# Council Work Session - January 13, 2015 > Auto-transcribed civic record · January 13, 2015 - **Permalink**: https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/meeting/3559 - **Source video**: https://lfucg.granicus.com/player/clip/3559?view_id=14&redirect=true - **Date**: 2015-01-13 - **Last revised**: January 13, 2015 - **Length**: 10,185 words > ⚠️ **Auto-generated content.** Audio from the official Granicus video was auto-transcribed with OpenAI's open-source Whisper large-v3-turbo model, run locally by The Lexington Times. Structured facts were extracted with GPT-4o; the narrative summary was written by Anthropic Claude. Verbatim wording may contain errors. See [methodology](https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/about/methodology) or [report a correction](mailto:editor@lexingtonky.news). --- ## Meeting Overview The Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government held a meeting on January 13, 2015, at 3:00 PM in the Council Chamber at 200 E. Main St, Lexington, KY 40507, with Mayor Gray presiding. The council addressed 10 agenda items during the session, covering a range of municipal business including zoning matters, budget amendments, and administrative approvals. The meeting resulted in 9 formal motions and votes, with the majority of substantive items receiving approval, including requested rezonings and docket approval, budget amendments, new business items, and the mayor's report. No public comments were recorded during either of the designated public comment periods for issues on the agenda or issues not on the agenda. The session concluded with standard informational reports from council members and the mayor before adjournment. ## Attendance The following members were present at the January 13, 2015 meeting: • Gorton • Ellinger • Kay • Ford • Akers • Beard • Farmer • Stinnett • Scutchfield • Myers • Mossotti • Clarke • Henson • Lane **Absent:** • Lawless No members arrived late to the meeting. A total of 14 members were present out of 15 total members. ## Votes and Decisions The Council conducted nine unanimous votes during the January 13, 2015 meeting, with all 15 members present voting in favor of each motion. **Administrative Approvals** • Stinnett motioned to approve the docket for the December 9, 2014 Council meeting, seconded by Ellinger. The motion passed unanimously 15-0. • Beard motioned to approve the December 2, 2014 summary, seconded by Akers. The motion passed unanimously 15-0. **Budget and Financial Matters** • Lane motioned to approve budget amendments, seconded by Clarke. The motion passed unanimously 15-0. • Ellinger motioned to approve December 9, 2014 neighborhood development funds, seconded by Gorton. The motion passed unanimously 15-0. **New Business Items** • Gorton motioned to approve new business, seconded by Henson. The motion passed unanimously 15-0. • Gorton then motioned to amend item B under new business to change the donation value amount from $800 to $1,500, seconded by Henson. This amendment passed unanimously 15-0. **Mayor's Report** • Kay motioned to amend the Mayor's report to remove the wording regarding the appointment of Council Member Steve Kay on item #10, seconded by Farmer. The amendment passed unanimously 15-0. • Gorton motioned to approve the Mayor's report as amended, seconded by Beard. The motion passed unanimously 15-0. **Meeting Adjournment** • Gorton motioned to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Clarke. The motion passed unanimously 15-0. All votes included the same 15 Council members: Gorton, Ellinger, Kay, Ford, Akers, Beard, Farmer, Stinnett, Scutchfield, Myers, Mossotti, Clarke, Henson, and Lane. No transcript timestamps were available for these votes. ## Budget and Financial Actions The council addressed several significant financial items totaling over $412,000 in expenditures and grant funding. **Infrastructure and Development Projects** The council amended Resolution 59-2013 for the Lexington Downtown Streetscape Phase One Site Amenities Package (L1332-14), allocating $137,580 to E.C. Matthews for the project enhancement. For transportation infrastructure, the council approved executing an agreement with Strand Associates for a scoping study of the Legacy Trail Project Phase 3 (L0002-15), committing $139,320 to advance planning for this trail expansion. **Emergency Services and Public Safety** Two items addressed emergency management operations. The council accepted a $106,212.27 grant award from the Kentucky Department of Military Affairs, Division of Emergency Management for the FY 2015 Emergency Management Assistance Project (L1338-14), providing federal funding for local emergency preparedness. Additionally, the council approved restructuring emergency communications staffing by abolishing one classified Telecommunicator Supervisor position and creating one Public Safety Answering Point (PSAP) Manager position (L1281-14), with an associated cost of $9,944.55 for the personnel change. **Parking Services** The council authorized executing a Professional Services Agreement with the Lexington and Fayette County Parking Authority (LFCPA) for $19,250 (L1344-14), continuing the partnership for municipal parking management services. These financial actions demonstrate the council's focus on infrastructure improvements, emergency preparedness, and operational efficiency, with the majority of funding directed toward capital projects and grant-supported emergency management capabilities. ## Public Comment - Issues on Agenda This agenda item provided an opportunity for members of the public to address the governing body regarding issues listed on the meeting agenda for January 13, 2015. Based on the available information, this was a standard public comment period designated specifically for agenda-related matters, allowing community members to share their perspectives, concerns, or support for items scheduled for discussion during the meeting. No specific speakers, comments, or issues were documented in the available records for this public comment period. The item was informational in nature, serving as a formal opportunity for public participation in the governmental process. This type of public comment period is typically structured to allow residents and stakeholders to provide input before the governing body deliberates on agenda items, ensuring community voices are heard as part of the decision-making process. ## Requested Rezonings/ Docket Approval The meeting addressed the approval of requested rezonings and the meeting docket. This agenda item was presented as a resolution requiring formal approval from the governing body. The item involved standard procedural matters related to zoning requests and the organization of meeting business. No specific details about individual rezoning cases, property locations, or applicants were provided in the available meeting materials. The resolution was approved by the governing body without recorded discussion or debate. No concerns or objections were raised during consideration of this item. **Outcome:** The requested rezonings and docket approval resolution was approved. *Note: Specific transcript timestamps are not available for this agenda item.* ## Approval of Summary The meeting addressed the approval of the summary from the previous meeting. This routine procedural item was presented for the board's consideration and approval. The agenda item was classified as a resolution requiring formal action by the governing body. No specific speakers were identified as presenting or discussing this item during the proceedings. The summary from the previous meeting was approved without recorded discussion or debate. No concerns or objections were raised regarding the accuracy or completeness of the summary document. **Outcome:** The summary was approved. *Note: Specific transcript timestamps are not available for this agenda item.* ## Budget Amendments The council considered approval of various budget amendments during the January 13, 2015 meeting. This agenda item was presented as a resolution requiring council action. The budget amendments were listed in the meeting agenda, though specific details of the individual amendments were not captured in the available meeting documentation. No key speakers were identified for this particular agenda item, suggesting the amendments may have been presented as part of routine administrative business. The council approved the budget amendments as presented. No significant discussion, debate, or concerns were recorded regarding these financial adjustments. **Outcome:** The budget amendments were approved by the council. *Note: Specific transcript timestamps and detailed discussion points were not available in the source materials for this agenda item.