# Planning and Public Safety Committee - January 13, 2015 > Auto-transcribed civic record · January 13, 2015 - **Permalink**: https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/meeting/3558 - **Source video**: https://lfucg.granicus.com/player/clip/3558?view_id=14&redirect=true - **Date**: 2015-01-13 - **Last revised**: July 16, 2026 - **Length**: 8,963 words > ⚠️ **Auto-generated content.** Audio from the official Granicus video was auto-transcribed with OpenAI's open-source Whisper large-v3-turbo model, run locally by The Lexington Times. Structured facts were extracted with GPT-4o; the narrative summary was written by Anthropic Claude. Verbatim wording may contain errors. See [methodology](https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/about/methodology) or [report a correction](mailto:editor@lexingtonky.news). --- ## Meeting Overview The Planning and Public Safety Committee met on January 13, 2015, at 1:00 p.m., with Peggy Henson presiding. The committee addressed seven agenda items during the session, taking 24 motions and votes overall. Five members of the public provided comments during the meeting. The committee approved three items: the Election of Committee Chair, the Appointment of Vice Chair, and Committee Summaries. Additionally, Items Referred to Committee were approved. Three agenda items were deferred for future consideration: EMS Transport Fees, Ridesharing/Taxicab Services, and Current & Future IT Needs in Public Safety. ## Attendance **Present:** Jennifer Mossotti, Bill Farmer, Kevin Stinnett, Chuck Ellinger, Shevawn Akers, Jennifer Scutchfield, Diane Lawless, Harry Clarke, Ed Lane, Aldona Valicenti, Robert Stack, Sally Hamilton, Craig Bentz, Rusty Cook, Rick Curtis, Glenda George, and Melissa Murphy. **Absent:** George Myers. **Late:** None. ## Votes and Decisions The committee took 24 votes during the meeting, all of which passed. **Committee Leadership** The committee elected Jennifer Mossotti as chair of the Planning and Public Safety Committee by electronic vote [timestamp: 00:05:06]. A motion to elect Jennifer Scutchfield as chair failed [timestamp: 00:06:49]. **Meeting Minutes and Resolutions** The committee approved the summary of the November 11, 2014 Planning and Public Works Committee meeting by voice vote [timestamp: 00:10:04]. A motion to amend Resolution 343-2012 to include zoning enforcement activities in addition to nuisance abatement passed by voice vote [timestamp: 00:11:07]. **Zoning and Land Use Matters** A motion to allow mobile food unit vendors as accessory uses if located 500 feet or greater from a residential zone passed by voice vote [timestamp: 00:11:38]. A motion to amend the motion to initiate a text amendment for the Planning Commission's consideration by combining Alternate 2 and Alternate 4 passed by voice vote [timestamp: 00:12:42]. **Committee Item Dispositions** The committee removed several items from further consideration: the possible revision of signed ordinances [timestamp: 00:54:27], the H-1 notification process [timestamp: 00:54:59], the Initiate Zoning Text Amendments for Food Trucks in the P1 and AU Zones [timestamp: 00:56:04], electrical inspection fees [timestamp: 00:57:05], the Code Enforcement, NUSES, abatement process [timestamp: 00:57:36], the permanent barricading of Agape Drive [timestamp: 00:59:13], and the design excellence update [timestamp: 01:00:45]. The committee retained several items for continued discussion: the downtown traffic study [timestamp: 00:57:36], the taxicab ordinance [timestamp: 00:59:44], the scrap metal dealers ordinance [timestamp: 01:02:49], and the sky lanterns ordinance [timestamp: 01:03:22]. **Task Assignments and Other Actions** The committee assigned responsibility for exploring assistance to low-income homeowners with code compliance to Shevawn Akers [timestamp: 00:55:33] and assigned responsibility for code enforcement fines and building inspection civil offenses to Council Member Gibbs [timestamp: 00:56:34]. The committee changed the sponsor of the taxicab ordinance from Diane Lawless to Peggy Henson [timestamp: 01:00:14] and voted to keep the Design Excellence Ordinance on the agenda for next month [timestamp: 01:00:14]. The committee approved the summaries of the November 11, 2014 and December 2, 2014 Planning and Public Safety Committee meetings by voice vote [timestamp: 01:04:24] and adjourned the meeting by voice vote [timestamp: 01:05:21]. ## Budget and Financial Actions The meeting included consideration of funding for Phase 2 of the jail management system upgrade. An appropriation of $1,500,000 was discussed for this project. ## Public Comment The meeting included comments from community members and council members addressing several municipal concerns. **EMS Transport Fees and Senior Impact** Peggy Henson raised concerns about the financial burden on seniors with fixed incomes resulting from Medicare patient responsibility for emergency medical services transport fees [timestamp: 00:20:00]. She requested further analysis of the potential impact of waiving additional charges on this vulnerable population. **Ride-Sharing Enforcement** Kevin Stinnett inquired about staffing and enforcement capacity for local oversight of ride-sharing companies [timestamp: 00:28:28]. He emphasized the need for adequate resources to effectively enforce ride-sharing regulations. **Inter-Agency Data Sharing and System Integration** Robert Stack addressed current data sharing practices, confirming that data is presently shared with the University of Kentucky Police Department and Blue Grass Airport [timestamp: 00:47:31]. However, he noted that these agencies operate separate systems, and integration would require future planning efforts. Council Member Lamb raised related questions about the proposed public safety IT system, asking whether it would include integration with agencies such as the University of Kentucky Police Department and the airport [timestamp: 00:46:58]. He suggested this integration as a future possibility to consider during system development. **Electronic Records Management** Council Member Lamb also inquired whether electronic records management policies would be incorporated into the development of the new records management system [timestamp: 00:52:24]. ## Appointments The following appointments were made during the meeting: * **Jennifer Mossotti** was appointed to serve as Planning and Public Safety Committee Chair * **Jennifer Scutchfield** was appointed to serve as Planning and Public Safety Committee Vice Chair ## Contested Items **EMS Transport Fees and Financial Impact on Seniors** Council member Henson raised concerns about emergency medical services transport fees and their burden on seniors living on fixed incomes. The discussion centered on patient responsibility charges and whether the city should waive additional fees for this vulnerable population. The debate reflected disagreement over the balance between maintaining municipal revenue and protecting seniors from unexpected medical transport costs. No action was taken on this matter during the meeting. **Enforcement of Ride-Sharing Regulations** The council experienced a split vote regarding the enforcement of ride-sharing regulations. Council members questioned whether the city has adequate staffing resources to enforce state regulations governing ride-sharing services. The discussion revealed concerns about resource allocation and the need for coordination between city departments to effectively implement and monitor compliance with these regulations. The split vote indicates the council was divided on how to proceed with enforcement efforts and resource deployment. ## Election of Committee Chair [timestamp: 00:03:34] Council members nominated and voted on candidates for the position of committee chair. The two nominees were Jennifer Mossotti and Jennifer Scutchfield. Following the nominations, a vote was held among council members. Jennifer Mossotti was elected to serve as committee chair, with the election decided unanimously. The key speakers involved in this agenda item were Bill Farmer, Jennifer Mossotti, and Jennifer