The Council members, we're going to go ahead and convene our meeting. Okay, this is what this is for. That's what this is for. Today is November 18th. This is the council work session, and we're going to go ahead and convene our meeting. And the first item on our agenda is public comment for issues on the agenda. And Mr. Mundy says there are no signees. Second is rezonings and docket approval. We have a work copy of a docket. Do I hear motion? Motion approved. Second. Okay. Is there any discussion about the motion to approve the work copy of the docket? All right. Are there any walk-ons to the docket? Councilmember Farmer. I have two walk-ons, Vice Mayor. First is, I move to place on the docket a resolution authorizing and directing the mayor to execute change order number three to the contract with Marilla Design and Construction LLC for the replacement senior citizen center construction project, increasing the contract by the sum of $102,869. From $8,882,900 to $8,895,769, so moved. Second. I have a motion from Council Member Farmer. Second from Council Member Kay. To add that to the docket, Is there any discussion? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? That motion passes. Council Member Farmer. Thank you on that and one more. I move to place on the docket for the November 20, 2014 council meeting a resolution authorizing the mayor on behalf of the Irvin County government to execute an asset purchase and sale agreement with Kentucky Utilities Company to purchase the public Granville street lights and related equipment and facilities in the downtown area at a cost not to exceed $475,000. So moved. Motion by Councilmember Farmer, second by Councilmember Acres to walk that item onto the docket. Is there any discussion about the motion? I see none. All those in favor say aye. Anyone opposed? Okay, that motion passes. Thank you, ma'am. You're welcome. Councilmember Myers, did you have a walk-on? Yes, ma'am. Councilmembers, you've had a motion in your mailboxes today. A while back, we did an NDF for Tate Creek High School, and it was for a celebration event that was canceled due to weather, and it could not be rescheduled. And so in the interim time, there was a report done on WKYT TV about football helmets that needed to be replaced for high schools in Kentucky. And so what I'd like to do is put a motion on to repurpose the NDF that we gave them for that event and allow them to use that to replace five football helmets. And so I moved to place on the docket for the November 20th council meeting under first reading of resolutions, a resolution amending the NDF agreement with Tate's Creek High School, PTSA, changing the use of the allocation from Tate's Creek Campus Celebration to the purchase of five football helmets with a five-star rating for the Virginia Tech Star Rating System. The change in the purpose of the allocation is being made on the condition that the Tate Creek High School football team discontinues the use of and replaces at least five helmets that are rated as having two or less stars per that same system. If this condition is not agreed to, then the money previously allocated shall be returned to Umbry County government. So moved. I have a motion by Council Member Myers, second by Council Member Ellinger, to walk that onto the docket. Are there any questions or discussion? Okay, seeing none, all in favor, please say aye. Anyone opposed? That motion passes. Thank you, Vice Mayor. You're welcome. Are there other motions to walk on? Okay, the motion on the floor then is to approve the docket. Councilmember Akers. I'm so sorry. It's okay. I move to place on the docket a resolution, I think I say this now, authorizing the mayor on behalf of the urban county government to execute an agreement with Melrose Oak Park Neighborhood Association in the amount of $300 for the office of the urban county council at a cost not to exceed the sum stated. So moved. Is that right? Is that on the NDF motion? Is it already included in the NDF? It is not included. It is not. Okay. Okay. Then maybe I have another motion then. Okay. When we do under continuing business item A, that would probably be the place to put that. Okay. Then this one I'll make. So did you want to withdraw that motion? I will withdraw that motion. Okay. Does the seconder withdraw? Yes. Was there? Yes. Thank you. Okay. Go ahead. Now, I move to place on the docket for the Thursday, November 20, 2014 Council meeting, a resolution authorizing and directing the Division of Traffic Engineering, pursuant to Code of Ordinances Section 1886, to install multi-way stop controls at the intersection of Mark Avenue and Kathy Lane. So moved. There's a motion by Councilmember Akers, second by Councilmember Henson. Is there any question or discussion? Councilmember Farmer, did you have a question? So staff recommended this? Yes, sir. Thank you. Any other questions or discussion? Seeing none, all those in favor say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? Okay, that motion passes. Is there anything else for the docket? Okay, all those in favor of approving the docket, please say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? That motion passes. We're on the summary. Do I hear motion? Second. Motion by Councilmember Farmer, second by Councilmember Massadi to approve the summary. Are there any questions or discussion about the summary, pages 1 through 3? Seeing none, all those in favor say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? That motion passes. Budget amendments, pages 7 and 8. Moved, approved. Second. Councilmember Ellinger moves to approve. Councilmember Beard seconds. the motion are there any questions about budget amendments or comments all those in favor say aye anyone opposed that motion passes new business do i hear a motion motion by council member farmer second by council member scutchfield to approve new business which is on pages 9 through 21. And it looks like we have some questions. Council Member Lane. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Item G, is there someone who could speak to that? Has to do with the change order for the courthouse structural study. Yeah, I presume this is a study we've been talking about that we're going to get in January? This is in regard directly to inspecting all the exterior areas of the old courthouse. It's for the rental office special lift. I think it's 120-footer that a consultant needed at a time to reach all the different locations, the roof and everything, the rotunda, to identify any structural issues, water infiltration, and so forth. It's more like a, it became a change order simply because they did not know at that point what would be needed. So that's why we have it done. Well, I don't have a problem with the amount or the change order. The interest to me was this was their courthouse structural study, so we'll be getting that report. Is that the one you're playing? That was the first step. That's correct. Thank you, sir. Thank you. Councilmember Farmer thank you vice mayor minus on item e page 14 the water utility franchise legal services where the Department of Law is requesting approval to hire Miller Wells PLC who have experience in it complex contract negotiations so what's the length of their contract if we approve this it is one year or whenever the franchise is negotiated, whichever comes later. And when does the franchise run out right now? May of 2015. So this coming May. All right, and so did we audition around and come up with these folks as the best to help us? We did a legal RFQ in which we asked for specialties from different law firms and what their expertises were, and we went through those and reviewed them, and yes, we negotiated with them. So is this similar to folks who would have used for, I guess we just did the gas one, didn't we? What we did on the gas one, we used outside experts that were specialized in auditing. So we've used outside expertise, I think, in all of our franchise negotiations. Some of it's been legal. Some of it's been outside auditor types. So what sort of instruction would this vendor have in terms of getting this job done in a timely manner? because I'm interested in us getting this done in a timely manner. Well, the contract is capped at $45,000, and, you know, I think we would urge them to go ahead and start, of course, trying to get this done. You know, I think there's an incentive with the capping of the contract with that amount to go ahead and get it done, and it's up to that amount, so it's not the full amount if they can get it done sooner. I think generally speaking, we have a good template or two to work from, from some recent other successes. I'm just, I'm mindful of when this runs out, and I just, we've just gone through a really long period of time where we had to negotiate and renegotiate over the cable franchise in several forms. This needs to be taken care of in a timely manner before this runs out. And if there's other help you need from me or this council or the next council, please don't hesitate because this needs to get done. Well, I'm sure I think the administration is interested in compiling a team of council members, maybe community members, you know, to become a negotiating team. So I'm sure that, you know, I think Jamie was working on that before he left and will be working on that when he gets back. Just know I remain highly interested in making you all motivated. Well, we appreciate that. Thank you. Thank you, Vice Mayor. You're welcome, Commissioner. There may be other questions about this. Council Member Stenet. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Indeed, on letter E. So how many RFP respondents did you have? We actually did, I want to say about 14 on the legal one. And this firm has expertise in dealing with water franchises? Is that why we selected them? We did not specifically denote it to water, but we just said franchises because we knew we had electric, gas, cable, all of them. So it was on franchise expertise. So would we use them on other ones, I assume? Or why didn't we? Because I know this firm, we recently used them on CenterPoint. So I'm trying to get from CenterPoint negotiations to water franchise. And I don't see the correlation legally. Well, we needed a firm that would have inside expertise on both franchise negotiations and dealing with the PSC. And David Kaplan, who's with their firm, used to work at the Attorney General's office and has both knowledge about the PSC and is within that firm. So you'd be looking for somebody who not only has franchise complex contract negotiations but also understands what we can do with our local franchise and what we can't touch that the PSC has jurisdiction over. Okay, so it's not the attorney you named here in item letter E. It's someone else. The firm itself, I mean, we would use the expertise of the whole firm. Mason Miller would be the primary one, but there's other expertise in the firm we would call upon. Okay, very good. Thank you. Councilmember Massadi. Thank you, Janet. I don't know if you can answer this question or not, but because of this, the idea of the water franchise being renegotiated had such interest in the past. Can you give us any kind of indication what some of the points that may be discussed are within the franchise so the public at least is aware of this? I can tell you generally some of the things that we've done with other franchises, and that would apply to water as well. One of the terms that's always at issue would be how do you define gross revenues? That's one that always we did that with the electric and gas utilities because you have to come to an understanding of what the franchise fee will be based upon. The franchise fee itself right now it's at 3%. Some of the, I believe the gas and electric, they're now at 4%, so we would be negotiating what the franchise fee would be. Our permitting requirements and how those affect our right of ways and whether we incorporate that into the franchise or not. How long a term of franchise we want to do, that's another issue. And we always kind of work with that. Those are the ones that generically apply to franchises. and there might be other things specific to a water franchise that we would hone in on at that time. I know the last time it was negotiated there were some concerns about Jacobson Park and so forth, and I just wondered if that would still be on the table. With the settlement that was done as part of the condemnation proceeding, the Jacobson Park issue... It's kind of a moot point, isn't it? Yeah, right