* ## New Business The meeting addressed several new business items requiring approval, though specific details about the individual items were not provided in the available materials. The agenda item was categorized as a resolution type, indicating formal action was required from the governing body. The new business segment encompassed various amendments and contracts that needed official approval. While the specific nature of these amendments and contracts was not detailed in the extracted information, they represented items that had not been previously scheduled or required immediate attention from the board or council. No key speakers were identified for this portion of the meeting, suggesting either that the items were considered routine in nature or that the discussion was brief and procedural. The absence of recorded concerns or debate indicates the new business items may have been non-controversial or had been previously reviewed in committee or staff meetings. The outcome of the new business agenda item was approval, meaning all presented amendments and contracts received the necessary votes to move forward. This suggests the governing body found the proposed items acceptable and in line with their policies and procedures. Without specific transcript timestamps available, the exact duration and detailed content of the new business discussion cannot be determined from the provided materials. The approval of these items would have required appropriate motions, seconds, and voting procedures according to the body's standard parliamentary practices. The successful approval of the new business items allowed the meeting to proceed with these matters resolved and ready for implementation or further processing as required by the specific nature of each approved amendment or contract. ## Continuing Business/ Presentations During this agenda item, the meeting addressed ongoing business matters and presentations. The discussion included topics related to neighborhood development funds, though specific details about the presentations or their content were not provided in the available materials. This portion of the meeting was classified as informational in nature, indicating that the presentations were intended to update attendees on current initiatives or provide background information rather than to seek formal action or approval on specific matters. No specific speakers were identified for this agenda item, and no transcript timestamps were available to reference particular portions of the discussion. The outcome was noted as informational, suggesting that no formal votes or decisions were made during this segment of the meeting. The agenda item appears to have served as a vehicle for ongoing communication about municipal business and development-related matters affecting the community. ## Council Reports The Council Reports agenda item provided an opportunity for council members to share updates on various topics and activities. This was an informational discussion item with no formal action required. No specific transcript timing or detailed content was available for this portion of the meeting. The reports typically allow individual council members to update their colleagues and the public on committee work, community events, regional meetings, or other matters of municipal interest they have been involved with since the last council meeting. As a standard agenda item, Council Reports serves as a communication tool for elected officials to maintain transparency about their activities and keep fellow council members informed about ongoing initiatives or concerns within their respective areas of responsibility. The outcome was informational in nature, with no votes or formal decisions made during this portion of the meeting. ## Mayor's Report The Mayor's Report was presented during the January 13, 2015 meeting as a standard agenda item. The report included various updates and amendments for the council's consideration. The agenda item was categorized as a presentation-type item, allowing the mayor to provide updates on municipal matters and propose any necessary amendments to existing policies or procedures. **Outcome:** • The Mayor's Report was approved by the council **Note:** Specific details regarding the content of the mayor's presentation, including particular updates discussed, amendments proposed, or any council discussion that may have occurred, are not available in the provided meeting materials. No transcript timestamps or detailed speaker information were recorded for this agenda item. ## Public Comment - Issues Not on Agenda This agenda item provided an opportunity for members of the public to address the governing body on matters not specifically listed on the meeting agenda for January 13, 2015. No transcript timestamp information is available for this portion of the meeting, and no specific speakers or comments were documented in the provided materials. This represents a standard public comment period that allows community members to bring forward concerns, suggestions, or information on topics outside the formal agenda items. The outcome was informational in nature, serving as a forum for public input rather than requiring any formal action by the governing body. Public comment periods of this type are typically included in government meetings to ensure transparency and provide citizens with regular opportunities to engage with their elected or appointed officials on matters of local concern. Without additional documentation or transcript details, the specific content of any public comments made during this period cannot be determined from the available materials. ## Adjournment The meeting concluded with a motion to adjourn. The motion was approved, formally ending the session. No specific speakers were identified for this procedural item, and no discussion or debate was recorded regarding the adjournment motion. The outcome was approval of the motion to adjourn the meeting. --- ## Decisions - **Motion** — passed (15-0): Approve the docket for the December 9, 2014 Council meeting - **Motion** — passed (15-0): Approve the December 2, 2014 summary - **Motion** — passed (15-0): Approve budget amendments - **Motion** — passed (15-0): Approve new business - **Motion** — passed (15-0): Amend item B under new business to change donation value amount from $800 to $1500 - **Motion** — passed (15-0): Approve December 9, 2014 neighborhood development funds - **Motion** — passed (15-0): Amend the Mayor’s report to remove the wording the appointment of Council Member Steve Kay on #10 - **Motion** — passed (15-0): Approve Mayor's report - **Motion** — passed (15-0): Adjourn the meeting --- ## Full transcript The ¶¶ Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Welcome to the new council, and welcome to our new council members. I think it would be appropriate to. All right. Yeah, there we go. I've already asked forgiveness if I get confused on any names right out of the gate, y'all. Just ask forgiveness ahead of time. I think it'll be okay, though. All right. First on our agenda for the work session today is public comment for issues on the agenda. Mr. Mundy, nobody's signed up for issues on the agenda. All right. that allows us to next move to, I'm going to ask Councilmember Kaye as an announcement. Councilmember Kaye. Thank you, Mayor. And I forgive you for already failing to use my new title. Thank you, sir. Forgive me. I asked for that in advance, so thank you, sir. And I'm happy to provide that. I'm making a motion to suspend the rules so that I can make an announcement to the council and the public. So move. Thank you. All right. It's a motion and a second. Unless there's objection. We'll proceed. Councilman Vice Mayor Kaye. Thank you, Mayor. I'm announcing right now that Susan Lamb has agreed to serve as the parliamentarian going forward for the council. I want to thank her for being willing to do that. and I want to thank Council Member Stinnett for the long service that he provided. But thank you. Thank both of you. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Vice Mayor. All right, that allows us to move on to the next item on our agenda, which is rezonings and the docket approval. I believe there are some motions to amend with... Well, let me first ask for a motion to approve the docket, and then we'll go to the motions. Is there a motion to... So we'll move approval. A motion by Vice Mayor Kay and a second by Council Member Lane. All right. Is there any discussion? And I believe there are some motions now for motions regarding public hearings. Council Member Ford. Thank you, Mayor. Council Members, this is regarding ordinance number six on our work copy docket for Thursday night. I move to schedule a special council meeting for the purpose of holding a rezoning public hearing. I ask that we schedule that public hearing on Monday, March 9th at 5 p.m. So moved. Second. Motion by Council Member Ford and second by Council Member Scotchfield. Is there any discussion on the motion? All right. Hearing none, then we can take a vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Council Member Ford. Next, Council Member Lamb. I've actually, are we going in order on the docket? Well, I was following who had signed up to speak. Okay, all righty. In my history and knowledge, I believe we are supposed to go in order on ordinance number 2, 3, 4. All right, that'd be the order to set up the public hearings or not, please. Okay, thank you. So that will be Council Member Gibbs. I move to place on the docket without public hearing, MAR 2014-20, a petition for a zone change from P1 zone to an R3 zone for 232 Waller Avenue, as recommended by the Planning Commission. So moved. It's a motion by Council Member Gibbs and a second by Council Member Sadi. Is there any discussion on the motion? All right. Hearing none, then we can vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Next would be ordinance number three, and that would be Council Member Evans. Yes, I would move to place ordinance number three on the docket without a public hearing. Second. A motion by Council Member Evans. Second by Council Member Henson. Is there any discussion? All right. If not, then we can take a vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Now, Council Member Lamb. Yes, and on number four, I want to state that there is one objector on this ordinance, and they were not able to be connected with, so I'm going to make this motion on the presumption that they are not going to come forward and ask for a public hearing at a later date. I make a motion that we put ordinance number four on the docket without a public hearing. Second. Motion by Council Member Land, second by Council Member Akers. Is there any discussion? Hearing none, then we can vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Next is back to Council Member Evans. Yes, I would move to place ordinance number five on the docket without a public hearing. Motion by Council Member Evans and second by Council Member Henson. Is there any discussion? Okay, hearing none, then we can vote. All in favor, please say aye. Opposed, no. And that motion also carries. I'm showing that we've got a couple of walk-ons, too. Is that correct? Council Member Akers? Yes. Thank you, Mayor. I move to place on the docket a resolution authorizing the Division of Engineering pursuant to Code of Ordinances Section 1886 to install a multi-way stop control at the intersection of Ferndale Pass and Buck Lane. So moved. Motion by Council Member Akers. Second by Council Member Ford. Is there any discussion? All right. Hearing none, Council Member Stennett. Yes, sir. Council Member Akers. not that I disagree with either one of these issues, but our normal process is to go through committee for traffic changes in areas of our city. So just curious as to why you'd rather bypass that and go straight to the docket. Well, in my two years serving previously, I don't believe anyone or that I know of, we didn't put stop signs into committee unless they, well, I don't recall them ever being put through committee. This was a request from the Neighborhood Association and Masterson Station, and then at their request, I submitted it to Traffic Engineering, who did their study traffic count. That memo is attached supporting their recommendation for the stop controls, and so therefore I'm bringing it forward. I mean, it's fine to be vetted through committee, but as far as a simple traffic stop sign in a neighborhood, I'm not sure that it's necessary. Yeah, again, not that I disagree with either one of these, but I think we learned on two issues last year that we were told they were simple traffic matters, and the council bypassed our process, put it to the full docket they passed, and then we had neighborhoods upset. So I won't support this. I'll support it going to the committee and reviewing there and have a recommendation from committee back to the council. I know the last year or so we've gotten away from that, and, again, that's harmed this council and neighborhoods because we didn't have a full vetting process. Thank you. And if someone, if the clerk or anyone in the council can provide me with, like, where this is written, that that's the process or the procedure or rules of council, then I'm happy to do this going forward. But I haven't until now, and so that's why I didn't tonight. Thank you. Council Member Maloney. Well, wait a minute. All right. I just, okay, okay, okay. I mean, getting off for a few years and coming back on, I remember when we were on the council, and I know Mr. Brown is here and Jennifer, and we used to have a process to go through the service committee to be looked at these things. And there were times when council members did vote against what the recommendation of four-way stops in certain neighborhoods. So as a commissioner, I had a problem with the process when they changed it. Now, I think we need to have a process. To me, I think it's best that we go back and go back to the old way and let people, let the whole council know before we make these counts. And from what I understand, you all did have some bad examples last year, and a couple of them. I remember one was over in Glutton Catholic and then another one somewhere else. So it seems like it may be wise if we just put these to the service commission. So I think we need to start doing the process again. Council Member Farmer. Thank you, Mayor. My commentary is going to be similar to what's been sampled so far. it may not be something that is completely codified but it is something that the council got away from certainly over the last two years if not a longer period of time and it has to do with making sure that the needs of the neighborhood and the needs of the city are all meshed together and to take this from an administrative side and just place it on the docket without having it be part of the council's committee organization and structure, and to give time for all to be involved in those kind of conversations. It just goes to a process issue. And I think that we're better served to try to have process on behalf of the citizenry rather than to bypass it or have the perception of bypassing it because at this point this can be or your motion would place it on the docket and really would not have been heard in a public format other than in the discussion we're having right now or subsequent to that for a first and second reading. So I'm going to join some others in wanting us to return to a time where we spent more time with some of these requests rather than less because if we keep up at the rate we have been producing these, there will be a stop sign on every corner. And I think we need to take that. If you talk to the traffic engineering folks, the more stop signs people see, the less they are aware of them. So they have to have impact with where they're placed. And I don't doubt the gravamen behind traffic's recommendations here, but I think having the discussion in public is very important for our process. Thank you, sir. All right. Vice Mayor Kay. Thank you, Mayor. I'm going to weigh in with a similar sentiment. We don't have a formal procedure. There's no rules and regulations about this, but I believe I would encourage all council members to have as the default position put it into committee. If there's some emergency, if there's some rationale why it does not need to go to committee, you can still bring it forward to the council, and we can make a decision on an ad hoc basis. But I think as policy, I would agree. I think we need to have it be something that we routinely send to committee just so if there is any opposition, if there's concern, people have a chance to raise those questions. So on these, and I would start with these two, and it will delay them for a month, but I would vote no to put them on the docket and then either make a motion or have someone else make a motion to place them into committee. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Council Member Henson. Thank you, Mayor. I guess I have mixed feelings about this because I know I've been on the council for seven years and this has not been the procedure since I've been here. And many times our neighborhoods go through a process. I trust in traffic engineering not to allow a stop sign at every intersection, I mean a four-way stop. But so I just think as a district council representative, I know more about what is needed in my neighborhoods and listen to my constituents that I don't know what we gain by placing it in committee when it's been vetted completely through traffic engineering and with the neighbors. So that's my thoughts on it. I'm really okay either way. I don't think it will slow the process down tremendously, but we also have another one that has come up recently. The thing, I think, with Lexington Catholic was a problem because it was permit parking, and that is a different, different issue than a stop sign or a no-through trucks. So thank you. Thank you, Council Member Henson. Council Member Brown. Yes, I agree with a lot that's been said, and I'm familiar with it going into committee, and I have no problem with the resolutions as such and the traffic patterns, but I really think it's better served for the public and the people and other council members to know what's going on in districts and the type of intersectional controls that we're looking at because there may be something in your particular district that may be comparable to the district that I'm in. And so I don't feel like that I want to take something through without a due process. So I'll be voting no on this. I would like to see us to have some type of policy. And this is a new year, a new day, and I think we need accountability. Thank you. Councilmember Ford. Thank you, Mayor. members of the council. I second the motion that Councilmember Acres brought forth and I'll also have to agree with Councilmember Henson that with understanding of the way things were done traditionally that is not how it has occurred here recently. And so I say that just in defense of Councilmember Acres not to bring anything forth maliciously. I do understand though however the will of the council for it to go to committee. Council Member Lamb helped us just a few moments ago with providing a better way of going through the docket approval. So we have a good blend of experience and new council members here. So, Mayor, the question I would ask, I would encourage Council Member Akers to heed the guidance of the council to send it to committee. But, Mayor, the question I have for the chair and for the floor is which committee is the best venue for such an issue to be had as judged by our past practice? Because I'm unaware, Mayor, that would be helpful to me. Well, I'm hearing some suggestions from council members. Can I speak or do I need to get up? Yeah, Council Member Brown. In the past, and it's been a number of years ago, we always had it in the Services Committee, which is basically General Government Committee, and it really served well there in that particular committee. All right. All right. So we've had that. Council Member Ford, you heard the comment. Yes, sir. That would be helpful. Thanks, Mayor. councilman massadi thank you mayor um i've got a little bit of history on this as well and i do think councilmember acres knows exactly what her district needs however i think everything has to have a neighborhood vetting a public vetting irregardless so i would say that this should be placed in general government committee and if councilmember ford would consider that and if we can make sure that it's expedited because that is something that the neighborhood is counting on that it doesn't languish in committee. We get it there monthly, so we know that this can be discussed and moved forward. So I would still make that motion, that these two resolutions be put in the general government committee. First, let me withdraw the other motion first, and then I'll make the next motion. Do we need to have a second mayor before we go forward? If Councilmember Akers wishes to withdraw the motion, and then if Councilmember Ford withdraws the second. I withdraw the second, Mayor. All right. Okay, and then I have a, in my opinion, it seems that since traffic reports to planning, Commissioner, that it should, no, public works. It is public. Okay. Then I make a motion to place, I guess, can I just say both of these resolutions? or do I need to read them separately? I think just cite the, just a reference to. Well, and I need to do that later probably in council comment. I'll do it later. You mean the motion itself? Yes. Okay. All right. Does anyone else wish to speak to this now that Council Member Akers has withdrawn her motion? All right. Then we can vote on the original motion to approve the docket, unless there's any further discussion. Is there any further? All right. We've already got a motion and a second to approve the docket. All in favor of the motion, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. All right. Next on our agenda is the summary. Is there a motion to approve the summary? So, no. Motion by Council Member Scutchfield, second by Council Member Farmer. Is there any discussion on the motion? All right. If not, then we can vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Next on our agenda is budget amendments. Is there a motion to approve? Motion by Council Member Scutchfield, second by Council Member Henson. Is there any discussion? Yes, sir. Council Member Farmer. Yes, sir. It's on page 11. It's journal 82979-80. Second one from the bottom, special miscellaneous revenue fund to provide funds for Cooper Drive Street Construction Project by recognizing revenue from UK for this purpose. I'm just interested in the scope of this project, if someone could tell me. Chief Administrator. Okay. Commissioner Paulson. This is the project that's already been completed on Cooper. It's the bike lanes and the – let's see if Keith's back there. Keith. All right. But it's the – we might be able to get Keith to come up. He was the project manager if you want a little bit more. But this was the bike lanes. This is also the mid-block crossing on Cooper Drive around University of Kentucky. Which is all complete. It is all complete. It's actually – if you have not been out there, it's actually a very nice set of bike lanes, probably better than a lot of that we've done recently. It's one of our kind of newer type. But also the mid-block crossing that allows students to walk over to the current BCT campus and cross over to main campus. Is there anything else? I'm good. If that's what it is, is there more to it? Just go for the project. Yeah, that's it. All right. I think that's it. Sounds like it. Good to go. Thank you both. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Council Member Farmer. Thank you, Commissioner Paulson. All right. Any further discussion? Council Member Henson. Thank you, Mayor. I have a question on Journal 82948-49. All right, can you ask? Grants and special projects. Eliminate funding for Salvation Army. It looks like Irene's coming up to the podium. Thank you, Irene. Irene, can you just explain what's going on here? Salvation Army was allocated these funds, emergency solutions grants program funds, and they found they were not able to comply with the federal regulations, so they have turned those funds back to us, and we are reallocating them as rapid rehousing and prevention funds. So, thank you. And those funds would go to Arbor Youth Services? They will be expended for Arbor's youth clients. They will actually be expended for rent and utilities, which means that checks will be written by the government. But Arbor's Youth Services will do the case management, will help the clients find units if they're homeless, help them get through the process and do all the paperwork, and then we'll write the checks. And that's why we've used their department ID. Okay. And I had another question for you about the Tiffany as payback. How many jobs did they, were they, do you remember the number? I'm sorry. I will send you that information. They got very, very close. Kevin may know. Kevin Atkins is coming to the podium. Yeah, we were notified by the Economic Development Cabinet. They're actually seven short of their agreed-upon total. That's the bad news. The good news is the jobs they have hired actually have exceeded the salary that they have projected. The pay scale. Good. Okay. So they're seven jobs short. Yeah. This was part of what program? It's part of the— It's not the jobs fund, but it's— Right. It's part of the state incentive package. Okay. It's done through an ED bond, economic development bond. when they do the monitoring, if the targets are not being hit, the money has to be repaid not to the state but to the locality, which in this case is us. Okay. Thank you. I would be interested in some time. I guess I could place it in committee, but if we could get an update on all of these and how they're doing, I don't know if that's possible or not. We can put together something. Okay. Thank you. all right all right councilmember acres I had a follow-up to Irene on number or letter G oh sorry well okay yeah I guess all right I'll wait then all right so there any is there any further discussion on budget amendment the motion to approve okay if not then we can take a vote all in favor please say aye opposed no motion carries next is new business is there a motion to approve motion by council member Masati second by council member Farmer is there any discussion on new business if y'all please sign up thank you council member Farmer then council member Stenner thank you mayor I wanted to start with item C which is on page 17 and it's making a lot of changes or some proposed changes to the ordinance and I'm only familiar, I'm sorry, yes it's fire and EMS. The Division of Fire Emergency is requesting it to amend certain