Scutchfield. **Outcome:** The election was approved, with Jennifer Mossotti elected as committee chair. ## Appointment of Vice Chair Jennifer Scutchfield appointed Jennifer Mossotti to the position of vice chair. The appointment proceeded without opposition and was approved. [timestamp: 00:07:55] ## Committee Summaries Bill Farmer presented a summary of the Planning and Public Works Committee meeting held on November 11, 2014 [timestamp: 00:08:29]. The summary covered the following topics discussed at that committee meeting: * H-1 notification process * Electrical inspection fees * Code enforcement fines * Building inspection civil offenses * Zoning text amendments for food trucks The Committee Summaries agenda item was approved. ## EMS Transport Fees The council discussed the financial impact of Medicare patient responsibility on seniors during this agenda item. [timestamp: 00:15:57] **Key Presenters and Speakers** Rusty Cook and Peggy Henson were the primary speakers on this matter. **Discussion and Data Presented** The council reviewed data showing that Medicare-only patients face an average patient responsibility of $88 for EMS transport services. This financial burden on seniors was a central focus of the discussion. **Concerns Raised** Council member Henson raised concerns about additional charges and requested further discussion on the possibility of waiving these fees for Medicare patients. **Outcome** The item was deferred and left in committee for continued consideration rather than being resolved during this meeting. ## Ridesharing/Taxicab Services The city council reviewed state regulations governing ride-sharing companies during this agenda item [timestamp: 00:25:08]. Key speakers included Glenda George, Rick Curtis, and Peggy Henson. The discussion confirmed the city's approach to regulating ride-sharing services through its existing licensing framework. The council determined that the city will collect occupational license fees from ride-sharing companies and enforce compliance with state regulations through the Division of Revenue. The council clarified that no additional local enforcement mechanisms beyond the occupational licensing requirement would be necessary, as state regulations would govern the primary oversight of these services. The item was deferred, with the council indicating it would receive a future update on this topic. ## Current & Future IT Needs in Public Safety Aldona Valicenti presented on the current state of information technology systems in public safety operations. The presentation focused on the need to upgrade the Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) and Records Management System (RMS), which are currently outdated and operate as siloed systems that do not effectively communicate with one another. Valicenti outlined the limitations of the existing infrastructure and made the case for modernization to improve operational efficiency and data integration across public safety departments. The presentation included discussion of next steps to address these technological gaps. In response to the identified needs, a Request for Information (RFI) was issued to gather vendor proposals and solutions. The discussion also addressed staffing requirements, with plans to hire a project manager if funding is approved to oversee the upgrade and implementation process. Robert Stack participated in the discussion alongside Valicenti. The agenda item was deferred, meaning the matter was not resolved during this meeting and will be revisited at a future date. [timestamp: 00:37:39] ## Items Referred to Committee [timestamp: 00:54:27] The council reviewed and updated the list of items remaining in committee during this agenda item. Bill Farmer, Shevawn Akers, and Peggy Henson led the discussion. Several items were removed from the committee list, and responsibilities were reassigned to specific council members to ensure continued progress on outstanding matters. The council approved the updated committee referrals. --- ## Decisions - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Motion to elect Jennifer Mossotti as chair of the Planning and Public Safety Committee - **Motion** — failed (0-0): Motion to elect Jennifer Scutchfield as chair of the Planning and Public Safety Committee - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Motion to approve the summary of the November 11, 2014 Planning and Public Works Committee meeting - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Motion to amend Resolution 343-2012 to include zoning enforcement activities in addition to nuisance abatement - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Motion to allow mobile food unit vendors as accessory uses if located 500 feet or greater from a residential zone - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Motion to amend the motion to initiate a text amendment for the Planning Commission’s consideration by combining Alternate 2 and Alternate 4 - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Motion to remove the possible revision of signed ordinances from committee - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Motion to remove the H-1 notification process from committee - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Motion to assign responsibility for exploring assistance to low-income homeowners with code compliance to Shevawn Akers - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Motion to assign responsibility for code enforcement fines and building inspection civil offenses to Council Member Gibbs - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Motion to remove the Initiate Zoning Text Amendments for Food Trucks in the P1 and AU Zones from committee - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Motion to keep the Design Excellence Ordinance on the agenda for next month - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Motion to remove the electrical inspection fees from committee - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Motion to remove the Code Enforcement, NUSES, abatement process from committee - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Motion to keep the downtown traffic study in committee - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Motion to remove the permanent barricading of Agape Drive from committee - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Motion to keep the taxicab ordinance in committee - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Motion to change the sponsor of the taxicab ordinance from Diane Lawless to Peggy Henson - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Motion to remove the design excellence update from committee - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Motion to keep the scrap metal dealers ordinance in committee - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Motion to keep the sky lanterns ordinance in committee - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Motion to remove the current and future IT needs in public safety from committee - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Motion to approve the summaries of the November 11, 2014 and December 2, 2014 Planning and Public Safety Committee meetings - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Motion to adjourn the meeting --- ## Full transcript The ¶¶ The End ¶¶ ¶¶ ¶¶ Good afternoon. It's 1 o'clock, and we are about to get started. It's a meeting of the Planning and Public Safety Committee, January 13. As vice mayor, I will be chairing this meeting through the election of committee chair and appointment of vice chair, and then I will turn the chair over to the newly elected chairperson. The first item on the agenda is election of committee chair. Are there any nominations? Council Member Lamb. I would like to nominate Council Member Jennifer Mazzotti for chair. A nomination, is there a second? Second. I have a nomination and a second. Councilmember Mossadi, are you willing to serve if elected? Yes, sir. Thank you. Are there other nominations? Yes, sir. Councilmember Farmer. I would like to nominate Councilmember Jennifer Scutchfield. So moved. I have a motion. Is there a second? I have a motion and a second. Thank you. Are you willing to serve if elected? Council Member Scotchfield. Thank you. Are there other nominations? Hearing none, I'd entertain a motion to close the nominations. I move. I have a motion to close. I second. I have a motion and a second. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay. Then we have two candidates. And since the electronic system is not set up to do two votes at the same time. She said we can. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Oh. Two separate. There are two separate motions. They'll have to be voted on separate. Thank you. In that case, we'll take them in order. The first motion is to elect Councilmember Massadi as chair. Is there any discussion on the motion? Councilmember Gibbs? I have Councilmember Scotchfield's name. Did you say Massadi first? I think the question was the order. I'm just taking them in the order that they were. I think that's because we can't list both motions at the same time. So, and this has got the motion by Farmer and the second by Amanda. Well, so, electronically, we're not in sync. I'm simply going to, as the chair, make a ruling that will take them in the order in which the nominations were made. And the first vote will be on approval of Council Member Masardi as chair. And we can do that vote electronically. So if you will log in. that motion passes and I believe given the direction that we're going and we nonetheless have to vote on the second motion so that motion is to elect council member scutchfield can we get that up on the screen need one more vote thank you that motion fails I believe that means that Council Member Massadi has been elected as chair. Congratulations. And at this time, would you like to name a vice chair? Yes, sir. I would ask Council Member Scutchfield that she would entertain the motion to be my vice chair. Great. Thank you. Very good. Thank you. That concludes the first two items on the agenda. I will turn this over to Council Member Massadi as the new chair. Congratulations. Thank you. And thank you all for your confidence. I appreciate it greatly. If you all have your packet in front of you, we're on page one, and I'd like to turn that over to Councilmember Farmer, as he was the former chair. And, Bill, if you could give us a summation of that Planning and Public Works Committee from November 11th, I would appreciate it. All right. We convened at 132. We approved our summary. Then our second item of business was to move into a conversation about the h1 notification process Which had been tendered to committee by councilmember Myers And I think that resulted in no action but kind of the potential for further further work later on that issue Next was the electrical inspection fees and this was an item that had been placed previously by council by vice mayor Gorton and We had the same The same group of folks here has from the previous month to talk about trying to raise this fee, which the committee had not looked favorably upon at that time. We ended up, through this conversation, kind of coming down to a motion. Here we go. A motion by Vice Mayor Gorton to conduct an annual review of the fee structure and schedule of electrical inspections. That was seconded by Council Member Henson and passed unanimously. And I would now so move on behalf of that committee. Do we have a second? Motion by Farmer, second by Acres to move that forward. Council Member Farmer, are you finished with your report? I figured you want to take a vote on that. I'm sorry. Can we have a vote on that, please? All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Thank you. Go ahead, Council Member Farmer. Next up was the code enforcement fines and assistance for code enforcement compliance. This was an item that had been placed in committee by Council Member Lawless, and she was here to make comment to it. We had asked for proposed language for council consideration that was not available at that time, so that item remains in committee for the time being. Our fifth item was building inspection civil offenses. We had kind of the re-presentation of some information from Jonathan Hollinger. Council Member Lawless spoke to that. That ultimately, after comments by Council Members Henson and Kaye, resulted in a motion by Council Member Kaye, seconded by Council Member Lawless, to amend Resolution 343-2012 to include zoning enforcement activities in addition to nuisance abatement. That motion passed unanimously, and I would now so move on behalf of that committee. Mr. Secretary. All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Thank you. Last, we took up a zoning issue, zoning text amendments for food trucks in the P1 and AU zones. This had been in committee, and we had at least two presentations on it. We were trying to find a middle ground on the best way to let food trucks into certain areas at certain times. This resulted in a couple of motions. The first one was a motion by Council Member Kay, second by Council Member Mazzotti, to allow mobile food unit vendors as accessory uses if located 500 feet or greater from a property zone residential. This motion was approved unanimously, and I would now so move. All those in favor? Sorry, second. Thank you, Council Member Akers. All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Thank you. All right, now the next part that's on page 5 here actually makes reference to parts of two previous packets where we'd ask the Division of Planning for different potential alternatives to allow the use of food trucks in certain parts of the P1 zone. Vice Mayor Gorton noted that letters of support for this item came from tenants or owners of professional office projects, And without having that framework in this packet for returning and new council members, there was a motion tendered at that time by the vice mayor and seconded by Council Member Mazzotti to amend the motion to initiate a text amendment for Planning Commission's consideration that combines alternate two and alternate four, as it says here, indicated on page 96 of that committee packet. And what that is is kind of, as it were, an arbitrated end to this potential because it will give the opportunity for the Planning Commission to look at this and provide the potential for some P1 usage of food trucks. And this just provides the opportunity for that conversation to move forward on our behalf to the Planning Commission. That motion passed unanimously, and I would now so make on behalf of that committee that motion. There's a motion in a second. All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Thank you. Now I'll just read the last paragraph just to wring it out. In response to a question from Council Member Kay, Director King confirmed that an applicant could only apply for a variance from the 500 feet requirement. Council Member Kay clarified that the amended motion requires designation as a professional office project. Director King stated that the professional office projects are defined by code and are designed as such as part of the development review process. That concluded the items for the meeting and we adjourned at 3.05. Thank you, ma'am. Thank you, Council Member Farmer. Any questions? Okay, we'll move on to the second part of the Public Safety Committee, and I will defer to Council Member Hansen, as you were the public safety chair at that time. If you would go forward, please. Thank you, Chair. The meeting began at 1 p.m., and approval of the summary was the first item on the agenda. The second item was emergency medical transport fees. And this item had been referred to committee. I had referred it to committee out of concern for our seniors who might be on limited or fixed incomes. There was quite a bit of questions that came up about this item, and it is on the agenda today for further discussion. And then next on the agenda was the ride-sharing taxicab services, and this is also on our agenda today. We were awaiting some regulations that were put in place by the state. We now have those regulations and we'll take up more discussion on that item. There were several items