second reading for item number 35 under resolutions. Second. Motion by Council Member Lane, second by Council Member Farmer for suspension on number 35 for a second read. Is there any discussion? Hearing none, we can vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Council Member Clark. Thank you, Mayor. I move to suspend the rules and request second reading for numbers 36 and 69. So move. Second. Motion by Council Member Clark, second by Council Member Ellinger on number 36? 36. 36 and 69. Right. Is there any discussion? Hearing none, we can vote. All in favor, please say aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. I think that's all the motions to suspend. Is there more? It's not showing up. All right. Council Member Lawless and then Council Member Beard. I'd like to suspend the rules and give a third reading to number 28. That died for like a second. There you go. Council Member Beard. Thank you, Mayor. I can't touch that. I move to suspend the rules and give second reading to number 58. motion by councilor beard to suspend on numbers 50 to suspend give a second read for on number 58 second by who was it councilor myers yes is there any discussion hearing none we can vote all in favor please say aye aye opposed no motion carries councilman scutchefield are you back up again no all right it won't it won't delete all right there we go all right so that's it looks like it Madam Clerk, did you get those? I got 35, 36, 38, 42, 43, 46, 48, 37. I forgot 37. 59, 58, 58, 59, 60, 67, 69. Did you get 35? Yeah, 35. Yeah, 35. You want to do 52, George? Yes, sir. We've got another one. Could I spend the rule? Yes, sir. Number 52. Yes, sir. Motion by Council Member Myers on 52 for suspension. Second. Agreed. Second by Council Member Ellinger. Any discussion? All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. All right, Meredith, whenever you're ready, you've got a lot of reading to do. All righty. Number 35, a resolution ratifying the probationary civil service appointments of Tracy Thurman, Director, Grade 121E, 2009-96.24, biweekly in the Division of Waste Management, effective June 30, 2014. Jonathan McCoy, Vehicle and Equipment Mechanic, Grade 110N, 15.563 hourly in the Division of Streets and Roads. Michael Cook and Stevie Brewer, both Trade Supervisor, Grade 113N, 26.023 hourly in the Division of Parks and Recreation, all effective June 30, 2014. Ratifying the Permanent Civil Service appointments of David Dawkins, Microcomputer Support Specialist, Grade 113N, 19.471 hourly in the Division of Police, effective May 4, 2014. Russell Cook, Director, Grade 122E, 3290.56 biweekly in the Division of Revenue, effective May 12, 2014. Patricia Slaughter, Administrative Specialist, Grade 110N, 20.912 hourly in the Division of Waste Management, effective June 15, 2014. Angela Lieber, Human Resources Analyst, Grade 115E, 20402.80 biweekly in the Division of Human Resources, effective June 30, 2014. ratifying the unclassified civil service pay increase in the office of the urban county council james waddell aid to council grade z02 from 10961.52 to 2059.61 bi-weekly effective may 5th 2014 ratifying the approved council leave for timothy lee equipment operator senior grade 109 n in the division of waste management beginning june 17th 2014 through september 16th 2014 ratifying the voluntary demotions of erica butler and stephen florence both telecommunicator grade 111N, 14.029, hourly in the Division of Police, effective June 16, 2014. Number 36. A resolution authorizing the Division of Human Resources to make a conditional offer to the following probationary civil service appointment. Thomas Garner, Traffic Signal Technician, Senior, Grade 112N, 19.058, hourly in the Division of Traffic Engineering, effective June 23, 2014. Andrea Brown, attorney, grade 117E, 1066.72 biweekly in the Department of Law, effective August 11, 2014. Charles Edwards, attorney, grade 117E, 10802.08 biweekly in the Department of Law, effective August 4, 2014. Nicole Wright, telecommunicator, grade 111N, 15.242 hourly in the Division of Police, effective June 23, 2014. Jennifer Carey, Program Manager Senior, Grade 120E, 3098.64 biweekly in the Division of Water Quality, effective August 25, 2014. Number 37, a resolution authorizing the mayor on behalf of the Irving County Government to execute agreements with Girl Scouts of Kentucky's Wilderness Road Council, Inc., $2,250. Casa of Lexington, Inc., $3,700. Walnut Creek HOA, $1,000. LexArts, Inc., $5,950. Prawl Town Neighborhood Association $575 Dunbar Advisory Council Incorporated $950 Fireworks for AT Children's Project $500 New Life