sections. These changes will update requirements of the fire department's fire marshal's office. we have battalion chief here i'm thinking hoskins is going to be here but he's not hoskins is here well i guess hoskins is back okay representative there's just a lot of cross through here and a lot of new verbiage and i'm kind of under our process discussion earlier i would rather not docket this without having the council have a separate vetting of it and so I would move to place this item into the Planning and Public Safety Committee. So moved. All right. A motion and a second. There's a motion by Council Member Farmer, second by who was it? Council Member Scutchfield. All right. Is there any discussion on the motion? Vice Mayor Kay. Thank you, Mayor. Before we do that, is there a simple explanation that would help us understand what the intention is? I think so. So some of these laws in Chapter 9, the fire prevention code, the code that we work under, hasn't been changed since 1946. So a lot of this has to do with making it easier for us to do our job because this is the code that we fall under primarily. I can walk you through some of them, some of the changes if you'd like, if you have it in front of you. But the order to remedy, there's a lot of those added. That's state fire marshal verbiage. It's so that we're more in compliance with section or KRS 227. But so we fall under the state fire marshal's office. We're expanded jurisdiction under the state fire marshal. Can you read his name? I'm trying to. I think it's Farmer. Yeah. It does say Farmer, doesn't it? It does. Okay. Yeah. Well, I think that I can go through them all or we can go through the committee. I think that maybe that's the issue. That's the question. Yeah, if it's going to be a lengthy conversation, then we need to put it in committee and have it there and not deal with it today. Sure. But thank you. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Thank you, sir. So we have a motion. We have a second. Is there any further discussion on the motion to put this in committee? Councilmember Evans. Yes, I actually did have concerns and questions about this because it was a lot of strike through. I think that the answer actually is pretty simple, and I don't think it would take a lot of time to go through it because I got my answers resolved in a phone call. So I think it was, I don't think it would take a lot of time, and I think it would be unnecessary to put in a committee. Okay. Personally, I thought they were fairly benign, the changes to Chapter 9, and I can go through them with you if you'd like. It's your decision. Well, we've got the motion on the table now. on the floor we've got the motion. So we're on discussion on that. Does anyone else wish to speak to the motion? Council Member Henson. Thank you, Mayor. Chief Jackson brought this to me to place it in, and we consulted about whether or not to put it in Public Safety Committee. It wouldn't have time to be heard, and there were some restraints, I guess, on timing issues. Well, our council staff reviewed it, and they agreed with Council Member Evans that the changes were not that significant, that it could go on and move forward to the docket, and he blue-sheeted it or whatever. So that's what I know. Okay. Thank you. You're welcome. Thank you. And to clarify even a little further, the deletion of Section 921, I think it is, that's regarding an appeals board that quite possibly has never been used or has never been staffed. So it's extremely antiquated, and we're trying to go towards an appeals process that mirrors the State Fire Marshal's Office, which is in KRS 227. Is there any further discussion on the motion to table? To refer. Place in committee. To refer to committee. Sorry. Right. I'm going to tell you about it. All right. All right. All in favor of the motion to refer to committee, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. And opposed, no. No. No. All right. All right. Motion to refer. Everything. Passes. Thank you very much. Chief. Thank you. We'll let you know when that meeting is. Yes, sir. Thank you, sir. I was just going to finish briefly, if I may. Council Member Farmer. I was just going to call attention to the council members of item K, which is the beginning work on changing the intersection of Liberty Road, Winchester Road, which has long had some pedestrian as well as drainage problems. This item of business begins that process or that project, which should make a difference in both that corridor and the ability for pedestrians to come and go there. And then I wanted to call attention or ask a question about item R on page 45 that outlines that this is to make changes to the duties and responsibilities of the Special Events Commission, but those changes are not enclosed in the packet, and I would like to see those before we would vote on this. I'm not going to ask to be pulled, but I think we need to see the information and the changes that would take place based on this item of business. If someone could provide that to myself and the council, I think it would be helpful. I think that's Lori Houlihan. Sally, can you speak? Well, I think what Council Member Farmer said was. Just send info. Yes, what we'll do when I go back downstairs, I'll ask Lori to send the information directly to the council members. That would be helpful. Thank you very much. That's all. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Council Member Farmer. Council Member Stennett. Thank you, Mayor. I'd like to start with item B as in boy. Thank you, sir. This is the abolishing of a position, creating one, public safety answering point manager. All right, that's Director Stack. Is he here? Yeah. I guess my two questions. One, was this one of the positions that was in our comp study that was reviewed, or is this a brand-new position? to government. Second of all, where is the additional $3,444 coming from to fund this additional payroll? Sure. We have two PSAT managers. This would be a third PSAT manager. It was not part of the comp study. The $3,000, $1,300 of it will come out of office supply money. $2,132 will come out of temp funds. And what was the first one? I'm sorry. $1,300 will come out of office supply budget. All right, and I'll just bring it to this attention to the council. Back in December, I asked the same question, and our CO was working on a new policy instead of moving money from operating to personnel to be able to utilize true personnel dollars for these type of changes. So I'm okay with this one. I understand it's been under the old way, but the CO is working with the Commissioner of Finance to maybe make some changes as it's going forward. So I'll save that one for that moment. So thank you, Mr. Stack. Just for the benefit, I think, particularly of the new council members, you might explain that a little bit more and why it can be painful. It's complicated, Mayor. Yeah, I know it is, right. It's going to get into a deep discussion. Maybe you don't want to. Okay. All right. But we can talk about budget and finance, maybe. All right. Okay. Item D, as in dog, this is establishing fees for automatic sprinkler systems, but the schedule of the fees were not in our packet. Do we have a schedule of what those fees are? I think, Assistant Chief Hoskins, are you available for? If we could get a copy of it. Or Battalion Chief Farmer. If we could get a copy for the public to see what those fees are going to be. I don't want to put in a committee or anything, I promise. But I just think it would be good to know what those fees and what the council is being asked to charge people for this. They are. We're actually going to just mirror what the Kentucky Building Code says. So they're already online. Anybody that would normally pay that will know the fee. In fact, the majority of the companies already pay it everywhere else. We're about the only jurisdiction that doesn't. I think Council Member Maloney can maybe speak to that. Well, for our Thursday night docket, I think for the public, if they ever were to go to research this, I think that would be a good piece of information to be part of this. So we can just say we're mirroring the building inspection, and that way we all will know exactly what those fears are intended to be. Okay. If we can do that, that would be good. How would you like for me to get that to you? Email? Yeah, email's fine. Thank you. Sure. And then item N, this is for our Housing First pilot project. I'm just curious about, I want to make sure I understand this right. We're going to execute an agreement with UK, Center for Business and Economic Research, to audit or evaluate our Housing First program. Yes, sir. They will provide a full third-party academic. Charlie, just one second, just so folks know who are observing. Charlie Lancer is our director for our Office for Homelessness. Yes, sir. Welcome, Charlie. This was awarded through a competitive