removed from committee and some items were moved to this committee. So our new committee structure, and then the meeting adjourned at 1.55 p.m. Thank you, Chair. You're welcome. Any questions on the previous minutes? If not, we'll move forward. Looks like the first thing on the agenda is the EMS fiscal year review and the costs that we were just speaking with. I guess, Mr. O'Mara, would you be the one to deal with this? As far as the EMS runs, we've got the presentation here. Actually, Rusty was going to, from Division of Revenue, was going to present. Thank you. Rusty, since we've got some new council members here, would you just kind of introduce yourself and tell them what your position is? Absolutely. My name is Rusty Cook. I'm the Director of Revenue. So I'd like to welcome all the new people here today as well as those back from the break. Thank you very much. I appreciate it. You're welcome, Chair. As Council Member Henson mentioned earlier, she requested some follow-up information on the revenue from Medicare patients for EMS runs. So what I put together today are four slides that break down the runs on an average basis. The first two slides are based on the patients that have Medicare insurance. Some of them may have supplemental insurance as well. And then the last two slides revolve around patients that only have Medicare insurance only. The time period that I looked at was for fiscal years 12, 13, and 14, which was a 36-month period. The average EMS run was $824. The Medicare disallowed amount. For those who don't understand, the Medicare will disallow amount of the run to what you can only bill at. that average was $429, leaving a $395 balance. Medicare paid on average $305 per run, leaving a patient responsibility of about $90 per run. If the patient had some supplemental insurance, those average payments come out to $67 on average, leaving a responsible amount for the patient of $23. On this slide, I've broken down the total EMS revenue and then how much the Medicare collections make up of that. The annual average EMS revenue of the three-year period was just under $6.9 million at $6.88. That is about 2.3% of our total general fund revenue budget. The annual Medicare collections revenue was $2.3 million, which is 33.4% of the total EMS revenue. And the average build runs for EMS was $7,536, which is part of about 25,000 total build EMS runs for a year. This slide, as I was mentioning, are for those patients that only had Medicare coverage. The total average run there is $822. The disallowed amount was $431. The amount due, $391. Medicare paid $304,000, and that left the patients responsible for $88. And again, those are only the patients that had Medicare only. And here again, you see the total annual average at $6.9 million with those patients that we just talked about at $1.3 million worth of revenue, which is 19%, and the average runs at $1,593. That concludes the information, I believe, that Council Member Henson asked to provide. Is there any questions? Any of the council members have any questions if you would sign in. Council member Hanson? Is this information sufficient for you as far as that? I had a couple of questions. Okay, go ahead please. I don't have it. Stacey, I don't have anything on my screen as far as people signed up. She needs to be in your seat, doesn't she? She should be on her. Oh, yeah. She was the only one, so I've removed her. Okay. Thank you. Council Member Hanson, go ahead. Thank you, Chair. Rusty, when you look at the Medicare collections 1.3, I guess what I'm trying to find out is exactly what would the cost be to the city if we were to not charge the additional amount above what Medicare pays? I believe that we would have to give up the entire amount. I'm not on the law side of it. I'm not sure, but I believe it's the entire amount. So we would have to do all Medicare. We can't do just a piece of Medicare. So it would be the entire Medicare run, which is the revenue for the year is $2.3 million in Medicare patients. And does that also include the cost, the mile cost? That is all. That's all the whole amount that's billed. Yeah, the per mile as well as the amount that they pay. Okay. Because I know, you know, even though this has an average of $88 for Medicare, some people are paying much more than that. That is correct. I looked at some of the numbers on that for the Medicare only, and the highest that someone paid that we actually received was $228. and it was as low as less than a dollar. Yeah. So it is a range, like I said, a high of $228. Okay. And so I guess I'm just not clear. This is something that I support because it will help our seniors who are the majority of the people on Medicare, and many of them are limited incomes, and if you get a bill for $150, $200 extra a month, It's devastating to them, and I know a lot of folks don't pay, but the folks that I have talked to, they have the desire to pay. They've always paid their bills, and now, due to whatever reason, they can't afford it. I think that's all the questions I have right now. I don't know if the committee has any other questions. Thank you, Rusty, for your work on this. Do any of the other council members on the committee have any questions? Councilmember Henson, I'm assuming that this was for informational purposes only. Do you want to leave this in committee for any further discussion? Actually, what I would like to do is ask if the administration feels this would be devastating, because I know these funds go into the general fund. What impact if we chose to do this beginning next physical year? I'll take a shot at that. Thank you, Bill. Well, as you see from the slides, it's $2.3 million on a $300 million budget. So you're talking about, well, $2.3 million that would have to be either made up with other revenues or expenses that have been approved in this year's budget to not be paid for next year. So $2.3 million is a sizable amount of money that we would have to carve out of the budget. And I'm not lawyer-based either, but I have a concern that if you carve out one insurance provider, what discussion would then follow from other insurance providers that they should then not pay as well. So I think it has some downstream impact that is very hard to judge right now. Right. I guess I do think it's a considerable amount of money. And I know originally when I looked at this, I wanted to do similar to what we do with the property evaluator. if you're 65 or older. But based upon the laws that we have to follow, which are state, that was not allowed. We could only, but they would allow you to do Medicare, but not based on a person's age. So I would, I'd like to give this some more thought and maybe talk to some of my colleagues, and we'll leave it in committee for now. chair and maybe I can talk to the administration about their desire so I that's fine with me are there any other questions from council members regarding this or comments so be it then we'll just leave it in committee council member Hanson for now thank you if that's okay with you chair thank you that's fine thank you I believe next we'll be talking about the transportation issues. Looks like it would be on page, starting on page 38. And Council Member Henson, did you put that in committee as well? Yes, ma'am. Do you want to do that? It actually begins on page 19. I'm sorry. Go ahead, Council Member Hanson. Thank you, Chair. We have been waiting quite some time on the state to make a determination about the transportation network companies now that they've defined them, which would be your Uber and Lyft. And I feel like Glenda and Melissa Murphy with the law department may have different thoughts on this, but it seemed that they were very thorough in their regulations. And there's a numerous number of pages here where I think that they covered everything that we had expressed concerns about in this committee. For instance, the driver backgrounds, the driver's insurance, the records of vehicle inspections, and it goes on and on and on. And so I would ask Glenda or Melissa if one of you have any thoughts, if there's anything as a city that we need to