Day Center $900 Fayette County Fatherhood Initiative $2,050 Imani Family Life Center Incorporated $575 Lexington Humane Society $2,000 Eastland Parkway Neighborhood Association $1,500 Faith Beads of Kentucky Incorporated $500 Iglesia Nueva Vita Incorporated $500 Pine Meadows, Cardinal Hill, Mason Hadley Neighborhood $1,500. Neighbors of Bryan Station Incorporated, $500. The Palomar Town Home Association Incorporated, $500. The Pasadena Neighborhood Association Incorporated, $1,800. Historic Woodward Heights Neighborhood Association, $500. Mental Neighborhood Association, $500. Aylesford Place Neighborhood Association, $4,000. And the Southland Association, $500 for the office of the Urban County Council at a cost not to exceed the sum stated. Number 38, a resolution authorizing the mayor on behalf of the urban county government to execute an agreement with springbook springbrook software for phase two implementation of an olf business tax revenue collections recording and reporting system at a cost not to exceed seven hundred and twenty five thousand two hundred and fifty dollars subject to sufficient funds being appropriated in the fiscal year 2015 budget number 42 a resolution authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the urban county government to execute an amendment to agreement with the Kentucky Department for Local Government for extension of the Detention Center Energy Savings Performance Contract Project through December 31, 2015 at no cost to the Urban County Government. Number 43, a resolution authorizing the mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute an agreement with EHI Consultants for an Armstrong Mill West Small Area Plan at a cost not to exceed $104,775. Number 46, a resolution authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the urban county government to execute and submit six grant applications to the Kentucky Office of Homeland Security and to provide any additional information requested in connection with these grant applications, which grant funds are in the amount of $716,425 federal funds under the 2014 State Homeland Security Grant Program and are for the purchase of hazardous material, detection, and mitigation equipment, $57,500, tactical medical personnel protective equipment, $580,500 for the Division of Fire and Emergency Services, and the purchase of equipment for the Hazardous Devices Unit, $22,350, the Emergency Response Unit, $24,465, and the Air Support Unit, $19,610 for the Division of Police. Number 48. A resolution authorizing the mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute a Memorandum of Understanding with Fayette County Public Schools for Transportation Services for the Fayette Care Center's students and their children for the 2014 summer school session at a cost not to exceed $6,228. Number 52. A resolution authorizing the mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute a memorandum of understanding with Kentucky National Guard Counter-Drug Task Force for administrative, operational, and investigative support. Number 58. A resolution authorizing the Division of Traffic Engineering pursuant to Code of Ordinances Section 1886 to install multiway stop controls at the intersection of South Point Drive and St. Elias Lane. Number 59, a resolution amending Resolution 296-2014 to increase the allocation for YMCA of Central Kentucky $2,000 and to delete the allocation to the Aviation Museum of Kentucky $1,000 at a cost not to exceed the sum stated. Number 60, a resolution authorizing the mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute agreements with Girl Scouts of Kentucky's Wilderness Road Council, Incorporated, $350. The Southland Association, $500. WGPL Neighborhood Association, $3,000. Carnegie Center, $250. Baby Health Services, Incorporated, $300. Movable Feast Lexington, Incorporated, $1,000. Big Brothers Big Sisters of the Bluegrass, Incorporated, $225. Bluegrass Technology Center, Incorporated, $350. YMCA of Central Kentucky, $400. Hope Center, Incorporated, $450. The Nest, $300. Southern Heights Neighborhood Association, $400. Bella Wood Neighborhood Association, Incorporated, $200. Lexington Leadership Foundation, $500. Squires PTA, $500. Lexington Humane Society, $2,000. Central Kentucky Radio Eye, $1,050. LexArts Incorporated, $1,500. And Victory Christian Church, $1,250 for the Office of the Urban County Council at a cost not to exceed the sum as stated. Number 67. A resolution authorizing the mayor on behalf of the Irving County Government to accept the proposals for fiscal year 2015 for excess liability insurance from and to execute any necessary