now, yeah, it is. I mean, so I think that particular aspect wouldn't be a part of this unless, you know, something came up that I'm not aware of. Is there anything else that the citizens need to be aware of? Well, I think when the team is finalized and put together, that's what we'd be looking for the citizen input on, you know, and whatever. And I suspect that we'd be looking for that type of input and would take that from the council as well on what their citizens are interested in. Very good. Thank you. Council Member Lane. Yeah, Commissioner, is Mason Miller, is he the attorney that was representing the city in the negotiations with the web companies on issuing the bond for the TIF? Yes, well, that's correct. We also had Jim Parsons, and both of them worked on different aspects of that. But, yes, that's correct. Okay. Okay. Well, I'm a negotiator of some, too. And he came across a lot of hard-nosed in the negotiations. So I hope that won't be an issue when it comes to negotiating with the water company. Thank you. Councilmember Farmer. You know, if you don't have something good to say, you probably shouldn't say anything at all. Uh-oh. Your time may be up. I think my time may be up. I don't know. This is who rose to the top in your RFQ? Or LR? RFQ or whatever it is? Yes. I think, you know, and this is my own opinion on things, so I, you know, but I think in the cable franchise negotiations, you don't need a shrinking ballot in these negotiations. And you can do it in a way that's professional, but I don't, I think the citizens and the council deserve somebody that's going to fight for the citizens in the best way that we can in the franchise document, knowing the limitations that the Public Service Commission and the courts have put on localities to regulate in this area. Well, I don't doubt that we have the same outcome in mind. I'm just not sure we want to take the same vehicle to get there. Well, there's always an element of subjectivity in who's determined to be a negotiator for things. And I think that's the reason why it's important to have council members on the team so that if they think, you know, we're going a little too far in this area or we're not going far enough in this area, that that's a way to balance that. I may remain unconvinced, but we'll have a private conversation about it. Thank you. Councilmember Kay. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Can you help us understand what, and the public too, what the options are for government in renegotiating this franchise? Well, I think as Council Member Massadi, if I understand your question, there are some terms that are common to franchises. There are some things that the government cannot regulate. We cannot regulate rates. The Public Service Commission is in charge of that. They have primary jurisdiction over utility rates and services. So issues regarding rates, you know, the public needs to understand, you know, in this franchise we're not going to be governing how high people's water bills are directly. What we can do is put, you know, protections in the franchise relating to the term of the franchise, the franchise fees, and that type of thing. Does that answer your question? It answers part of my question. In negotiation, we have the option of renewing a franchise under certain terms. Do we have the option of denying a franchise or of soliciting other interest in a franchise? Well, the franchise will be publicly bid. What we've done in the cable franchise, which would be similar to what we would do here, is you negotiate a franchise for all providers of that particular service, And then once you feel like you have a good document, then it's put out for bid for anybody to bid on, and it would be a non-exclusive franchise. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Vice Mayor. You're welcome. Are there any other questions about new business? Council Member Lane. Yeah, in the event that we did not enter into a new agreement with Kentucky American Water and another utility company bid for it, then the issue would be buying the water company and the winning bidder, or if the city wanted to buy it, would have to come up with the necessary funding to purchase the water company at fair market value. And is that what the provision is on the agreement? it? That relates to the Jacobson Park issue, yes. If for some reason the city determined that it was interested in a condemnation action, and this is from memory, so I'm going to be real generic, that they would have to pay the fair market value of the park, of Jacobson Park, if they were interested, in addition to whatever was valued, the water company valuation. Okay. I think it would be very interesting if you could maybe do just a little abstract of what the options are in this negotiation, you know, whether they renew or we don't renew. And if a third party bids to get in or if the city elects to try to purchase the water economy so we could just see what, you know, what the game plan would be. I think it would be very helpful for the council, particularly for the new council members that are coming on board. Okay. Thank you. Are there any other questions about new business? All right. There's a motion on the floor to approve new business. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? No on E. No on E. The one no. All right. Two no's. Mr. Farmer and Mr. Lane. All right. Thank you very much. Those items pass. Next on our agenda is continuing business presentations. And before we have a motion on our neighborhood development funds, I'd like to call on Councilmember Ellinger. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I was given a list, as long as you all were, about the NDF that's in front of you. And the Council Administrator wanted us to just be aware that there are four additional items that were put on this list. We do not need a motion. They'll just be put on for Thursday list, but just it was for information only that these were included in there. Vice Mayor. Okay, very good. Thank you. So do I hear a motion on item A? Okay. Yes. This would be a time to amend. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I move to place on the docket a resolution authorizing the mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute an agreement with the Melrose Oak Park Neighborhood Association in the amount of $300 for the office of the Urban County Council at a cost not to exceed the sum stated. So moved. Second. Motion by Councilmember Akers, second by Councilmember Clark to amend the motion to include one more neighborhood development fund. Is there any question on the amendment? I see none. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? That motion passes. Now the main motion is on the floor. Any questions? All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? That motion passes. The next item of business is committee summary, social services, and community development. Councilmember Ford. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Councilmembers, you can find the summary of our social services and community development committee on pages 23 through 27 of your packet. Our meeting was held on October 21st. meeting was called to order at 11.03 a.m. Committee summary was approved by a motion of Council Member Ellinger and second of Council Member Beard of the September 23rd summary. Vice Mayor, I've already called on Commissioner Mills just to be handy. This was a rather long meeting. We had 16 different action items, and you'll see the long list of motions. There were only two that were somewhat divided, and I will highlight those at the appropriate time and ask for consideration of the council. The first item was the first business item was the partner agency funding process for fiscal year 16. We started off with Commissioner Mills introducing Theresa Maynard, the new administrative officer in the Department of Social Services, and the consensus was to change the name of the partner agency, what is known as the partner agency funding to the extended social resource ESR program, whereas we're funding programs. She stated, Theresa stated that a mandatory pre-application meeting will be held on November 19, 2014 for interested applicants. And again, that is scheduled for tomorrow afternoon. On page 23, you will see that there were nine items that Commissioner Mills brought forth to our committee beginning in the September meeting, and we addressed those at our October meeting. Number one was the total funding available for all programs. Number two, the funding emergency shelter programs through the Office of Homelessness. Number three, disallowing the program to be funded by both Partners for Youth and through the ESR funding mechanism. Number four, amending the application from an annual to a biannual process providing for two-year funding awards. And that is one item that was a divided vote. Number five is the mayor's proposed budget will include a total lump sum budgetary line item for ESR programming. Number six was a discussion of regarding setting caps for maximum funding requests for a single program. And that was actually not voted upon, and I'll explain later. Number seven, the implementation of a letter of intent process with the December 15, 2014 deadline. Number eight, the recommendation was for allowing collaborative applications and providing bonus points for the same. That was the divided vote. They all passed. And number nine, last but not least, is the council budget link post-budget, well, during the budget, excuse me, will be here with the commission of social services and the es our funding group rather than individual agencies and that is the nine recommendations that were voted upon uh... at our meeting uh... there was great discussion on many of those are on this alone number twenty four vice mayor official came on a job number two page twenty five to highlight the motions okay that's fine The first motion pertained to the emergency shelter funding. On a motion by Council Member Stenet, seconded by Council Member Elegert to allocate 25% of annual ESR funding to emergency shelter programs, the motion passed without dissent. As it stands right now, we budgeted $3.27 million in fiscal year 15. If that were comparative to next year, I think it's estimated that $700,000 or so would now be managed by the new Office of Homelessness and Intervention. In the remaining $2.5 or so, we'll still be going through what was the partner agency program, which is now ESR. And that passed without dissent. So, Council Members, is there a second? Council Member Ford is bringing this as a motion. Okay, Council Member Myers seconded. Is there discussion on the item? Seeing none, all those in favor say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? All right. That passes. Thank you, Vice Mayor. The very next line was in regards to setting a cap, a funding cap on applicants. Council Member Kay spoke against setting a program or maximum funding request and stated that the government should focus on funding the best programs that the community can provide. this is actually number six on that original recommendation list the committee said it aside vice mayor we didn't even have a motion and we did not vote on that it was just consensus not to okay to accept that recommendation the next motion by councilmember acres second by councilmember Ellinger is to set a funding target of 1% of the general fund budget for all ESR programs the motion passed without dissent do I hear a second any discussion of the motion all those in favor please say aye anyone opposed that motion passes the next motion pertained to funding by partners for youth in the ESR program was a motion by councilmember case second by councilman acres to approve the requirement that no specific program can concurrently can be concurrently awarded grant funds by both Partners for Youth and the ESR program. The motion passed without dissent. So moved. Motion by Council Member Ford, second by Council Member Myers. Is there any discussion? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? That motion passes. Thank you Vice Mayor. The next motion pertains to the recommendation to go from an annual funding cycle to a biannual application funding cycle. It was a motion by Councilmember Kaye, second by Councilmember Ellinger to approve a biannual application cycle for ESR funding. The motion passed on a vote of four to three. Councilmembers Ford, Acre, Ellinger and K voting in favor. Council Member Stenet, Beard, and Lane dissenting. As it passed the majority of the committee, I so move on behalf of the committee. Second. And there's a second by Council Member Clark. Is there discussion? Council Member Henson. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Council Member Ford, was there any discussion about like agencies that are new to the funding source. And, you know, I guess I put a lot of emphasis on performance of these agencies. And I was just curious if this came up in conversation. Yes, ma'am. Looking at the notes, it was the proponents, I guess, the positive aspects of the recommendation is that many state and federal funding sources already operate on a biannual or every three-year funding cycle. There was, though, however, Council Member Henson, some concern in regards to new applicants that if there was a new program that was presented or introduced to the community, if we were on a two-year cycle, that they would have to wait in order to have the opportunity to pursue funds. So that was brought up during the committee. And if a new agency wants their awarded funds, they would have two years where we would have measurable performance, correct? Because I always am concerned about having an agency that we're funding that's not performing. That's correct, Council Member Henson. And we visit the agencies now and check on their performance. So they do get performance over two years. Also, in the council approved in last year's process, there's bonuses for being an innovative program. So if it's a new program, something that hasn't been done before, they get bonus points in the scoring anyway. So that will help them a little bit. Okay. And sometimes I think it's hard to really show your performance within one year. So thank you. Thank you, Vice Mayor. you're welcome councilmember beard thank you vice mayor councilmember ford what do you do when we have the majority of the people here on the horseshoe who have to skip a year you put him in you put the group in is coming in early or do you wait 12 months and have them do it late you could get a little problematic i guess right uh in regards to that applicants coming forth are council members council members hadn't don't have i'm not certain i understand or have a have an answer i will say to councilmember beard is as represented by the four to three vote it would require a change in the way we do things now and i i don't know if commissioner mills can speak to if it were approved how they would go about making those changes we did ask law's opinion You know, there's always a question, does one counsel buy on a future counsel? And we ask law's opinion, could we do a two-year cycle? And we're given the opinion that yes, we could, because there's a personal service agreement which can be amended for several reasons. So we were told by law that we could do a two-year cycle if counsel approved it. Is that your question? I don't disagree with that at all. It's the question that we have several new people coming here. Right. Are they going to be on top of the budget if we're in a two-year cycle? Or do they wait 12 months and be on the tail end of a two-week cycle? The way the awards would work is they would say that you would get an equal amount for both years pending the availability of funds in urban county government. And actually, Commissioner O'Mara recommended that we do them based on 1% of the actual revenues of the prior year. So what we would say in the PSA that, you know, it would be adjusted to available revenues for year two, but it would be the comparable amount from year one. Excuse me. it's going to be tricky is all i'm all i'm saying is going to be a bit tricky with the new folks and um you just can't leave them out to dry so think about that part of it i don't have any problem with the two-year approach otherwise and you know once they get into the the swing of things, it'd be fine. But if they're in and out in two years, it might not be, wouldn't work very well. Let's just put it that way. Thank you, Vice Mayor. You're welcome. Council Member Stennett. Thank you, Vice Mayor. As it reads here in our packet, I did vote against this in committee and plan on doing so again. And given the changes and the magnitude of changes we've had over the last couple years and how we're actually administering this program, I think one big critical problem is we're on an annual budget here in Fayette County. We're not on a biannual budget. So it's still going to come up, and I appreciate Mr. Romero's input on how we could best balance that if we choose to go to this process. But I think until we have a year under our belt on the new process and are able to create a needs assessment that really we all can start agreeing on and getting a little more fluid with that, I don't think this I think this stuff's premature and I'll still vote against it until we can get some of those other kinks worked out on funding because I still think there's agencies that would like to apply this year that may be left out if we go to the biannual immediately. So thank you, Vice Mayor. Thank you. Council Member Myers. Thank you, Vice Mayor. And first, Mr. Chair, I apologize. I was out of town on business that week, so I missed this meeting. And obviously there was some great discussion and a lot of innovation went into this meeting and a lot of good motions came out of it. I'm not I wish I'd been here for the conversation on this. And I I understand what law is saying. But the fact of the matter is that any time a council votes eight people, then that changes whatever is done in the past. So you really can't bind a future council on something. I guess, Commissioner, could you give us just a couple Was this a recommendation that was made by you or by your office? I know that the United Way went to, I think, a three-year cycle As Mr. Chair said, the federal and state agencies do two and three cycles Can you speak to why you think it's an advantage to do this? It's an advantage for several reasons First, it's less burden on the agencies The application process is fairly involved. And with changes that are coming through this committee every year, it is a big process. Many of the agencies have told us they're thrilled that it's going to be every two years instead of every year because it's a lot of work on them for maximum 20% of their budget. That was one reason. The second reason is it's a lot of work internally. We spend a lot of staff time every year going through the scoring, going through the rubrics, going through the meetings. And, you know, it's a matter of saving staff time and saving agency time was one of the reasons we did it. And the fact that there's a precedent for that in the grant world. If we are a grant, in fact, instead of being a different kind of funding, many, many grants are multiple year because people look at doing a program over multiple years. We can do it either way. We just felt like it would be more efficient to do it on a two-year cycle, and that was our main recommendation. Okay. In a lot of examples when they're doing multi-year, is it because their budgets are set that way and also because of the dollar amounts that they're in the outcomes are? The reason they're multiple years is because most programs can't go from start to finish in one year. And we've had several instances where programs could not expend their money. We have to hit zero at the end of the years. You know, we had a balance in partner agency money that we dealt with last year, and we were just going to let it go to fund balance. We have an amendment that's coming up before council next week. We had an agency that had $459 left over, and they found a creative way to use the $459, and I'd like for them to use it. But if you have two years and a longer program, you're better able to adjust funds to meet the needs of your client population instead of doing it in 12 months, particularly if it's a new program. You've got to get started. You've got to train your staff. You've got to get your clients. You've got to spend the money. Okay. Thank you. Councilmember Kay. Thank you, Vice Mayor. The commissioner really, in giving her answer, kind of described where I end up on this, and that is that for most kinds of funding for what people want to consider innovative programs, one year simply is not enough. You don't know until late that you're getting the money, and then you're supposed to start from scratch, implement, evaluate, et cetera. So as the council has made up its mind to shift from funding agencies on an ongoing basis to funding projects that are innovative, I think this is consistent with that. And the two-year funding cycle, I understand completely that we make budget determination on a year-to-year basis, but I trust council would be sensitive to any changes. If we are obligating funds for two years to an agency, absent some compelling reason, we would assume that they would continue to get that funding. So I don't see that as a problem or a barrier. Our finance people have said it's not. But for me, the compelling reason is, as we shift to projects as opposed to agencies, we need to give them more time to develop their proposals, to begin the implementation, to evaluate, and then we can make a better determination about whether it was worth the funding or not. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Thank you. Does anyone else wish to speak to the motion? All right, let's go ahead and do an electronic vote. Thank you. Thank you. Council members, if you'll log in, whether to approve the biannual application cycle for ESR funding. We have 14 people here, so we need another vote. So that vote passes 8 to 6. Council Member Ford. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Thank you, Council Members. the next motion pertained to budgeting and how this process interfaces with the mayor's proposed budget. So on a motion by Councilmember Senate, second by Councilmember Elegor to approve the presentation of a lump sum amount of ESR funding in the mayor's proposed budget, and that is in contrast rather than the individual line items for each program receiving funding. The motion passed without dissent, and I so move. Do I hear a second? All right, Council Member Akers seconded. Is there any discussion? Council Member Myers. Yes, ma'am. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Could you elaborate on that a little bit? Yeah, I'm sorry. The last few years, we've had the partner agency process begin almost just while the mayor's proposed budget is coming forth. So in the last few years, to make it plain, we've had preliminary recommendations from the department in regards to the former partner agencies being published before the mayor's proposed budget. I think we've received some line-item recommendations on funding in March when the mayor's proposed budget comes back in April. And I think what's being proposed now is that our process, and correct me if I'm wrong, Commissioner, our process will delay until the mayor presents his budget in April. And in that budget, it will be a lump sum amount. This year's $3.27 million, but it will be a lump sum amount. And after it's proposed, after the mayor's budget is presented, is when the council will begin to look at the funding recommendations coming from the department and the mayor. Okay. Thank you. Commissioner? Yes. There's two questions. Yes, sir. The first one is, do you envision the administration providing any insight to applicants whether or not they got funded before the mayor's budget is announced? I don't think that that will come forward. His budget is the first Tuesday in April. and by us taking longer to deliberate, we really won't know who's going to get funded and what amount until later in the game. It will give us a longer time to look at it and look at the different scenarios. We've done it in one two-hour meeting, and every year that we've done that and given all the line items in the April meeting, we've gone back and changed it. And we think if we have more time to present it later in the budget cycle, that's not that there's still not time for deliberation. maybe we'll be more finite in the decisions that are made if we wait until later in April or maybe even the 1st of May to say this is it and then it goes to budget length. Okay. I like that because I always thought it was problematic that people were told in advance that they were in the mayor's budget and then when it changes they blame the council for the process working. problem the other thing I would say is that hopefully in this process it will work in a way that when the mayor