do. Glenda, if you wouldn't mind coming to the podium, and also would you introduce yourself again for those new council members? I would appreciate it. Sure. My name is Glenda George, and I am one of the managing attorneys in the Department of Law. So to answer your question, Council Member Henson, now that the state has implemented their regulations, there isn't anything for us to do on the local level. But we would be, now we would be collecting revenue from these companies. Is that correct? I'm going to defer that question to the appropriate department. Yes, we will be reaching out to register these people, both the corporate as well as the participating. And there are requirements in the state regulation for them to give us a list of their drivers. And we'll be educating everybody as to what the local tax responsibilities are. Thank you, sir. And, Chair, I see Council Member Stennett, I think, had a question. Yes, ma'am. Councilmember Senate, please. Thank you, Chair. Let's go back to that word I used the last couple of meetings, enforcement. Who's going to enforce this on the local level? Do we have enough staff to do so? And are we going back to enforcing our ordinance as it's written? We will be enforcing our occupational license ordinance through the Division of Revenue, and we have two field inspectors. that will be part of their responsibility, just like looking at construction, looking at independent contractors throughout the county. And what about the other regulations, the insurance requirement? We're in meetings with public safety as to which part will be handled by which department, and we'll coordinate that with them, whether it's revenue when we're reaching out or whether we refer to public safety, we'll make sure that that's coordinated. Okay. So I just want to make sure we have enough staff to do this. I know you're holding your tongue, but we have a budget coming up, and, you know, of course, this could put a financial burden on the city. Well, we've had a successful enforcement of the occupational license, and we'll be reviewing that. And if we need new staff, we'll bring it forward to the council. Also public safety as well. So when will you all finish your discussion and be able to come up with a plan? Well, we just reviewed this last week with everybody back from the holidays and have meetings scheduled. So within the next 30, 60 days, we'll have a game plan ready to go. Very good. Thank you, sir. Thank you, Chair. Councilmember Hanson. Thank you, Chair. Council Member Stenet, also, from what I've read, it appears that the state will offer most of the violate or whatever to make sure that all of the regulations that were laid out are adhered to. and they even list what the possible penalties or citations would be, why a driver would not be approved, and so forth. So, but that was what I was getting at when I asked Glenda about if, What else do we need to do as a city to make sure that these companies are in compliance within our city? But I felt like the state had covered everything. Glenda, do you have any other comment? Other than compliance with the state regulations is going to be handled by the state. that these regs wouldn't be enforced by us on the local level. Exactly. So other than the area of collecting the occupational license fees, there wouldn't be other enforcement issues for us to handle. It's similar to a charter bus. Correct. The regulations, yes. Okay. Thank you. Mr. Curtis, did you wish to speak? Would you introduce yourself, please? I'm Rick Curtis. I'm the administrative officer for public safety, and basically I do all the taxicab administrative regulatory issues as far as our ordinance exists. And to her point, I mean, basically the state regulation, which will go into effect at the end of this month, and the state will, in fact, regulate that as far as ride-sharing goes. We will, in fact, get a list of all the drivers. We will get a list of the companies that are going to be registered for this county, which will be turned over to the Department of Revenue. and essentially they will enforce it regulatorily or just like to do any other business. As far as our own ordinance is concerned, it doesn't cover ride-sharing. It specifically covers taxicab businesses themselves, and that's, for lack of a better term, it's a horse of a different color, and we've been doing that since 2002. So we will continue to regulate and control administratively taxicab businesses as they exist. Thank you. So Councilmember Scottsville, would you take the chair for a moment because I have a question? Mr. Curtis, if you wouldn't mind. Thank you. How many cars are we dealing with? Do you have an idea? How many are the Uber? As far as ride sharing or taxi? Yes. Ride sharing. I don't know at this point. Right now we have approximately 70 is what I've been told from the meetings that we've had with the two different companies that are here now. 30 for one and approximately 40 for the other. But I won't know that exact number until such time as they file with the state how many cars they want to put in the county. And you feel comfortable that these 70 vehicles that are personally owned and through these two companies will be able to get the information so they can go forward with this application process? Yes, and from the meetings that we've actually had with the company representatives, they've already informed us that if they don't get the information that the state requires, they will not drive for them, period. And I guess I go back to what Council Member of the Senate said, enforcement. That's going to be somewhat difficult? It won't be difficult. Administratively, it's going to have to be controlled by the parent companies for Uber and Lyft to be in the two themselves as far as that goes. The state itself will send us a list, and they will check. That's a state responsibility to check that they are within the state regulation that's been issued. And if they don't adhere to the regulations, what are the penalties? They're spelled out in the regulation itself. I don't know exactly what they're saying. Okay. Yeah, but you feel comfortable that the providers are being notified? Yes, ma'am. This has happened specifically to other states, other cities across the country. As a matter of fact, the regulation that the state is putting in is based upon other regulations that have worked across the country. Okay, thank you very much. Thank you, Council Member Scotchfield. Are there any other questions for Mr. Curtis or Law or anyone else? Council Member Henson, we've got Council Member Akers first. I'll come right back. Oh, okay. Go ahead, Council Member Akers. Thank you, Chair. I tried to find the date in the regulation, but I didn't see. What is the deadline for compliance of these ride share companies? anyone anyone february the second okay so at that time they will have had to follow and file with the state and then at that time we will know then how many are here and begin that process of yes okay that's all I have thank you council member Hanson thank you chair just if you look at page 37 there will be a public hearing public comment period on January 22nd at 10 a.m. transportation cabinet building in Frankfort thank you council member for bringing that to the committee's attention and once we have right chair was placed in committee i had placed it in committee taxi cab ordinance was placed in committee by council member lawless and the two were combined so i do have some other discussion to bring about the taxi ordinance when whenever the the committee desires to hear that well we'll be meeting again in um it looks It's like February. Well, it's already on the agenda. Right. The taxi cab services. Do you have anything specifically that you would like us to look at? I know that the taxi drivers are getting very impatient with us because we waited for the state to bring down their regulations on ride shares. But we still need to look at the taxi ordinance to allow them to at least be competitive. So Rick Curtis with the Public Safety Commissioner's Office and myself, we cannot change the ordinance if it's going to cause a huge burden upon our administration as far as regulating. So I would like another month to work on that with Rick and see what we might be able to do to reduce the number of taxis. And the 24-7 dispatch, we're going to be looking at that. Any questions with Council Member Henson's addition to the committee? We'll go ahead and leave that in committee and talk about it next month. Anyone have any questions or additions? If not, we'll just leave that in committee. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Hansen. Next item on the agenda looks like on page 47, and I would say Commissioner Balancente. I'm not sure how to, it's like Masati. It's difficult. If you wouldn't mind introducing yourself, so I don't miss your last name. Good afternoon. I'm Aldona Valicenti, and I usually answer to just Aldona. It works. Thank you. I've been the CIO for about a year in the city, and thank you for this opportunity to come and give you some information about some public safety issues and some public safety systems. I was here about a year, well, probably a little bit less than a year ago, to talk to you about one of the most pressing systems issues that we had, and that was the jail system. And you were kind enough to give us some money, and that project is now beginning. It took about six months to gather the requirements and then actually to make sure that we bid it correctly. And Council Member Hansen sat in on many of the meetings, so we appreciated that. So while we've come to you now with really another... Let me flip the switch here. Is it working? Thank you. This way? No, the remote. Oh, I'm sorry. Everyone's different. Every remote. So anyway, a little bit of background. We'll go through public safety requirements, and we'll do the update. The jail management I already mentioned, part one, is funded. We've actually begun. The project manager is in the audience, if you'd like to have him say a few words later on. We will need part two, and we will come back again during the budget meetings and ask for part two. to finish the project. I'd like to talk to you about two other systems, and they kind of go hand in hand. So it appears like a bunch of letters at first. CAD, CAD, and RMS. CAD stands for Computer Aided Dispatch and Records Management System. And by the way, they work together. They don't work independently. So what is it? CAD is really the first part of entry when someone calls for help in the public safety system. The calls are generated in the CAD system and become the basis of when police and fire get dispatched. And then later on, the data is stored in the records management system. So CAD uses and initiates service, dispatch, and then maintenance of those people in the field. Consists of call input, call dispatching, called status maintenance, and then event notes. Then the data goes over into the records management system, and that's why I say their companion need one and the other. It's a comprehensive piece of software, and it does what a lot of other software does. It enables the public agencies, public safety agencies, to manage and store that information, both to analyze criminal and non-criminal data. So what does it do? So let me go through that second bullet point, because I think those are the ones that are probably most important. It's data and information management. And, you know, one of the things that I know that you hear quite a bit is we need good cars, we need good vests, we need all of that. We need all the physical things in public safety. But I will tell you probably the other thing that we need is good information. And so good information is the ability to data sharing. It's got powerful capability to search the data. It's got reporting features and investigative tools. And it is used in public safety by every single agency. And it covers the lifespan of that records management. So I thought, well, how can I tell you what is the current system and what is the current state of our systems? The best way I can tell you is we're not CSI. you see on television the ability to call up pictures, and it's all integrated, and they know exactly where the car is, and all of that. Well, we're none of that. We're just beginning to touch the very top of the iceberg. So we're at the end of what I call our useful life. Well, what does that mean? Well, it means that we have to come and talk about this at least 18 or maybe even more before the need really exists because it's going to take us that long. So let's say that we get this into the budget. You know we're going to have to look at the requirements in a very, very deep way. We're going to have to bid it, and then we're going to have to find somebody to manage it, and then we're going to start implementing. And guess what? At the same time, we've got to keep all the old stuff running. so it has to be done in parallel. So the timing is ultimate that we do it now. All right, what do we have today? We have silos. What does that mean? That means that in our public safety, every one of the agencies has their own today. They don't talk to each other. And we did it that way because that's what we were able to do in the past. We were not able to do much different. Now, what will it do for us? What are the opportunities? Well, as you can see, it's going to provide, let me go back. Critical information. And why do we need that? Well, right now, if it's in one database, it doesn't necessarily get over to the other one. It has to be transferred. We're now talking about using potentially one system for all of the organizations. We'll be able to respond quicker. Efficiencies, that's a given. Single instance, that data today is taken multiple times and stored in the system over and over again. And if you look at the next generation of 911, we're talking about body cameras. We're talking about storing video. we're talking about many things that we would like to do. Ultimately, that data will need to be stored and retrieved. So we had a committee working. It was formed out of the CAO's office and the CIO's office. We had police, fire, emergency 911, corrections, my office, and public safety commissioners. And you can see them sitting in the back. I told them they needed to be here to support me and to support us. And they're very happy to do that. And I'll tell you, this is the first time that we've gotten everybody to talk about the requirements at the same time. So where are we? Well, we discussed all the challenges. We discussed what we would do. We discussed the possibility of a draft, of looking at requirements. We have issued an RFI that has been drafted and actually released. So we are now waiting for a response. That RFI contained the size of our municipality, as much information that we had that we knew we could share to get some good estimates back on that RFI. The call volumes, for instance, that we handle, the pain points that we have, and that list can go on and on. So criteria. We asked for people to look at what platforms they were using, the opportunities for integration, because really that's what we're looking for, and then looking for some price ranges because right now we have never done a system that served all of those departments. It was released in December. We're looking for responses towards the end of this month. It will be reviewed. And as we've done with all other projects, we're looking to hire a project manager should we have the funding available. And like I said, I go back to the statement that I made. It's not only good equipment, but it's also very good information. and that's really the basis of public safety going forward. We would then, if the RFP was released, we would begin the implementation of a new system, and that's pretty much what we've done with the jail system. Questions? Thank you, Aldona. Council members have any questions? Please log in. Council Member Lamb. I would like to find out if we have talked about working with other agencies such as public safety agencies in Lexington, such as UK and airport, when we're going to be inclusive within our own organization? Has there been any discussions? That has not