contracts and documents on behalf of the Irving County Government with the following insurance companies and or their respective broker, J. Smith Lanier & Company, Lexington Powell Walton Millward. Aviation from Old Republic Insurance at a cost not to exceed $8,772.11. General Auto, Public Officials, Law Enforcement, and Professional from American Alternative Insurance, Munich RE at a cost not to exceed $513,900. Property from Affiliated Factory Mutual FM at a cost not to exceed $323,643.04. Cyber from National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania at a cost not to exceed $28,614. Pollution from AIG Specialty Insurance Company at a cost not to exceed $19,954.28 and workers' compensation from Safety National Casualty Corporation at a cost not to exceed $299,778 all subject to sufficient funds being appropriated. Number 69. A resolution authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the Irma County Government to execute an amendment to agreement with Computer Sciences Corporation for renewal of the risk master maintenance agreement at a cost not to exceed twenty nine thousand nine hundred and eleven dollars and thirty cents motion approved motion to approve by councilman ellinger second by council member stennett is there any discussion on the motion all right hearing none then madam clerk when you're ready please call the roll Mr. Ford? I abstain on number 35. Yes on all the rest. Thank you. Ms. Gorton? Aye. Ms. Henson? Yes. Mr. K? Yes. Mr. Lane? Yes. Ms. Lawless? Yes. Ms. Massadi? Absent. Mr. Myers? Yes, ma'am. Yes, ma'am. Ms. Gutchfield? Yes. Mr. Stennett? Yes, ma'am. Mr. Beard? Aye. Mr. Clark? Yes. Mr. Ellinger? Yes. And Mr. Farmer? Yes, I'll all agree. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Clerk. The vote reflects passage of the motion and allows us to move on to communications. Move to approve. Motion by Councilman Ellinger, second by Councilman Myers. Is there any discussion? All right. Hearing none, then we can vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Next is communications for information only. And next are announcements. The floor is available for announcements from council members. Any council members have an announcement? Council Member Stenet. Thank you, Mayor. In light of our discussion earlier in regards to the budget and finance meeting, I'll go ahead and move to cancel the July 8th environmental quality meeting. that's scheduled for 11 a.m. because we have one actually Tuesday and move to cancel that and I think Council Member Hellinger is willing to schedule a budget and finance meeting for July 8th at 11 a.m. So moved. All right. Motion by Council Member Beard. Is there any discussion on the motion? I just want to ask a question. Are you including that or do you want me to make a motion for budget and finance? Because I'll do that after this. Yeah, you'll do that after. Okay, sure. This is just a big Council Environmental Quality. All right. Vice Mayor Gorton. Just a comment. Because I can't be here at that meeting, I would like the Council to consider voting this down and having it in August like we originally talked. All right. Is there any further discussion on the motion? Council Member Lawless. I have the same situation as Vice Mayor Gorton. All right. Council Member Ford. Thank you, Mayor. Would it be possible, I would pose the question, would it be amenable, Council Member Stenick, you brought forth the motion to carry this on until August to allow greater notice for Council Members and to allow everybody to be there. That's the last day of session before break. I'd make a motion to amend for the August meeting, Mayor. All right. The motion, let me clarify the motion on the floor. I don't think you can amend it because it's to cancel the environmental quality meeting. That's all it is. Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Time out, time out, time out. And Councilman Ellinger was going to follow up with scheduling the budget and finance, if he so choose, because I can't schedule a budget and finance meeting. My motion is simply just to cancel the environmental quality meeting for July 8th at 11 a.m. So moved. Thanks. All right. Is it clear? Wait a minute. Council Member, Vice Mayor Gordon. So I have a question then. If we, so there's no business to be heard in July. We have a meeting too. So it's not, okay. So it's not connected to a potential budget finance meeting. No, but if Council Member Unger wanted to do so, he could. Thank you. Okay. So any further discussion on, all right, Council Member Ford, you're going to. With that understanding, Mayor, I kindly remove my motion to amend. All right. Was there a second or not? Vice Mayor Gordon's second, I think. Okay. So that's all right. Yep. All right. So the motion to amend has been rescinded. Is there any further discussion on the motion? All right. We can vote then. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Thank you, Mayor. Yes, sir. Council Member, who's next? Council Member Ellinger. Thank you, Mayor. In light of the environmental quality being canceled on July 8th, I'll make the motion, but I understand if council members can't, we'll just vote it down. But I know we talked about trying to look at this information and also we have an opportunity before we go on break to hear where we stand for our last financials that the Commissioner of Finance could come to us. So I'll make a motion that we, I see his head pop up. So I'll make a motion that we schedule a budget finance meeting at 11 o'clock on July 8th. So moved. Motion by Councilor Ellinger, seconded by Councilor Myers. We're back to discussion on the motion. Any discussion on this motion? Councilor Vice Mayor Gordon, this is what you spoke about earlier. This is what I need to say. since there is not a deadline on this financial information, and now we know that more than one council member cannot be here on July the 8th, I would respectfully ask you to vote this down and consider having it in August at our next regular budget and finance meeting. Thank you. All right. Council Member Ford. Thank you, Mayor. I'm going to bring forth an amendment and I'll explain the amendment. In large part, it has to do with what Vice Mayor Gordon just brought up in regards to not having the availability of the full council, which is important. Monday was scheduled to be a budget and finance meeting. We could have talked about anything financially, I would say, in that meeting if we so chose to have that meeting on Monday. It was already scheduled. With that said, I do agree with Vice Mayor Gordon. Since we decided not to have it on Monday, since the mayor has already announced the suspension of the project, it is not by time, by essence of time, necessary to have it on July 8th. So I'll make a motion, Mayor, to amend the motion to schedule that budget and finance meeting. Excuse me, Mayor. I apologize. I will echo Vice Mayor Gordon's in support to vote the motion to call a special meeting down. Thank you, Mayor. All right. Councilor Myers. So I guess my question would be is everybody going to be here on August 26th? Do you want to ask for a show of hands on that? I guess a show of hands if you can't be there. So the question would be is anyone not able to attend a meeting on what date? The 26th. August 26th. August 26th. Thank you, Mayor. Doesn't look like it. Okay. All right. So ready to vote? All right. All in favor of the motion, please say aye. All opposed? Well, yeah, just all opposed. All right. All right. Pardon me. All right. I can withdraw on it. All right. The motion. Thank you. Motion does not pass. All right. Motion does not pass. All right. Any further, any other announcements, council members? All right. Then that allows us to move to public. Oh, oh. Folks. Vice mayor. in the heat of the budget and finance i almost forgot um so i think technically if we're going to change the time of a meeting we need to make that motion and vote on it and i believe the next week the environmental quality um council member farmer was wanting to meet at one o'clock correct instead of 11 o'clock because of the cancellation of the other meeting Oh, I'm so sorry. Councilmember Stinnett. You see, I got all wrapped up in the B&F issue. So I move, if it's okay, I think you had agreed to move it to one. I move to move the environmental quality meeting on June 24th to 1 o'clock p.m. Second. Okay, motion by Vice Mayor Gorton to move the environmental quality meeting to 1 o'clock on what date? On what date? On Tuesday, June 24th. All right. Is there any discussion on that motion? Okay. All in favor then, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. You back up. Council Member Ellinger. Thank you, Mayor. I just wanted to wish Councilmember Henson a happy birthday tomorrow. Happy birthday. Happy birthday. Did you have a birthday last week? That's the present I'm giving you. I'm not going to say anything. Didn't you have a birthday last week? Thank you. Don't tell anybody. The vice mayor. They had a birthday last week, too. Our birthdays are very close together. Happy birthday. I think you should sing, mayor. You don't want that. But it's the spirit. No, no, no, no, no. All right. Any further announcements? All right, then. Floor