presents his or her budget there'll be some visioning around this funding and it's not line item like it has been but it's this is what we're trying to accomplish with this block of funding and the outcomes are looking to move the needle on so and it may change from year-to-year depending on what the needs in this community are I mean every not Not year to year, but every two years. Right, and I'd anticipate that's what would happen. But if you are successful in getting the two-year increment, then you can come out and say, these are the things that we're trying to move the needle on over the next two-year period. Hopefully there'll be enough success that you could go to another group of things in the next two years. Right. Yeah. So I'll just take a couple seconds to say you've done a really great job. Thank you. And the committee did, too, and Council Member Ford, as the chair, has done a fantastic job in moving this whole thing forward. Thank you very much for your work. Thank you, Vice Mayor. You're welcome. Is there any other comment to the motion? All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? That motion passes. Thank you, Vice Mayor. The next item pertains in regards to the application process. Commissioner Mills just described how intensive the application is. So now there is a recommendation that applicants be required to submit a letter of intent. A motion by Council Member Stenet, seconded by Council Member Ellinger to require the said letter of intent process prior to a formal ESR program application. It passed without dissent. I so move. Second. Council Member Ford brought forth the motion seconded by Council Member Myers. Is there any discussion? Seeing none, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? That motion passes. Council Member Ford. Thank you, Vice Mayor. The only remaining item of real debate that we had pertained to item number eight, allowing collaborative applications and providing bonus points for the same. I'm going to ask the commission to be prepared, so I'm just going to read the motion. on a motion by Councilmember Kaye, second by Councilmember Ellinger, to allow collaborative ESR program applications and to award a five-point bonus for the same. There's a motion by Councilmember Akers, second by Councilmember Ellinger, to amend the motion to provide for ten points for collaboration rather than five points. The motion to amend failed, didn't pass, so the original motion remained on the floor of a five-point bonus. It passed on a 4-3 vote with Councilmembers Ford, Acre, Alligar, and Councilmember Kaye voting in favor. Councilmembers Stenet, Beard, and Lane in dissent. It passed 4-3 on behalf of the committee. I so move. Second. I have a motion by Councilmember Ford, second by Councilmember Kaye. Are there questions about this motion? Councilmember Myers. Thank you, Madam Chair. could anybody who voted against this motion speak to why you didn't I would think that this would be a good thing we've always wanted people to collaborate and work together to accomplish the goals that we want to set with this funding stream so and I would be in favor of amending this to doing the 10 percent or the the 10 bonus points like you originally tried to do in the committee but I guess I'd like to hear from people who voted against that why this wouldn't be a good thing to give people bonus points for collaborating if anybody wants to I see no speakers then could I would yes sir councilmember in in regards to bringing the report forward I think there were concern in regards to allowing while it was important to promote collaboration I think there was concern and committee help me if I'm wrong, in regards to maybe an unfair advantage that folks may just come forth for collaboration in the sake of collaborating, and it might not pose too well for those singular agencies that bring forth just as worthwhile funding. I don't know if I'm serving that justice, but that's my recollection. Thank you. Councilmember Lane. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Yes, I voted against the giving points and rating agencies because I feel like it's very subjective and may not be fair and impartial to all the parties involved. So that was just my personal opinion on that. Thank you. Council Member K. Thank you, Vice Mayor. About the difference between 5 and 10 points, there was an interest in providing some incentive, but there was a I'll just voice my own concern. that given how closely the final scores tend to group, a 10-point advantage would seem so significant that we would get all collaborative applications, and that's not the intent. There are some things that agencies need to do by themselves. So I was in favor of the five, but not in favor of the 10. Thank you. Thank you. Any other? Councilmember Henson. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I see it as being subjective and was curious as to how would you confirm or verify that this was taking place? Okay. Again, this is a brand- Can you give an example? Yes, I will. This is a brand-new program, and we have written a separate application pending this going through for people that are collaborating. The advantage to very small agencies, there's one in your district that we met with last year. Their entire year's budget is very small. But if there are two or three larger agencies that have got the same mission, you can get 20% of all three agencies put together. So they could ask for a bigger pot of money. They could join hands with other agencies. For example, let's say we wanted to do self-sufficiency for teenage mothers. You could have one group do financial literacy program. You could have one group do dress for success, could do the close. You could have somebody do an educational program. But the program would be self-sufficiency. So what we would do is the way the application is going to look, this is the program, these are the outcomes, and these are the partners. The only thing we're asking separate from each agency is their financials. One agency would be the fiscal agent. So let's say the big agency in that case, they can't be because they're one of ours. but say Family Care Center was the big agency. They would get the check, and then they would see that this agency got this amount of money to do what they're doing. They would all have the same clients, but they would be served by two or three agencies instead of one. It's a good way to approach a problem because if you have to share a pot of money, you're not going to overlap services. You're going to realize who does what part of that. And I don't think, you know, it will be interesting. And I dare say that if we get these applications in, there's going to be some problems filling them out because there's going to be things we haven't thought of. So we've thought of everything we possibly can, but we may kind of build this plane as we fly it. And if it works, it might be a good model to go for in the future. So the agency that grant, I've heard that's a problem for the child, or it would be in the contract? Yeah, they would prove outcomes as a group. And, you know, the thing is about a two-year grant, too, they can tinker with that. They can amend it and say, well, this program needs a little bit more and this needs a little bit less, and it could be an interesting thing. Or maybe we should have included this partner so next year they'll do that. You wouldn't get in a situation where an agency's like, well, you didn't earn your part, so we're not giving it to you? Well, they might. You just never know. But if it's set out with outcomes, we do visit them during that two-year period. And so I guess we would be the mediators if they fight with one another. Thank you. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Yes, Council Member Stenet. Thank you, Vice Mayor. So, Commissioner, is your goal in creating this type of collaboration? Do you have you set priorities about needs we need to fill? And then we're going to suggest agencies partner to fill those needs? Or are we going to? We have set those with that needs assessment that we had done with UK and the Martin School. We already have three areas, child care, employment, mental health and substance abuse. It gets bonus points. So, you know, you get bonus points for doing that. Then if you get bonus points for being a collaborator, that would be a good thing to do if, you know, they might want to think about that. Yeah, and that's my concern, Councilman Myers. We set our needs-based assessment, but there are some agencies that don't fit in any of those. So we're automatically penalizing them. Some cannot collaborate with anyone. They're their own agency. And I didn't want to ever be in a situation I'm not, as Councilman Ford talked about, putting them, allow them to have a step forward where we're going to give other people an advantage. because I just didn't want to be in that situation. That's why I feel like I wasn't ready to move forward to flush it out a little bit more. I think we're just throwing it in the air right now. I'm thinking it'll work, and I'm not sure it will. Did you have a comment? The only thing I was going to say, a high-performing agency can get bonus points, too, for their outcomes. So if it's a singular agency that's doing a great job, they get bonus points for that as well. Thank you. Councilmember Akers. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Beth actually brought something to my mind that I hadn't thought of before. I do support an incentive for collaboration because I think that we don't have enough of that in the nonprofit sector. And I think that even though a lot of agencies do run their own programs and have great individual programs, that they can always step outside themselves and collaborate with other agencies to do more or to do something inventive. So that's why I support it. But then when she mentioned that really large agencies could partner together and then get a larger share, sort of, because if you combined all of their budgets, 20 percent combined of all of the combined budgets would be a larger percentage. They can't ask for more than 20 percent of the three agencies. However, the Hope Center Community Action, as large as they are, we don't even get close to their 20 percent. Right. But if you have a small program, there's a program in Glacier, I don't know how to say it. Glacier, no way. Yes, I'm not very good at Spanish. But they serve a very small population, and their annual budget is very small. CISO, ProMathomArt Program, they're a very small program. But they do art with young people, and they do art. But if there's other things that young people need, and they partnered with Community Action, they can stand to grow their program because they can't ask for it. That's what I meant. The small program can latch on to the larger program. This came to mind because I visited a homeless program in Louisville, which works very well, and it is a federal grant. The mental health component, the housing component, and the day center component all get a federal grant together. And Council Member Henson with me to visit that program, and it's amazing how well it works because they're all getting a SAMHSA grant, and everybody's got a piece of it, and they have to meet and work together. So when I saw that, I thought, well, this is a good model. Okay, great. Thank you. Thank you. Council Member Myers. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Commissioner, again, I just want to say, you know, this is a culmination of 10 years of work to get to where you're at, and there's a lot of innovation that came out of that meeting, and I just encourage the council to support this and support their whole package and let them work that for two years. The concern with council members coming in and out, Council Member Clark brought this to my attention, that when this starts, it'll start with a fresh council coming in, and that council will be here for two years. And so I think it would be fantastic to support this entire package because, remember, the commissioner has people that are going in doing site visits throughout the year. They've brought some really great reporting back to us. They've brought money back when people weren't meeting their goals, different things going on. So I think if we give them an opportunity to take this and run with it for two years, at the end of that time, look back and see what happened. I think it'll really be strong. And this is what our community needs. This is what we've been working for the last 10 years to get to. So I support it 100% and you guys, great work. Thank you. Councilmember Stimmit. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Commissioner, I had one follow-up question. As we move forward, are agencies that already collaborate today, are they eligible for the bonus or are we talking about new initiatives in our community? Because to me, if they're already collaborating, what have we really done if we give it to all the groups are already doing it. Yeah, they are collaborating, but they don't apply for this money as a collaborative. We can't just say we're working together. They actually have to apply for the funds for one program, and they have to sit down and consciously think, what is my role in this program? So it's not about my agency, it's about this service. And it's amazing how that works when you think about it, because then you realize that they do this better than I do, and I'm doing a little bit of that. Yeah, well, I'm just thinking, if they're already collaborating, and the goal here is to encourage collaboration, if they're already doing it, what are we really doing in the first place? Well, it depends on how you define collaboration. I mean, are they really sharing money, or are they all just serving the same client? But how are we going to define it in the process? Well, we have a separate application for agencies that are collaborating, and they have to lay it out in their narrative. This is what we're going to do, and agency A is going to do this, and B is going to do this, and C is going to do this. This is how much each component is going to cost. And agency A is going to get the money, but they're going to have to work with B and C because they have to get their part of the money as well. Sometimes people partner with agencies, but they're not necessarily collaborating. You know, they refer to that agency and that agency takes clients that that won't take. That's not a true collaboration. So how do we prevent that in this process from happening? Well, because we're going to be visiting and we're going to hold them accountable to these outcomes. And when we read the application, if it doesn't look like a true collaboration. We also have a letter of intent now. We can say we read this application. It doesn't look like it's a true collaboration. We're not going to accept it to move forward. So we have some processes to look at it throughout the process. Thank you. Is there any other comment on the motion? Seeing none, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? We need a couple more votes. That motion passes 11 to 3. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Thank you, Vice Mayor. That was the last item of real debate, so I'm going to speed up. The next motion pertains to the budget link process. In the past years, the budget link, Council Member Beard, Council Member Akers, and I met with agencies post-notification of their award. That's going to change by a motion of Council Member Akers, second by Council Member Beard, to require the budget link to be comprised and held with the Department of Social Service Commissioner and the ESR Funding Work Group rather than the individual applicant agencies. It passed without dissent. I so move. Council Member Akers seconded your motion. Is there any discussion? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? That motion passes. Thank you, Vice Mayor. That wraps up the first item of work, and we thank the council for your patience, and good luck, Commissioner, in your meeting tomorrow. The next item was in regards to the home care match. It was fiscal year 15 counseling recommendation to separate the existing purchase of service agreement with the Bluegrass Area Development District. It breaks up the annual dues and the home care match. Motion by Council Member Kaye, second by Council Member Akers to approve the link recommendation to split the agreements into two agreements. Passed without dissent. I so move. Second. Council Member Clark seconds the motion. Is there any discussion? All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? That motion passes. Thanks, Vice Mayor. There's item, business item number three was workforce investment and training in regards to an interlocal agreement. We were visited a few weeks ago in regards to a revised interlocal agreement. I presented a resolution recommending that the mayor not signed. I think the council has already adopted the resolution and the mayor has communicated with the ad. So it's by my motion, second by Council Member Ellinger, to approve the resolution going forth to the mayor. And it passed without dissent. I think it's already been reported out, Vice Mayor. And then the last item, I'm not going to bring the mover and the seconder, but the items that were referred out of committee included bluegrass ad membership and the audit response, the change of the name to the partner agency funding process, partner agency funding process, prescription programs, and the proposed reorganization of the Office of Homelessness to the Department of Social Services. All of those items were referred out of committee. We adjourned at 1235. That's our report, Vice Mayor. Thank you so much. You were busy in October. Thank you very much. Okay, the next item of business, and some people have been very patiently waiting for this. Chris King, Director of our Division of Planning, and this is the presentation on the amendment to Article 22 for the planned urban, planned unit, development to zone. And I feel like it's last night again. Bill Sally has his maps. He hasn't been home. While Bill and Tracy are passing out some supplemental information to you, I just want to comment that my presentation is actually going to be more at the high level, conceptual level. We gave you some additional information in, of course, the Planning Commission's final report. and you also received a little more detailed PowerPoint, which is in your packet. But it's very important that with the 15 allocated minutes that we have, I think you need to really hear from the applicants as well. So I'm going to try to allot about half the 15 minutes to this group of gentlemen that you see down here in the front row to your left, who are the representatives of the North Limestone CDC, or really the driving force behind the project that led to this text amendment. And what we're dealing with here is a very unique piece of legislation related to infill and designed to help facilitate a very unique program and project that these gentlemen and others are working on. So I'll just kind of run through this and we can get into some of the more details if you want to do that when we get to questions and answers and things of that nature. So what is before you right now? And I think there may be a little bit of confusion about this, again, because of the unique nature of the text. This is not a zone change at this point. Even though this text is very much aimed to a certain defined geography, it really enables a zone change to be made. And if this legislation is passed, this group will be bringing zone changes for properties that they own within this area. So, again, the text amendment was filed by the North Line CDC, also known as NOLI, working very closely with the staff over well over a year on this project, their vision for the project, where we may or may not have a match or mismatch with the zoning tools we had available. And in the end, we agreed that this would be the best way to approach this question. So the purpose of this is to create a planned unit development 2 zone, the second planned unit development zone we have in our zoning ordinance, to facilitate this Luigart Makerspace project. And that's an innovative project to create a live-work environment within a defined area, basically to support artistic endeavors and craft endeavors, things of that nature, in a live, work, and sell environment. The area that has been targeted that they are working in is basically in the North Limestone Corridor between 7th Street, Maple Street, and the R.J. Corman Railroad, which parallels and is just about a short block south of the Loudoun Avenue area. So if you're familiar with the North Limestone, Loudon, General Intersection, Bryan Avenue, then you know the area that we are talking about here. As I said, the review indicated that the existing zoning really did not provide adequate flexibility to really address the kind of project that had been envisioned by this group, We created a sustainability plan that they shared with planning staff basically to provide for home ownership program, artists and residents, business artists, housing, and gallery space. Again, in this area right now, you can see the zoning map, you have a mixture of R3 residential zoning, B1 neighborhood zoning, and I1 industrial zoning. And this planned unit development zone would basically be able to supplant that into a much more flexible regulatory environment. And if you watch the little map in the picture and the maps that you have there, you can see with this aerial photograph the kinds of buildings and structures you have in this area, very mixed. Everything from small shotgun homes to larger industrial-type buildings, utility feature, a water tank which is in the middle of that area that's not readily visible to folks. And just again, a number of different types of buildings along limestone that we're all trying to work in this program. Just to give you a little bit of an idea of what is a planned unit development zone, It is a mechanism, and your zoning ordinance allows the creation of these, that basically instead of traditional zoning restrictions, lot, yard, height, et cetera, set forth in the zoning ordinance, it allows through a process involving a development plan that those can be defined in negotiation with the planning commission through the development plan process. So this area is largely developed. it will remain largely like it is, but if this goes through and if zone changes then follow, the development plan process would guide any additions that would be made, any new structures that would be done. And any of them that fall out of a certain range of set requirements that are listed in the zone. And that's sort of how PUD zones are structured. The first one we have, PUD1, is a suburban PUD, and that has been utilized at least once in Fayette County zoning back in the 1980s out in the area off Clay's Mill Road, out beyond Manowar Boulevard. And again, this is a very different type of plan unit development tailored to this area. I pretty much covered most of the things involved in that slide with the process I was just describing. and again that any development plans would have to be prepared by registered architect and another design professional to ensure that we're looking at compatibility in design again the planning commission spent a great deal of time as did the staff on this in coming forward and recommending approval conducted a public hearing i don't need to read these as you can probably imagine from the presentation They believe this furthered the comprehensive plan, the small area plans we had in the area, like the central sector, and, again, helps provide an innovative zoning tool to realize this project. But while you're contemplating those findings, I want to just list off for you the groups that have supported this, that are on the record of supporting it. the North Limestone Neighborhood Association, Seedleaf, the Fayette Alliance, LexArts, the Bluegrass Community Foundation, the Downtown Development Authority, and Commerce Lexington. So again, that's a pretty impressive cross-section of groups and agencies to support an innovative infill project. And at this point, I think next up, I will ask the representatives from the NOLAI group to give you their presentation, talk about their vision, and share some of the information they shared with the Planning Commission. And then we can return for any questions that Council may have. Thank you, Chris. Welcome. Thanks, Chris. Good afternoon, everybody. My name is Brandon Cohn, representing NOLI CDC, and I'm just here today to introduce the rest of our team to you and to introduce this very short presentation. I'm joined today by NOLI CDC Executive Director Richard Young, by the Louis Gartt Makerspaces Project Manager Architect Chris Nunn, and by NOLI CDC's Board Chair Griffin Van Meter. Richard is going to give you a brief overview of NOLI CDC and some of the context for this particular project, other work we've done in the area. Chris