bid process. University of Kentucky Center for Business and Economic Research is going to do a full third-party academic evaluation of that project. It's going to examine significant data points, including basically to tell us whether this is a cost-effective method for delivering homeless services. So they're going to do a full return on investment analysis of basically three models of delivering homeless services. No intervention, meaning what does it cost when someone is just on our street and nothing's happening. What is the traditional cost? Emergency shelter to transitional housing to permanent housing, how we've been doing it, and then housing first. So there will be control groups for all three. They'll issue a final report in three years and tell us what it's costing to deliver through those three mechanisms. And it'll help us to determine how to move forward with these projects. Was the housing first project cost effective? Was it not? is it cost effective for certain populations but not others, which is more like what I suspect we'll find, is that in certain populations it's when it's cost effective and when it's not. It's going to be very rigorous. It may be one of the first evaluations of its kind in the country. Most Housing First evaluations have only looked at retention of housing. This one will look at other factors such as hospital expenses, mental health expenses, incarceration expenses. What costs are we avoiding through Housing First? That's not really been looked at before in these models. Good. I'm glad to know that. And then will students be involved in this? Yes. The cost is for a professor and I think two full grad students. Grad students, though. Yes, sir. Very good. Thank you, Charlie, for explaining that. And my time's up, but I would like to bring attention to item Y. This is a request many employees have asked for a pediatric physician at our wellness clinic, and this hopefully gets us down that path on a part-time basis temporarily. but this is a much-needed service for our employees and their dependents at our wellness center. So thank you, Sally, Mr. Maxwell, and everyone for getting this done so quickly. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Council Member. Stand it. Council Member Akers. Thank you, Mayor. I just had a follow-up to the budget question earlier, but item G for Irene. And this is not the first time that we have had money, funds given back to the city from nonprofits who couldn't spend them or for whatever reason couldn't meet the requirements of the funds. Correct. And then we have given the funds to a different nonprofit. And so I raised this concern a year or two ago when we did the same thing. And so I'll ask it again. Is there a reason that we couldn't just rebid this money or offer it back out to multiple nonprofits instead of just picking one? And how was the one chosen, I guess is my concern or question, to receive the funds that were given back by the Salvation Army? The reason we picked rapid rehousing and homelessness prevention was because we had used all of the allocated funds for homelessness prevention and rapid rehousing. We had no more funds left there. The Emergency Solutions Grant Program has a lot of regulations. When HUD wrote the regulations, they didn't leave any regulations out. So it's a very difficult program. We find organizations have problems, and these funds have a shelf life, so we need to move them through rather quickly. I'm not sure if we need and we wouldn't have a second chance to do this if we allocated it to a nonprofit who had not used ESG funds before and they weren't able to spend them, they would be lost. But there are more than just the agency that is receiving them is not the only agency in Lexington that receives ESG monies. That's correct. Right. And so that's my question is why was this agency chosen over agency X or Y or Z? The reason is because we needed funds for rapid rehousing and homelessness prevention. Rapid rehousing takes people who are homeless. They're either living in a shelter or they're living on the street and puts them into housing, puts them into private market housing. And then prevention approaches those people who are at risk of losing housing to make sure that they don't become homeless. So we had used all the funds that had been allocated for these programs, and that's where we needed it the most. Okay. I just want to make sure that when funds are returned to the city and then we are giving those back out again, that it's a fair and equitable process for all the nonprofits that are out there. I understand that there's quick turnaround times and some of the deadlines that if we don't spend the money, we'll lose the money. But, you know, I just want to make sure that we're being fair. We're trying to be fair. Okay. Thank you. That's all I have, Mayor. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Rakers. Councilman Brown. Yes, my question, I guess, is on procedure. This new business item, do they go entirely as one motion to put on the docket? They do go as one motion. Because on A, I need to recuse myself, and I didn't know if I did it now. I know I can Thursday night. Then it would be noted that you've recused on item A. On A, item A. Yes, thank you. Thank you, Council Member Brown. Council Member Sadi. Thank you, Mayor. Commissioner Reed, if you don't mind coming to the podium. He definitely needs to introduce himself. Okay, coming to the podium is Commissioner Jeff Reed, General Services. Thank you, Mayor. Yes, sir. How are you, Commissioner? I'm good. How are you? I'm fine, thank you. Good. Just a quick question on item F. Can you tell me what the parking-related services are going to be provided? Do we know? I need John Sheed to come up and help me with that. He's my parking expert. I understand. Yes. It's primarily related to the new professional services contract between the city and the parking authority for them to, for the processing of the tickets, parking tickets and so forth, and violations related to parking. And that's the estimated amount of revenue that they think that's going to be coming to us. So it's just pretty much ratifying the contract. Okay. Thank you for the explanation. And Jamshid, would you mind introducing yourself? I know maybe some of the new council members. Sure. Jamshid Berdan. I work with Jeff. I'm in charge of facilities and fleet management. Thank you so much. Appreciate it. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Sadi. Council Member Maloney. Irene. Irene. Irene. Yes. To clarify that grant that they're taking out the money, that EMS is pretty hard to get. Am I correct? Only certain people apply for that. Yes, we, emergency solutions grants are usually applied for by emergency shelters. It's the Hope Center. Salvation Army made the application. Arbor's, which is a shelter for youth, made an application. And Bluegrass, they're not called that, Greenhouse 17. So there's not a lot of nonprofits that apply for this. There's only certain apply for this amount because it's really restricted. We don't, and not Catholic Action Center, but Catholic Charities made an application, and they've been funded now. But you're right, not too many, especially after they've read the regulations, not too many nonprofits want to do this. And we have a certain time limit to spend a lot of this money by a certain time, say, in compliance. Is that correct? Yes, all of it has a shelf life, yes. So, and picking this group that we, they've already had an application. They've already spent all their money. And the reason why we want to head with that is because they can spend the money quicker and keep us in compliance. I hope so, yes. Okay, that's what I need to know. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Maloney. All right, looks like that's all we've signed on for discussion on new business. so that allows us to take a vote on the motion to on the motion to approve new business all in favor please indicate by saying aye aye oppose no motion carries with the note that council member brown is recused next on our agenda is continuing business and presentations all i show is that there's a ndf that needs a motion motion by council member council member scutchfield and a second by who was at second we had competition for that second council member henson all in fact is there any discussion on the motion all in favor of the motion please indicate by saying aye opposed no motion carries and next on next on our agenda council reports if you please sign up sign on for council reports councilmember farmer first I want to take a moment to welcome back old colleagues and to greet new ones we have a great and more diverse council than we had before and although we've said it separately and we haven't been together in this forum until just now it's a pleasure to be here with you now we We stand each time we meet with the opportunity to make Lexington a better place and to make history as we do so. So it's a pleasure to be here with you and to serve with you. Secondarily, I was going to just touch on the end of the active part of the pedestrian improvement plan in Chevy Chase that happened after our last meeting. The intersection controls were put up. The paving was finished. All the sidewalk is finished. The grand experiment of pull-up and back-end parking is ongoing as we speak on High Street. It seems to be going, I think, fairly well. And folks who have contacted me, for the most part, have been happy about the outcome there. So I think it's something for other districts and other council members to think about the opportunity to make our infrastructure both better and proactive for pedestrians and bicyclists. It lies within every district. So I appreciate that. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Farmer. Council Member Gibbs. Thank you. Thanks so much. I moved to place into the General Government Committee two issues. One is Woodland Avenue pedestrian enhancements as recommended by the LFUCG Department of Traffic Engineering, and also a resolution placing no through truck signs in the Columbia Heights neighborhood as requested by the Neighborhood Association and recommended by the Department of Traffic Engineering. So moved. Second. The motion by Council Member Gibbs and a second by Council Member Farmer. Is there any discussion on the motion? There it is, Mayor. Council Member Ford. Thank you, Mayor. And thanks to Council Member Gibbs for bringing forth the motion. My question is similar to the question I raised earlier is in regards to the appropriate committee. Should it go to public works? Okay. All right. So I would offer to amend if council member and mayor. The reason I'll do this and for council member Gibbs and for the new council members is just real briefly to explain the committee structure. A few years ago, the council reorganized committees, and now we're condensed again to four committees, but they're really aligned based upon the function of the departments of government. And so the general government committee consists of the administrative services, general services, and social services. And so public works, environmental quality would have the staff that would be needed to help Council Member Gibbs and the council bring forth this to committee. So that's probably the better committee. Otherwise, I would definitely welcome it, but it's probably better in environmental quality than public works, Mr. Gibbs. Okay. So I'll amend my motion to move it to the Environmental Quality Committee. Second. Okay. So we have an amended motion. So basically you withdraw that first one and make it a new motion. How about that? Will that work? Okay. I'll start off. And we have a second by Council Member Ford. for the motion. We're all okay with moving it to environmental quality. Environmental quality in public court. I'll make the motion you can discuss that, right? Okay. I moved a place into the environmental quality committee two issues. One is Woodland Avenue pedestrian enhancements as recommended by the LFUCG Department of Traffic Engineering and also a resolution placing no through truck signs in the Columbia Heights neighborhood as requested by the Neighborhood Association and recommended by the Department of Traffic Engineering. So moved. Second. Or second, whatever. All right. Council Member, motion by Council Member Gibbs and second by Council Member Farmer. So is there any discussion on this motion? All right. Hearing none, then we can take a vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. All right. All right, Council Member Masati. Thank you, Mayor, and again, welcome to the new council members and the old council members. I look forward to working with you all. Last Friday, I had the opportunity to attend the law enforcement ceremony at Clay's Mill Baptist Church, honoring our law enforcement officers, and I think Amanda Bledsoe was there, Council Member Bledsoe was there as well. I just missed you. And I just wanted to say thank you to these public service officers. Just by wearing the uniform, they have a target on their back. and they work in an extremely dangerous and stressful environment. They put their lives on the line for us. And I think if we all could just say thank you when we see a police officer or a sheriff's deputy or a jail officer, I think that would do a lot to support them. And I just want to say that I appreciate their hard work that we do. And, again, it's a very difficult and stressful job, and hopefully the environment will change so we don't have to, those guys don't have to, and those ladies don't have to worry about going to work every day. My second, I guess it's a question, is with HR. And I've spoken to Commissioner Hamilton and I've spoken to Mr. Maxwell about this. I have received communication from police retirees and fire retirees in reference to their health insurance. I guess initially they didn't receive, some of them didn't receive their health insurance cards on time. So that made them at the first of the year having to go to their physicians or get their prescriptions and not having any type of insurance coverage, and so they were upset about that. I guess there was also some issues with their HSA accounts, and I just would like maybe if someone could come to the podium, because I know there's been some other issues with payroll and so forth, and I think it would be helpful if someone could just come and talk to us about what's happened. And I know the issues have been rectified, but I think that there needs to be an explanation, if you don't mind. Thank you. We've got Mr. Maxwell coming to the podium, but also Mr. O'Mara is approaching the podium as well. Thank you, Mayor. We had a little bit of an unusual enrollment this year due to some changes that we were getting, trying to bring in line with respect to making sure that we complied with the Affordable Care Act. We had, and we have most all of the glitches worked out. We did have some lingering, and we do have some lingering ones in the retiree side. There's about 50 or so retirees that, and it's actually not the retirees themselves. It's retirees who are Medicare eligible, in other words, on Medicare Advantage, the Humana plan, whose dependents are eligible under our Anthem plan. And when the files went over, there's about 50 of these people. They didn't go over correctly. We really kind of had a perfect storm here because we've got new vendors. We've got a new company that's administering the file transfer. So those 50 or so were a problem, and those were the dependents of the retirees. We did send a file over late last night that we believe is going to be put in production either today or tomorrow morning, and that should take care of all of those remaining retirees. Now, I'm not going to tell you that there aren't one or two other issues out there, but that is the main issue with the retirees. We're handling them. Susan Combs is handling them through the Pension Retiree Office, and she does have access to make those corrections on a manual basis if necessary for people who need those services. With respect to the HSA, some of the HSAs, we did communicate the situation with the HSA. UMB, under Humana, the HSA plan terminated, and the health equity plan started the first of the year. Now, the health equity plan, which is the new HSAs, and by the way, we have about 1,800 people on HSAs. So with the new plan, the government LFUCG contribution is up, and it's valid for everybody on the new plan. Those who had the UMB, it has not rolled over yet, and this was announced in early December that there would be a blackout period. That blackout period was January 4th through January the 19th, and that is giving UMB Bank. We're in that period now, time to reconcile those accounts, and then they will be transferred over on the 20th. So everybody was notified of that in December. It's been up on the intranet. So all that rollover money from the old accounts will be in those accounts on the 20th. a small side issue to that is they did charge $2.50 for December for a number of people that they shouldn't have charged that they will be crediting back, but that is kind of the issue with the HSAs. Mr. Maxwell, there was no delay of cards to some of these retirees or some of employees because that's what the main issue they said to me was there there were some delay of cards yes but but we can manually get them a card if they haven't have one the retirees and are or give the provider the the group number if they haven't got their cards yet but they are out in process and they should have them shortly if they don't have them already And that was their main concern, that they had to go to the doctors and had it out of pocket, you know, without an insurance card. I just want to make sure for them, in order to reconcile this, that they would