is available for public comments. Mr. Bernard McCarthy. Your Honor, members of the Council, for the record, my name is Bernard McCarthy. My address is 515 Harry Street. While resolution number 21 is progress, I will be glad to see those three intersections on Manowar improved any way that they can be. But I think that a fourth intersection on Manowar also needs improvement within the next few years. If you can ever find the money to do so, the Manowar-Sir Barton-Pleasant Ridge intersection, And I say this because it's very frustrating when you have a situation where through movement and left turns have to share a lane. Like you've got one lane exclusively left turns, one exclusively straight through, but this lane in the middle is shared between those two. It would be better to add another lane and separate those movements having to share a lane. It's also frustrating that the exclusively through lane from Servarton heading to Pleasant Ridge across Manowar only continues one block past Manowar and then becomes a right-turn-only lane at that next intersection. Really, it should continue at least one more block beyond where it does now. Thank you. Thank you. Bernard. Mr. Bill Wheeler, is Bill still here? Yes. Yes, sir. Welcome. Can I get rid of me? That's all. No, we were happy to see you again. Yes, sir. Name Bill Wheeler, address Jessalyn Drive. I wish to continue a dialogue that was started Tuesday, and I want to pose a question to the Commissioner of Law. On Tuesday, the issue that I brought up was the adoption of a property tax that exceeded the 4% state limitation. The commissioner of law said that the administrative measures to approve that tax increase were done appropriately, done appropriately. I wish to ask the commissioner of law if that meant that the publication of the notice was made within seven days, which would have meant that the process was done appropriately. And that would mean that my investigation of this issue was totally incorrect. The commissioner of law happens to be just to your left there, over your shoulder. Mayor, I think we covered this at the last meeting, and my answer wouldn't change. I think it was done appropriately. I think Mr. Wheeler and I have had several conversations about it, but I don't believe this is probably the forum for us to converse about it. Okay. Well, I object to that. I don't see any reason that an employee of that government cannot answer a question posed by a citizen in the public comment session. I ask again, if it was done appropriately, does that mean that the publication of the notice as prescribed by state law was made? Mayor, since Mr. Wheeler at some points in time has suggested that he might be seeking legal advice on this issue, I would just suggest that you may want to do that, and we could deal with that matter through the legal process. So apparently a question that asks for either a yes or no answer will not be answered. Thank you, Mr. Wheeler. Thanks, Bill, for joining us again tonight and everyone else for joining us tonight. it appears that that's all for public comment. Amy, you had signed. I didn't know whether you had already spoken to the issue that you were here for or not. I believe I did, and I'm grateful for having been called to speak before you when I need the invitation of council members to do so. I'm very glad that the Armstrong Mill-Gainesway small area plan got two readings tonight and is on its legs and running after two years' wait. And I thank you for listening to me on the question of the commercial study, commercial corridor study. I'm glad you had an opportunity, the 14 council members present, to discuss it with one another for probably the better part of an hour. Maybe it will be a better plan for that, better study. I only regret that you haven't had the opportunity to discuss it with the citizens, to hear the citizens' comments, or to discuss it with the elected officials in your several boards and commissions that could well have had valuable input. Thank you very much for listening. Thank you, Amy. All right. And that's all who signed up for public comment tonight, which allows me to take a motion for adjournment. motion by Council Member Stenney, second by Council Member Ellinger. Unless there's objection, we will stand adjourned. Thank you. I'm out. I don't believe in goodbye And I believe it takes time To build something strong It won't take long For you to believe in me Just look in my eyes I don't believe in goodbye I don't believe in goodbye I don't believe in goodbye I don't believe in goodbye I don't believe in goodbye I don't believe in goodbye Thank you.