is going to do a little deeper dive into the project itself, although a quick deep dive. And then we're all available to answer questions afterwards. So Richard Young. Great. Thank you, Brandon. I just want to run through a little bit about how we got started and the other work that we're working on, again, to give you a little bit of context. and I'll try and keep it pretty quick. So we are a 501c3 nonprofit community development corporation. We got founded about a year and a half ago, two years ago. And we talk about our work in terms of livability, which is a pretty broad thing, and we really break that down into accessibility, affordability, sustainability, and vibrancy. And we address these four tenants by offering affordable housing, coordinating cultural programming, enhancing public spaces, helping grow the economy and the retail nodes of our neighborhood, increasing access to social services, and addressing threats to neighborhood resources. We put on various other programs in addition to the Luegert Makerspace that Chris will tell you about in a minute. We're probably most well known for the night market, which is a monthly pop-up market that we put on at the corner of Limestone and Loudoun, right in the same area. And that has mostly, for us, been, in addition to being a great, fun event, has been a really great economic development tool for our neighborhood. We've seen several businesses in our neighborhood expand and hire new employees to take on this sort of increased demand that's come because of the night market. We, on average, have about 3,000 people at each event, which spends a total of, on average, $23,000 in three hours. We work with Seedleaf. They're a really great partner in our neighborhood to maintain the North Pole Garden. And that's sort of the first of our many programs that address the environmental sustainability issues that are in our neighborhood, especially stormwater quality. In addition to partnering with Sea Leaf, we're right now working with Kentucky American Water to put in a very large-scale monarch butterfly garden on York Street that will actually go around their tank. We're working with them to remove a barbed wire fence that currently protects the tank and install several things around it that will actually make their facilities more safe and be a better use for the neighborhood. We also got a grant from the National Endowment for the Arts to do a mural on the water tank itself, and we'll be doing a national call for that in the summer. In 2015, it's a pretty big laundry list of the things that we're planning on doing in terms of environmental sustainability, so I won't go all the way through that. We partnered with Central Kentucky Youth Orchestras to create an after-school music program that serves 40 kids from Arlington Elementary. They go to this program two and a half hours a day, five days a week, 40 weeks a year following the school calendar from second grade through high school graduation at no cost. It's a really amazing program that follows the El Sistema model from Venezuela. And we also have a few other projects. We put out a map of our neighborhood once a year. We're working on our one for 2015 right now. We partnered with Magic Beans Coffee Roasters to implement a micro-granting program for anyone that lives or works in the neighborhood. And we also, as part of this National Endowment for the Arts grant, are in the process of working on a cultural plan for our neighborhood that addresses public space, access to arts and culture, and public art. So I really want to express by telling you all of this that we're trying to take a really holistic approach to what we're doing. And all of this is really based around the Luligart Makerspaces, which is the project that got us started through a grant from a group called Art Place America, which is based out of Brooklyn. So I'm going to turn this over to Chris to talk to you a little bit more about that. Thank you. Thank you. So basically, as Richard said, this makerspaces project is the keystone to all of the programs that we're working on to revitalize the North Limestone neighborhood. And at the core of that mission is something called creative placemaking, which I won't read this all to you. But basically, the idea is to use creative and artistic populations as the core of a revitalization effort. And that's a proven model that has been used in a number of places across the country, and we're very excited to use that and apply that in this area due to the high artistic, the high population of artistic and creative types as a result of the university and other entities in Lexington. The reason why we targeted this area, the reason why we identified the boundaries that were highlighted by Mr. King was because of the low owner occupancy, because of the way that this neighborhood stacks up against greater Lexington in terms of income, in terms of employment, in terms of owner occupancy, renter occupancy, and trying to improve all of those numbers and using this creative placemaking as a model for enabling and empowering individuals to improve their own circumstance. The project goals, as we have stated, are to purchase and rehabilitate 40 workforce houses into these affordable live-work units. Currently, we own 17, and based on the model that we're developing, we'll then roll all the proceeds of that into purchasing further properties and continuing the party. So basically why this is necessary is because, as Mr. King said, the traditional zoning doesn't allow this right now, and given the vision of the planning department and the support of all the people that have been so kind as to support us. We feel that this is one approach that has not been tested yet in Lexington to really address the substandard housing and economic situation in our neighborhood. So this is part of, this is a bit redundant, but basically in the greater context, this is in the green outline is the boundaries of what we're looking at. The properties outlined in green are the 39 properties that we will be pushing through the first map amendment should this text amendment pass, which amounts to 23% of the overall properties in the area in question. And the economic impact is that we would infuse over $2.5 million into the neighborhood through our work alone, not to mention the residual and secondary impacts of what fixing up and bringing in this vibrancy into the neighborhood would cause on adjacent properties. It's just a list of our partners again, and we thank you for your time and consideration. Thank you very much. Very interesting. Did you have more? I'm just happy to answer any questions. Okay, very good. They'll line up. First up is Council Member Lane. Sorry. I think this is a very interesting idea, and I feel like it would be a good concept for the neighborhood you selected. I have a couple of questions, though, as far as funding. And I'm just going to make a guess here that perhaps you buy individual properties and then build them one at a time out and sort of create some kind of continuing momentum, or do you try to do an assemblage of all the property? Sure. Tell them about the grant. Yeah. Yeah, I can answer that a little bit. So the Lugart Makerspaces project actually got started through a $425,000 grant from ArtPlace America that we got in 2013. And ArtPlace is basically a funding pool for some of the top family foundations in the country, Knight, Kresge, Bloomberg, Ford, sort of the big 15. And they give out about $16 million a year in grants. We were really fortunate to get this funding source. It was incredibly competitive. I think there were over 1,200 applicants, and less than 40 got funded. So we were really fortunate to have that come through. And then so we've purchased 17 properties, and we actually just finished our first one very recently. And we are going to be taking them on. but hopefully we want to do two to three at a time. And we also are working right now on a program-related investment from the Knight Foundation that will hopefully allow us to do more than two or three at a time. Does that answer your question? Yeah, that's a good response. How long do you think the development will take for this particular parcel of land here in Fayette County? I'll let Chris answer that. I would say that to do our 17 properties is going to take probably two to three years. Obviously, once we grow our support, grow our construction capital, it's going to get easier as we gain momentum. To redo the entire 171 properties on the area in question, I think that's going to be a matter of how well we market and how well we educate the community, how well we spread the word, I guess. So I would say that would probably be a decade. Okay. My last question is who do you consider would be your primary, say, owner of property there? Are you looking for young professional types or creatives, that type of thing? So I'm Griffin Beameter. I'm the chair of the board of the Community Development Corporation. And we currently have two target owners. Our first owner group are people existing in the neighborhood who already live in these streets. So a lot of these houses are substandard housing, and we're working with this first group of people to stabilize them and to make sure there's not a first wave of displacement. So those are our first target occupancies. And then we're also working with Community Ventures and United Way to help them on the back-end equity program and on the financial literacy. So that's one group. And then the group we got funded for was creatives, artists, makers. And the thought process is that a lot of economy follows these groups of people. For example, obviously West 6 is a huge example. But that's something that's made here that then economy and jobs have followed that making of that product. And then maybe on a smaller scale, Brian Turner and Sarah Turner of Cricket Press, who are screen printers who have grown this business. And we would be targeting them to come in and buy these houses. So we create kind of a community of artists and makers. All right. is there anything that we can do to help you in your progress? I think support us. Give us your blessing. Obviously, if you guys have a big pot of money, that always helps. I think we would love the opportunity to also show all council members this project because when people see it, they really get it and they see the scale of these houses and they understand that this could be really this amazing thing for the neighborhood. And people say, oh, it reminds me of this city, of this city. And Council Member Ford has been very gracious in his time and expertise to come down, look at the project, and also other members. I think Steve knows, Council Member Kay knows the project really well. Sorry. Well, I think you made a great selection looking at Lexington, and I wish you a lot of luck. And I'm going to turn it over to our next council member. Thank you for your answers. Thank you, Councilman. Councilmember Farmer. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Thank you all for dreaming on so many people's behalf and coming to be with us today. What were the particular – how did you set this particular boundary? How did you fix this rectangle when you began to look at this area? I think we really looked at properties we already controlled. So we had 16 properties on York Street. There were a couple other community-minded developers that have contiguous property right in there. So we outlined that area, wanted to give it a geographic boundary. and as a city block, it kind of is really interesting in its scale. The structures are somewhat similar. The structures are very similar in terms of actually disinvestment. So as a whole, that was where that came about. Do you think ultimately you have any impact on the directions of the streets or the traffic pattern? I mean, there's some opportunities there, it strikes me. I'm not sure what you're suggesting. Well, I mean, there's some one-way streets that could be two-way. There's some neighborhood opportunities. I mean, I think we would be all four two-way streets on all parts on North Limestone and especially on these side streets where it allows. The York Street is pretty narrow. I don't know if the planning staff might be able to give more input, But we'd love to have, you know, more, you know, anything that calms traffic is what we're for. It's kind of an organic thing. You're not into it yet, but you're looking at it. And as opportunity presents, you might make a change or have an upgrade or what have you. Right. And then, I mean, we also think that another part of why this is an innovation is that it gives people the ability to live where you work. So it will actually be a reduction of car traffic. So that's another part of this project that we really like is the walkability of it. And then I guess just from an overall planning perspective, just the lack of need for parking designations. I guess from the overview, the feel is there's plenty of parking here for what's going to go on. Yeah, we feel there's current parking, enough current parking to handle it. There's good street parking on Limestone. And then also for larger events, like when we do the night market, when we flood the area with 3,000 people, one we've noticed that a lot of people bike and walk and take alternative transportation, but then there's larger parking lots like the old Baker Iron site on 7th and Limestone, the Grace Baptist Church on Loudoun, parking within the Louis Gart, which is right off of Limestone where Minton's and Fleet Street. So there's availability for overflow parking as it exists. I just wanted to add one thing. Certainly, no last CDC is interested in any public infrastructure improvements and beautification that could happen and wouldn't impact the neighborhood from a functional standpoint. But I think one of the points we wanted to make is that this project is not intended to transform what is currently, it is a mixed use, but it's residential predominantly. that won't change. We're not creating a new high-traffic commercial node. It should still retain the predominant residential character and feel that it has today, just with a little bit more vibrancy and color. More and more. Thank you. Director King, this is on our docket for first reading on Thursday night. In its final form, the way it's been tendered, does it use these particular street boundaries? As it does now, it sets those as the parameter where someone could come in and seek a zone change. Inside these four lines? Inside this area, correct. So it is defined. It's a defined area. It has been designed and created to address both this project and the character of that specific area itself. I think it's nice when we can have a tool on the shelf and pull it out and use it in a new way. That's what we're doing here. Thank you all very much. Thank you, Vice Mayor. You're welcome. Councilman Burkay. Thank you, Vice Mayor. And gentlemen, thank you for bringing this forward to us. I am excited about what you're now planning. I have been following your efforts for a long time, and I'm impressed with what you've done. One of the things that I'm most interested in is, I think, and I want you to speak to this, the intention to improve the neighborhood without removing the residence? The stability in terms of homeownership or the people who presently rent, what your intentions are, and how you intend to see that that happens. So we've already been successful. When we bought the, out of the, I think it was within the first seven houses that we bought. We bought an all-one group, and we actually just had one existing tenant in there. And this tenant and his mother have lived on York Street for the last 20 years, and essentially in a very substandard unit, very costly to heat, but have lived in there at a low rent, even though what they're getting for their low rent isn't that great. So they're our first, we're working on getting them through an equity program with community ventures so they can actually buy their house for the same cost of what they're paying rent. And so that's, that innovation in itself was one of the main reasons, I think, why we got the funding initially, because obviously we see that as neighborhoods become more vibrant, original populations get displaced. So that was a big win. And then another group of housing we bought had an existing tenant, and we were able to move her into a bigger house we bought, fix it up, and charge her less rent than what she was paying prior. And then the goal with her is similar to the other tenant, is to work her through an equity program to purchase their house and control their own destiny. And at the same time, we obviously can't force people to buy houses if they don't want to buy houses and then we would just operate their house in perpetuity at that same rent rate. And your price points for ownership and rental range? Yeah, ideally, so those first tenants, our existing tenants, are paying about $300 on average. And then our price point for selling the house is in the $60,000 range, which also puts the mortgages under $400. And in your retrofitting, I assume, actually I know, but I want you to speak about the cost of utilities and the efforts that are made to keep those costs down. Right. So when we're approaching these houses, we're also taking a very holistic approach to the house that we're renovating. So we're putting a lot of the money, a lot of the renovation capital into insulation. Like the first house we did, we did the spray and insulation. And that's actually a big one. We have Hendrick Floyd who's going to move into that house, and he grew up on Eddy Street. So even though he left the neighborhood, we're giving people the ability to reengage back with the neighborhood. So these houses will be, that's what we think, pound for pound, price per square foot, that you won't be able to buy a house of this condition in Lexington. And so it also addresses affordable housing on that side of it, too. Yes, it does. Thank you. Thank you very much. Councilmember Ford. Thank you, Vice Mayor. And gentlemen, thank you for coming down and, again, for allowing me to understand what you guys are doing in that North Limestone area. I think the innovation, the creativity that you guys are bringing to these projects are very encouraging. These are examples. I know that this area has also benefited council members from a small area plan, the central sector, that you guys, I know, incorporate much of what's in that plan into what you guys are doing. Public infrastructure, I think is, I would hope to be able to support what you guys are doing, the council and the government as well. In closing, I just want to talk about the networks of inclusion, and you guys have already hinted at it in regards to keeping a community base. was very impressive to me, and I want to applaud Mr. Chris and Bill and staff members in the Division of Planning for being welcoming to these developers and community organizers and allowing, because we understand that planning is not easy. The planning and the zoning ordinance is not easy, but these gentlemen have worked long and hard to better understand it. And I think that from what you guys can connect in regards to our planning with the CDC, the CDC can in turn translate back in the neighborhood to those residents there. So, again, congratulations, and we look forward to working with you very soon in the future. Thanks, Vice Mayor. You're welcome. Council Member Clark. Thank you, Vice Mayor. First place, I just want to say this is absolutely incredible. I must tell you, I'm just so impressed. I must also admit having a little preview from my son, Matthew, because he knows about you guys. But I just think this is exactly the kind of thing that we need to be happening. I'm particularly impressed with not only the support but the enthusiasm of the planning staff. I appreciate that. I saw that immediately, guys. My question is, any thought about expanding the boundaries? You know, once we see this, and then you probably see something in the future that may even help us do even more. Any thoughts about that? We've talked about that a lot, and I think to Council Member Farmer's question, we picked this boundary because we needed to start with something discreet. to do something that was going to be across the entire ordinance was going to be potentially much more contentious, and so we decided to use this as a first microcosm and test of this model. And our hope would be that there could be PUD 3, 4, 5, and 6 that applies a very similar approach in any number of other areas as it proves to be successful. So our hope is to be ambassadors of this approach and to really pioneer this alternative method of urban redevelopment. Can I add one point? I'm from Louisville, and the way they do this type of thing in Louisville, and we don't do this exact type of thing, they created an individual live-work classification. So the owner of any single property, if it's a certain residential unit or a commercial unit, depending on where they are could apply to have their unit rezoned live work, where you could do the kind of things that our occupants are going to do. And that has not been successful in Louisville. And so by design, we tried to right-size a district where we could sort of get the economies of people working together in close proximity to create an area where they feed off each other and are able to sort of, you know, generate that kind of activity. And in terms of right-sizing it, we did look at other live-work district examples across the country to try to find some best practices. And we looked at some that included Philadelphia, Baltimore on the East Coast, Oakland and San Francisco on the West Coast, and then some cities that are a little bit more like Lexington-sized, Wilmington, Delaware, for example. And so we were fairly specific in terms of trying to designate these boundaries. we could in terms of just process if this is successful down the road from what I understand because the text defines the boundaries I guess you could edit that text somewhere down the line and then change the lines if it bears doing that good thank you also I want to say that I have familiarity with the artist types in my career for better or worse. And I think this idea to incorporate that is going to be a major plus. And I applaud you for that. And finally, I just want to say to Griffin that I hear you and your wife serve a great breakfast. Christmas Eve breakfast at my house, everybody. If you want. How early? Well, 1201 North Limestone Street, north side of town. You know this thing's on public television. Everybody's invited. Thanks, guys. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Councilmember Stimmit. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Gentlemen, thank you all. I just want to chime in. As a native of Lexantonia, I grew up on the north end of this area. I had a lot of friends. Griffin and I had this conversation about what York Street used to be when I was in high school and how bad it was. Some of the things that were happening there weren't very pleasant for our community, but thank you for, one, working with government, because government's not always the friendliest animal to work with, but kudos to our staff, too, for making it easier, making the flexibility there, because that's what we need more of. Big question I have for you all in terms of financing. Have you approached banks and other people for financing, or is it all coming from your pocketbooks or money you've raised? How have the banks been receptive for this? So right now, we do have some community lending partners, So, Traditional Bank has financed some of the initial purchases of houses. Currently, U.S. Bank is working on our side, on the construction side, on a refinance and construction loan. Then, the financing that Richard mentioned, which is through the Knight Foundation, and it's the first time the Knight Foundation has ever done this for any of their projects, will be in a $200,000 line of credit at 0% interest to help with the construction operation of it. So banks have been pretty receptive to it because it satisfies CRA. I think they understand it. And then on the back end, obviously, we are introducing mortgages, so they're interested in that business and have some different loan products for different amounts of down payment equity and also a lot of the financial literacy. So that's a big part of it. And then as a partner, United Way, we've been referring a lot of people to United Way, which has an individual savings program where somebody can save $2,000. If they can save $2,000 between a six-month and two-year period, United Way will give them a $4,000 grant to apply to a down payment of a home. So we're getting creative. But so far, banks are interested in it and get it. And for the most part, it sets up as a standard real estate deal. Yeah, and that's good to hear because a lot of times, obviously, as you know, the biggest obstacle is the finance in the end. And, you know, also teaching people not only to get into a home, but how do you stay there? You still got property taxes, you still got maintenance, and those aren't cheap things. So you have to learn to budget and prepare for those things in the future. So thank you all for giving people a leg up. And this could be a great model for a couple of other areas, especially one in my district. I know Council Member Myers and a couple other people have areas we want to see turned back around. This is a good way to do that. So thank you. Thank you. Council Member Myers. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Thank you, gentlemen, for coming in today. And I had a few questions for you. I love what you're doing. Absolutely love it. But what makes this work? So you're night out. Why have you guys been successful in getting the people who live in that neighborhood to come out and partake in the things that you're doing? And the background of that is we're in the middle of a small area plan in my district, and we're trying to figure out how to get people to participate in this opportunity while they have it, because once we lay this roadmap, then that's the next generation of what happens. Yeah, I think that's a great question. And, I mean, for us, this started way back in the Neighborhood Association and getting neighborhood coalitions together to do the central sector plan. when we had Council Member James, and that was a multi-collaborative effort. So I think that was getting that plan done and then looking at the recommendations of that plan. One of the first was to start a community development corporation. And so when we started to look at our programming, we said, well, let's follow the central sector plan as our roadmap. And so I think that's been a big part of it. And then a lot of the actual programming we do is it is inclusive. The night market is a free event. It's family-friendly. The El Sistema-based music program that Richard talks about touches children is about educational opportunity and cultural programming. So I think that's a big part of it, lowering those barriers to cultural access. And then I think with the housing project, we're lowering the barriers to entry and also being supportive of people that have different understandings and literacies of how to buy a house. And just, you know, trying to be as transparent as we can, and we want as much community input as we can. So I guess that's a big part of it. And I think we've been very successful to date because of that. And are we the best at it? By no means we are. And we talk weekly in our staff meeting about how to do better with engagement. And so that's an ongoing thing that we're working on. But ideally, I think, and Chris kind of hit on this, that we do want to be a model for community development, not just in Lexington, but across America. And to say, okay, what does it mean to be a community developer? We hope that we are serving as the model for it. Okay. So we're in the middle of a small area plan right now in the 8th District. Our next meeting is going to be January 6th. We don't have a time and a place worked out yet, but we'd love to have all four of you come and anybody you want to bring and really help us understand how you guys are doing what you're doing. Yeah, we'd be happy to. You know, and I mean, we the biggest thing is we we had the benefit. And this actually was government initiated to this project. There was a meeting with the mayor's staff, the community foundation. And they said, look, there's all of this large foundational money out there in the world and we're not going after it. And so they kind of said, let's short list these foundations and these grant opportunities and let's go after it. Let's find the narratives for it. And it was at that meeting that we found out about Arts Place, that they had this money. And then it said, well, let's find a project for it. So I think that's one of our biggest benefits is that we had some initial seed money, not just a little bit, but enough to get us going that allowed us to buy these houses and show some process and hire staff that really helped out. So maybe that's in some of the community development money you guys are thinking about allocating over the next couple years, that you look for funding the CDC efforts to do kind of the strategic planning and engagement and go after some of the large foundational money. Sure. What do you guys do during the day? Do all of you work for the... During the day? Seriously. Well, I mean, just before we came here, Griffin was meeting with BGCF. Richard was meeting with a bank and I was digging a ditch. So, I mean, it runs the gamut from high-level discussions about, you know, the cultural plan and master planning for the neighborhood all the way down to we just had an open house fish fry last weekend on York Street. and bringing together everybody who worked on the first house, everybody on the street who's had to put up with our mess and our noise and all of that, and really bringing everybody out onto the street and feeding everybody and basically being transparent about what we're doing, who we are. And there's no better way to reach people than to just shake their hand and know who they are. So the reason I ask that question is do all four of you work for the CDC? No. So Richard is a staff member, a full-time staff member, hired with the ArtPlace money. And Chris is a full-time staff member. Brandon is a consultant that has helped us through this whole planning process. So he's a hired consultant, and I'm just a volunteer. I'm just the schlep, the guy that, like, has to move stuff. Sure. Okay. Thank you. So I want to get you guys cards and I'll give you mine at the end of the meeting. The last question I had on my time may be up, but can I ask one more question? How about we ask? How about we let Councilmember Massadi and you come back? You can go ahead, George. Okay. No problem. Very good. Thank you, Councilmember Massadi. My question was for Commissioner Paulson. And, you know, the whole time that we talked about affordable housing and one of the things I kept saying was when we have a plan, I'll vote to approve that money. And this is the kind of thing that we were talking about. So my question would be, I'm sure you've been working with these guys. I see a roadmap for at least part of the funding that we have. And Council Member Lane asked about funding streams. Is this something that we could fund through part of that money to do what they're doing? And is this a model that we could make for? They have a meeting, I think, next week with Rick about this. And we've got two different deadlines that are going on for affordable housing fund. The first is coming up in December, and that is for low-income housing tax credits. and most of those people have already been moving it. Again, tax credits are a long-term kind of a deal. The next one is the end of January, January 31st, and those are for non-tax credit deals of which we think these kinds of projects are great. We actually were meeting yesterday about some different issues, and we got them set up to meet with Rick next Tuesday. I believe it's Tuesday. So, yes, this is definitely one of the kinds of projects that we would love to get involved. This is the rehabilitation-type projects, the smaller ones, not necessarily the large new construction that we'll see out of the low-income housing tax credits, but these are the kinds of projects we hope to be able to fund a great deal of. So how do you – someone said that there was a list of foundations they shorted down to the Big 16 or whatever it was, and they went after those. So how do we leverage our money, the government money, with some of those foundations to continue this kind of work? And that's some of the work that Rick is doing right now. In fact, we have – Rick and I meet every other Monday to talk about this, And that was one of our conversations this past Monday was what are some of those other foundations that we can go after? Some of the meetings he has with other associations, he had done a couple conferences and then works closely with the Ohio Capital Group as well out of Ohio. And so those kinds of connections to try to figure out where are the foundations we can try to leverage the money from, those are the things that he's working on in addition to applications and a host of other things. So we won't give a report probably too soon, but I know when we have our first major report out about what all that we've accomplished from this fund, he will be talking about those other groups as well as traditional lending sources, as you mentioned, that they're going after as well. Those kinds of things, those partners as well. Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you, Vice Mayor. You're welcome. Council Member Massadi. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I just want to say thank you to you guys. As you know, the first house I sold was on Miller Street 17 years ago for about $60,000. And that never went any further than they had a concept. I think the North Weimstone Neighborhood Association had a concept there, but it never went any further. I'm hoping, and I know with your guys' persistence and your attitude, that this will go further. And I just want to say thank you, and thank you to the planning staff, because this looks like it's going to be a really neat effort. That's all. Are there other questions? Congratulations. This is very exciting. Thank you all very much, and we appreciate it. Yeah, thank you guys all very much. And also, again, thank you to the planning staff. They moved mountains on this thing, so thank you. Excellent. Very good. All right, Councilmembers, we're on for Council Reports. Councilmember Lane. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I would like to ask for a review of the new Council Chambers sound system during our holiday break coming up. I've talked to several council members, and I'm one of them, who feel that the sound levels vary and frequently speakers cannot be clearly heard. Today, Council Member Henson actually demonstrated a little portable sound system you can wear on your ears to hear better. But I think what we really need to do is consider relocating some of the speakers. and I point out to the speakers over here on the left, they're pointing back to the audience rather than to this. The one over here, both of those were originally this way and now one of them is that direction. And when we have a presentation up there, that sort of breaks the sound up. So I'm hoping maybe a speaker or two in the corners could fill the sound system in for us. So that was my first comment today. Secondly, I wanted to mention that this week, the Sanders Brown Center on Aging at the University of Kentucky is holding its third annual Marksberry Symposium on Alzheimer's and Dementia. And it will also be having a special event honoring 35 years of research that will be held this Thursday night. And unfortunately, it runs up against the council meeting. So I would like to go to that meeting because I'm a former chair and currently on the board. So I wanted to mention to council members that I will not be able to attend Thursday's meeting. And I would also just like to take this opportunity to acknowledge the Sanders Brown Center on Aging, which is a major research entity that has been at the University of Kentucky. And it's been funded, I believe, by the NIH for over 30 years. So we should be very proud to have it as a major research agency in Kentucky. Thank you, Vice Mayor. You're welcome. Does anyone else have a council report? I just would like to ask our CAO Hamilton, since I don't see, is Kevin Stenet, Kevin Stenet, Kevin Adkins in the room? This is not a question for right now, but given what the Herald-Leader reported today about Centerpoint, I wonder if in the next two weeks we could get a detailed report of what's going on, whether the bonds indeed will be sold, and if, in fact, they're scheduled to be sold, and if the crane really is coming, those kinds of things. Without tenants or without the main tenant, it's, I would think, a little difficult. So I would like to request an update. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. All right. Council members, we need a motion on the mayor's report. We have a motion and a second. All those in favor, say aye. Anyone opposed? That motion passes and there's no more public comment. So do I hear motion to adjourn? Okay, move to adjourn. All those in favor say aye. We are adjourned. Thank you very much.