been part of the discussion, but I think at some point that could be. In other words, the data probably could be shared and might be shared, and there might be somebody out in the audience that can speak to that subject better than I can in terms of what has been shared, for instance, with UK. Anybody? Okay. Okay. All right. Hello, I'm Robert Stack. I'm the director of 911 for Lexington, and I've been in this position approximately one year. I can speak to the fact that we do share data with the University of Kentucky Police Department. As far as their computer-aided dispatch, they are on a totally separate dispatch system and a totally separate computer-aided dispatch software. the same holds true for Blue Glass Airport, separate radio system and separate computer-aided dispatch software. That doesn't mean that we couldn't explore this, as Aldona said, as a future possibility. I just think that it is very important that going forward that we look at all different options and make sure that we are as inclusive as possible to make sure public safety is throughout the city and all agencies. Thank you, Council Member Lamb. Council Member Stennett? Thank you, Chair. Going back to your first slide, Odona, what is the price tag for Phase 2 of the correction, the jail system? It'll be the same amount as Phase 1, which is $1.5 million. Okay. And then what about the current upgrading technology that we've invested in over the last two years, three years, and police now we're working on fire radio systems. Where are we at with that? I think the radio systems are probably about as robust as they are, and I'll let somebody out of the police department answer that because actually that's working. Go ahead. I assume that technology, Mr. Stack, integrates with whatever we do here? It is. The radio system and CAD are actually two different separate entities, but as far as where we're at with the radio system, we just signed a deal in the last few weeks to add additional dispatch consoles for the fire dispatch. That's to bring them onto the new radio system. They should be bidding on that this week for their handheld and mobile radios on the fire side to bring them onto the system. And their timeline is late spring to come onto the radio system. So in terms of technology, on the radio side, police and fire are funded and done? Yes, sir. Okay, this will be in addition to both of those systems. And are police already on the new system, and how is that operating? They've been on the system since April of last year. It's operating fine. And fire will be on by when? Late spring. Late spring of this year? Mm-hmm. Okay, very good. And then, Aldona, as we move forward, I assume I didn't see a council member on the working group, but will you ask for a council member to be on the RFP once you get those back? Absolutely. Very good. We will. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. You're welcome. Any other council members? Council member or Vice Chair Scotchfield, would you take the chair position, please? Aldona, just for clarification, because we've got a lot of new council members, Can you kind of give it the dumbed-down version of what you're doing here so they understand what police has been, what we've done with the jail and police and fire? Because I think it's very important. Well, I think, first of all, let me just say a couple of words about the establishment of the CIO position. It's really to take a look at technology in the most integrated way that we can across the city and the county. And the opportunity, especially in looking, in doing that position and in carrying out the mission of that position, is to take a look at the systems and the infrastructure. So let me differentiate. Infrastructure is really looking at the computers on the desk, the networking possibilities, et cetera, which, by the way, we are doing simultaneously. But then also looking at the systems. These systems, in many cases, were deployed in the 90s, late 90s, written in code that probably in many cases today we would have difficulty finding someone to support it or rewrite it. And it is these systems that still exist. Because hardware is traded out in many cases, systems are very hard to trade out. The investment is huge in most cases in terms of looking at just a piece of hardware on your desk. So we're now looking at those systems, which we know will be at the end of their life. And the reason I say that is because we will not be able to find programmers that can support it. It no longer supports the critical mission of the department. You can't find things in there. So people have built small ancillary systems around them to do that, workarounds in many cases. And in this particular case, we have multiple departments using individual systems, which were all okay in the 90s, but no longer share data, do not have the same field structure, and has to be done manually. You know, in the old days, we used to call it sneaker net. You know, used to carry a floppy over to one computer to another one to transfer the data. I won't tell you that this is at that stage, but maybe pretty close. Sorry, thank you so much. That was a great summary of kind of our technology that we have here in the government. I appreciate it. Thank you very much. Council Member Lamb? Thank you. Vice Chair. I just want one more question. I know that we're probably hopefully moving forward on electronic records management policies with the government, and I was wondering if that was going to be taken into consideration with this records management system component. Well, records management, you have to almost look at it in two parts. Something is going to be for general records that we need to store. And by the way, a lot of that sometimes is also called in question from an archiving perspective at the state level. That will be one issue. This particular system will have some special, let me call it conditions. Data has to be kept confidential. Some of it is investigative data, can only be viewed and touched by authorized people. So there will be some differentiation of the records management. So we're probably living in a common technology world, but in a different policy and environment world. And by the way, records, in most cases, we work with the law department on how long we have to keep them. And I will give you just one data point. You know, email is very prevalent. We send a lot of emails. We actually could bankrupt ourselves by storing all of it all the time. Thank you, Aldona. Any other questions from the committee? Thank you so much for your presentation. I appreciate it. I believe that's all the items that were in committee. If we could just turn to the last page and go real quickly through the list of the items that are still there, and I want to make sure that those items that have not been crossed out, if there's any others that need to be deleted. Council Member Farmer, on the possible revision of signed ordinances, where are we there? I think we're in a position to take that out of committee. So moved. Second. Okay. There was a motion to take out the possible revision of signed ordinances. And a second. All those in favor? Any opposed? Okay, next we have from the H-1 notification process, and that was from Councilmember Myers. And I had worked with him on this process as well. I think we probably needed to have it in committee and discuss it because I'm sure there will be a time there will be an H-1 overlay coming in front of us, and we probably need to know what exactly we do with that part. Councilmember Farmer. Would it be proper to maybe change his name out for either yours or mine? That'd be fine. Let's just put mine there if that's all right. That would be fine. So moved. All those in favor? Any opposed? Thank you, Councilmember Farmer. I've left in the Greenway Manual and Plan. We're still discussing that, I believe. Commissioner Paulson's going to have some information on that for us so we can move forward the next month. Is that correct, Commissioner? Thank you so much. All right, and then we have Vice Mayor Gorton put in exploring providing assistance to