have no problem, you know, when they would submit this claim because they had to pay out of pocket initially, that when they resubmit this claim because now that they are covered that there would be no problem. Can your office help them in any way? Yes, there won't be any problem with that. I mean, I know it's just a few people, but when you go to the doctors and you think you have insurance and you don't have a card or coverage, it's a lot out of pocket initially. Yes, and we did, you know, we had a kind of a storm of changes, including a 13% increase in our enrollment. So it's been challenging. The enrollment went very smooth, but the first, when we had new vendors and we had new processes, we got on it right away. But there are still some lingering issues that we do have under control. I don't know how you let these folks know that maybe still don't have cards. Can you put something up maybe on the net or whatever? Just because I think there's some folks that just probably have called either the provider and not sure what to do. so I would just like to make sure that they have a place that they can get this taken care of. Absolutely. We can put a note up and plus they can call the division of HR if they're employees, if they're retirees, they can call HR or they can call the pension office. I know it's been a lot of changes because of the provider and as you said affordable care but I just want to make sure these folks are taken care of. Yes ma'am. Thank you so much for your help. Thank you. That's all Mayor. Thank you Council Member Soddy. Council Member Lamb. Thank you, Mayor. Okay, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Council Member Lamb. Yeah. Does. Now, for seniority purposes, I would be glad for you to go right ahead, sir. You have the alpha lead. I would like to say this is pretty exciting to be here, and I'm really excited to work with my new colleagues in a different role. and I know that we're going to be contacting our neighborhood associations pretty soon and setting up getting connections to start having communications set up and I wanted to recognize Craig Kamek who is my legislative aide. Should you have any questions, contact me or Craig and we're most happy to help you and I'm just tickled to be aboard and thanks. Thank you, Council Member Lane. Council Member Lane. Thank you, Mayor. Well, I have been commuting from downtown to the 12th District for the several months, and I go through Chevy Chase every day. I've been watching the construction down there, and I agree with Bill Farmer that the final product right in the middle of Chevy Chase is very, very nice, and hopefully it will be good for the merchants there. During my commute, I was detouring around that area, and I was going to buy the new Kroger store also in Chevy Chase. And, of course, it was very controversial. I think some of the people opposed to it called it Fort Kroger in downtown Chevy Chase. But I just wanted to say that I just think it's one of the hippest designs that I've seen in the metropolitan area. It's going to be a beautiful store down in Chevy Chase, and it's especially going to open in a few weeks so that the people in that area and near the university will be very excited about it. I just wanted to compliment Kroger on a great job and their new location. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Council Member Lane. Council Member Maloney. Thank you, Mayor. I, too, thank everybody for letting me come back. and I don't know how many to be my fifth mayor and ninth vice mayor, and no telling how many council members. But I'm glad to be back. I really enjoy meeting a lot of the new council members, especially some of the old ones, so I look forward to working with you all. The other thing, like Mr. Lane, I was driving around, and when I was commissioner, we had three areas, Lama and Richmond Road and Pink Pigeon and we met on that and I saw where we're supposed to widen those and I was going to ask Brad Frazier but he's not here today so can I ask you I guess Mr. Holmes I noticed there were sidewalks put up at that corner of Man of War and Richmond Road the other day And I was going to ask, did that deal fall through where we were going to widen that area? Is that just not going to happen or what? I just got an email from Ms. Cutchfield about asking the same question, and I'll research it and send an email out to all of you on the council on that. I don't know the answer to that off the top of my head. Derek, was that in the plan? Because I remember meeting with Ballinger, and that was one of the areas that we wanted to widen. Did that just go away and we just put sidewalks there, or is that going to happen? I'm not sure if I'm understanding your question. If the mitigation, the congestion mitigation plan, I believe, does call for widening of the road at that location. So it is still in the plan to be widened in that road, right? That is my understanding. And we just put sidewalks there? That is also my understanding. Is that going to have to be tore up and be put back, or are we going to be okay there? This project that is not being handled by engineering, I'm not sure how that's going to work. Well, I hope you all get that straight now because I don't want to see money be wasted. All right. And we'll be talking with public works on this. All right. I appreciate it. But I know when we met. Right. We do not do the sidewalks, so that's why I'm saying I'm not sure when the sidewalks are put in and all that. It's not a project that was handled by engineering. That's why I'm unsure as to the answers. Thank you, Council Member Maloney. Council Member Akers. Thank you, Mayor. I would like to place the following resolution into the General Government Committee or make a motion to do so. So the resolution designated the speed limit on West 2nd between North Lyme and Newtown as 25 miles an hour and authorizing the Division of Traffic Engineering to install proper and appropriate signs in accordance with that designation. So moved. Motion by Council Member Akers and a second by Council Member Henson. Is there any discussion? Is there any discussion? Council Member Ford? Sorry. I wrote on here earlier, general government, but let me amend that, and that should be in the public works. Right. Okay. Second. And environmental quality committee. Sorry. Motion and a second. We've got a motion. Councilman Rakers, seconded by Councilman Massadi. Is there any discussion? All right. If not, then we can vote. All in favor, please say aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. And one more. I move to place in the Public Works and Environmental Quality Committee a resolution authorizing Division of Engineering pursuant to Code of Ordinances, Section 1886, to install multi-way stop controls at the intersection of Fernale Pass and Buck Lane. So moved. Motion by Council Member Akers, second by Council Member Ford. Discussion, Council Member Henson. Is it the Division of Engineering that installs them? Yes. It is. Traffic engineering. Traffic engineering. Traffic. Yes. Okay. Sorry. The motion said the Division of Engineering, so I would do a friendly amendment to say traffic engineering. Thank you. I was probably reading too quickly. Thank you. All right. Thank you, Council Member Henson. Thank you, Council Member Akers. All right. Anyone else wish to offer a council report? All right. Did we vote on that? We need to vote on it a second. Oh, I thought we did. Okay. All in favor of the motion, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. All right. Any other council reports? Don't see any. All right. I believe there's a... Okay. Next is the mayor's report. Move approval. Second. Motion by Council Member Stennett, second by Council Member Sadi. All in favor of the motion, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Next public comment for issues not on the agenda, then I'll take a motion for a closed session. Is there anyone, Mr. Mundy, no one signed up to speak to issues on the agenda, or not on the agenda, all right? Then Vice Mayor Kay. Thank you, Mayor. I move to go into closed session pursuant to KRS 61.8101F for discussions that may lead to the appointment, discipline, or dismissal of an employee. Motion by Vice Mayor Kay, second by Council Member Scotchfield. If there's no discussion, then the motion carries. And the council will go into closed session. I'm going to turn it over. OK, now I'm going to. ¶¶ Thank you. ¶¶ ¶¶ ¶¶ ¶¶ ¶¶ Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I'm sorry. Thank you. I'll entertain a motion to come out of closed session. So moved. I have a motion. I need a second. I have a motion and a second to come out of closed session. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? We're out of closed session. And I need a motion to adjourn. I have a motion. Second to adjourn. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Thank you. We are adjourned.