low-income homeowners with code compliance. Anyone interested in leaving that in committee and maybe taking that over? Thank you, Council Member Akers. Put her name on that, please. All those in favor, do we have a motion to take that over, Council Member? Sorry. Yes, I move to, I guess, take responsibility for exploring providing assistance to low-income homeowners with code violations. All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Council Member Akers, would you be interested in taking off also the code enforcement fines and building inspection civil offenses as well? I'm sorry, no. I'm not really familiar with that. I think that was probably planning and I wasn't in that committee before. Maybe Council Member Gibbs, would that be of interest to you? Since your district probably has a great deal of code enforcement issues? I'll do it. Thank you. Would you put that in the form of a motion, sir? Make a motion that I replace Diane Malvis as the person responsible for that. Is there a second, please? Second. All in favor? Aye. Okay, we're moving. Next, Council Member Akers. We've got the Initiate Zoning Text Amendments for Food Trucks in the P1 and AU Zones. We've kind of talked about that today. Move to remove. All right. All those in favor? Aye. Okay. Vice Mayor Kay, Design Excellence Ordinance. Where are we at with that? That's next month, I believe, isn't it? That's scheduled for next month. I'd like to keep it on the agenda. That's fine. Thank you. All right. We have another thing from Vice Mayor Gorton, electrical inspection fees. Move to remove. Second. All those in favor? Aye. All right. Next, we have something from the General Services Link, Code Enforcement, NUSES, abatement process. Move to remove. Second. All those in favor? Aye. Okay. Council Member Farmer, downtown traffic study. I would defer to the administration on this. This has had a modicum of secrecy about it, similar to the Manhattan Project. I would be interested in their update as soon as possible, personally. Do we have a motion to keep that in committee, then? That's a strong motion to keep it in committee. All right, and do we have a second? All those in favor? I think the administration has a note of that. As to when, I don't know. or maybe we should pose that to them now or soon, when might they update us or be in a position to update us? I don't know. CAO Hamilton, do you think you might be able to give us a response to that, please? And I think everybody knows who Sally is, but if you want to introduce yourself. I'm Sally Hamilton, and I'm part of the Manhattan Project. And I'm the chief administrative officer. I will find out when it would be a good time, and I will suggest that time is soon, and I'll get back with you. Thank you. All right, let's move on. And we've got the permanent barricading of Agape Drive. And Craig, can you come to the podium and just give a rundown on that place and introduce yourself? That's already been removed. Right, but he had something he wanted to add about this. Craig Bentz, research analyst with the council office. Most of the items that are stricken through on your list are done so just because they are recommended for referral to Environmental Quality and Public Works Committee under the new committee structure. The only exception is that permanent barricading of Agape Drive. That one is stricken through just because it can likely be removed from committee. It's still in the committee, but it's been acted upon by the council, so that one could be removed at your discretion. That's signed. Do we have a motion? Move to remove. Second. All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Thank you, Craig. And then we'll move down the list. We've got the taxicab ordinance, which we're leaving in committee, and that was going to be referred now by Council Member Henson. Is that correct? Yes. I'll move to change the name of lawless, sorry, to Henson. Second. All those in favor? Aye. Council Member Akers? we skipped over the design excellence update just above that one, the taxicab ordinance. And I actually had a question on the difference between that, it's in committee, as well as the design excellence ordinance and how those are different. I agree. I'm sorry I missed it. I kind of felt like it was the same one. Vice Mayor Kaye. I can speak to that. One of them was a standing item for review while the task force was doing its work. And I believe since we're prepared to come forward with a report, we can delete the design excellence update. So move. All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Thank you. We've spoken about the taxicab ordinance. Next, it looks like, well, it's merging the division. That's going to go to public safety. We'll just leave that in here. the Division of Emergency Management into Fire and Emergency Management Services will stay in committee. EMS transport fees, we went over that today. Council Member Henson, you wanted to leave that in committee as well? Sure. Okay. We'll go ahead. Do you want to make a motion on that? I'll make a motion to leave it in committee. You have a second? I'll second it. All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? We'll go forward with the ride-sharing regulations as well. Councilmember Hanson? I think it would probably be good, based upon the questions that we got, to possibly just give us an update and let us know that it's been implemented. Say if we could have a ride-sharing regulation update in March. If the administration can provide that. Do you think you'll be able to do that, Glenn, at that time? Okay. That's fine. You want to move that then, Council Member Hanson? Yes. So I would make a motion that we leave ride-sharing regulations in committee and get an update in March. Thank you. Do we have a second? Second. All those in favor? Thank you. Next would be Council Member Farmer, Scrap Metal Dealers, UCG Code 13-54-3. This has been placed in committee. We haven't had a hearing on it yet, and I believe it has to do with the disposition of certain junk or abandoned vehicles, but I think we need committee work on it or time on it, if you will, so I'd make a motion to keep it in committee. So moved. Second. All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Thank you. Councilmember Farmer looks like you have sky lanterns as well. This is the one I've taken over for Councilmember Clark, and it was placed in committee, and I think this has to do with Chinese lanterns, weren't they? I was going to say religious concerns in relation to the proposed ordinance. I think we should keep it in committee and hear it. It has not had a hearing at this level. So I'd move to keep it in committee. So moved. All those in favor? Any opposed? Thank you. And the last one, Council Member Henson, we talked about that today, current and future IT needs and public safety. I think that's going to be, we'll probably have another report with that when it comes to budget time, but go ahead. That's what I was going to suggest is that we just get a quarterly update on that item, but I would move to remove this from committee and I think work with Craig to make sure that that gets scheduled on the agenda. It's similar to the way we do in environmental quality. That's fine. I'm going to make a motion on that, Council Member Henson. I so move to review. Second. Second. All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Well, thank you, and thank you all for your confidence in me as chair, and hopefully we'll get rolling with this. Oh, Council Member Farmer. One more thing. Congratulations on your chairmanship. Thank you. I think in the item of just housekeeping, we need to formally approve of two summaries that we went over on. Sorry? I'm sorry, it was off. I'll congratulate you again on your chairmanship. I think we need to go back and have a formal motion to approve the two summaries we went through. So I move to approve both. So moved. Do we have a second? All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Thank you. Thank you. I have a motion to adjourn. So moved. Thank you all. I'll be standing by I will be here for you I will be here for you