# Budget, Finance and Economic Development Committee - February 24, 2015 > Auto-transcribed civic record · February 24, 2015 - **Permalink**: https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/meeting/3589 - **Source video**: https://lfucg.granicus.com/player/clip/3589?view_id=14&redirect=true - **Date**: 2015-02-24 - **Last revised**: July 15, 2026 - **Length**: 10,162 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 Budget, Finance, and Economic Development Committee met on February 24, 2015, at 1:00 p.m., with Stinnett presiding. The committee addressed five agenda items during the session, including approval of the previous meeting's summary, which was approved. The committee heard three informational presentations: a Jobs Fund Update, a Commerce Lexington Quarterly Update, and a review of Monthly Financials. Items referred to the committee were deferred for later consideration. The committee took six votes during the meeting and heard nine public comments. ## Attendance The following individuals were present at the meeting on February 24, 2015: * Stinnett * Moloney * Kay * Ford * Farmer * Scutchfield * Brown * Mossotti * Bledsoe * Lane No absences or late arrivals were recorded. ## Votes and Decisions The following motions were voted on and passed by voice vote during the meeting: **Approval of January 27, 2015 Committee Meeting Summary** [timestamp: 00:01:00] - Motion by Vice-Mayor Kay, seconded by Ford - The summary of the January 27, 2015 Committee meeting as amended was approved **Removal of Lyric Financial Audit from Committee** [timestamp: 00:01:31] - Motion by Vice-Mayor Kay, seconded by Ford - The Lyric Financial Audit was removed from Committee **Removal of Collaboration Strategy Among Economic Development Agencies from Committee** [timestamp: 00:01:31] - Motion by Ford, seconded by Scutchfield - Collaboration Strategy Among Economic Development Agencies was removed from Committee **Removal of DDA 10-Year Development Plan from Committee** [timestamp: 00:01:31] - Motion by Ford, seconded by Brown - The DDA 10-Year Development Plan was removed from Committee **Removal of Jobs Program Review from Committee** [timestamp: 01:00:04] - Motion by Ford, seconded by Brown - The Jobs Program Review was removed from Committee **Adjournment** [timestamp: 01:01:04] - Motion by Scutchfield, seconded by Farmer - The meeting was adjourned All motions passed by voice vote with no recorded abstentions. ## Budget and Financial Actions The meeting included approval of two financial incentives totaling $200,000 to support job creation and retention in the region. **Grant Award to Sumitomo Electric Wiring Systems** A grant of $100,000 was awarded to Sumitomo Electric Wiring Systems. This incentive supports the retention of 28 existing jobs and the creation of 10 new jobs. **Loan Incentive to MedSignals Vital Signals** A loan incentive of $100,000 was awarded to MedSignals Vital Signals to support the creation of 11 new jobs. ## Public Comment The following council members raised questions and concerns during the meeting: **Council Member Brown** [timestamp: 00:01:00] requested a correction to the meeting minutes, asking that the phrase "further exploitation" on page 1 of the summary be changed to "explanation." Brown also asked [timestamp: 00:57:57] for an update on the list of allowable uses for funds drawn from the economic contingency fund, referencing the original "rainy day" fund ordinance. **Council Member Kay** [timestamp: 00:13:01] stressed the importance of including median wage data in economic development reports, arguing that median wage provides a more accurate picture of job quality than average wage alone. **Council Member Massadi** raised two separate concerns. First [timestamp: 00:18:32], he asked for a breakdown of how many of the new jobs were the result of incentive programs versus other factors. Later [timestamp: 00:27:48], he asked how many companies have been turned away due to lack of available I-1 land and whether companies accept regional alternatives. **Council Member Scotchfield** [timestamp: 00:24:25] asked for direct examples of companies recruited as a result of attending trade shows and international missions. **Council Member Akers** [timestamp: 00:29:25] asked about barriers preventing the Economic Development zone land from producing jobs and whether it could be re-zoned or repurposed. **Council Member Maloney** [timestamp: 00:52:18] asked for clarification on the $9 million positive variance, questioning whether it would increase if revenue catches up. **Council Member Farmer** [timestamp: 00:55:42] asked whether the 10% of revenues target is a formal goal of the ordinance and whether the fund can be accessed for specific purposes. ## Appointments The following appointments were made at this meeting: * **Stinnett** was appointed to the position of Chair * **Moloney** was appointed to the position of Vice Chair ## Contested Items **Land Availability for Economic Development** Council members engaged in a heated discussion regarding the limited availability of I-1 land and its implications for the city's economic competitiveness. The primary concern centered on whether the city possessed sufficient industrial land to attract new businesses. Some council members questioned the city's ability to compete with neighboring counties that offer free land as an incentive to prospective businesses. The debate reflected broader concerns about the city's economic development strategy and its capacity to secure new investment in the face of regional competition. **Economic Contingency Fund Target** A split vote occurred over the status and guidelines of the economic contingency fund's 10% of revenues target. Council members disagreed about whether this 10% target constitutes a formal goal established by the ordinance. The dispute also encompassed the need for clearer guidelines governing how the fund should be utilized. Some members advocated for more explicit parameters to ensure consistent and appropriate use of contingency funds, while the disagreement on the formal nature of the target suggested differing interpretations of the ordinance's requirements and intent. ## Approval of Summary of January 27, 2015 Committee Meeting [timestamp: 00:01:00] The committee reviewed the summary from the January 27, 2015 meeting. Vice-Mayor Kay led the discussion on this agenda item. During the review, the committee identified a minor correction needed to the document. Specifically, a request was made to revise the phrase "further exploitation" on page 1 of the summary. The committee approved the summary with this correction incorporated. ## Jobs Fund Update Wesley O'Brux provided an update on the Jobs Fund during this agenda item [timestamp: 00:02:05]. **Fund Status** Two companies have been awarded incentives totaling $100,000. The fund currently has $650,000 remaining available. **Applications** Five companies have submitted applications for Jobs Fund incentives. Of these applicants, two are currently awaiting the submission of additional financial information before their applications can be processed further. **Outcome** This item was presented for informational purposes. ## Commerce Lexington Quarterly Update Jenna Greathouse and Kimberly Rossetti presented Commerce Lexington's quarterly update [timestamp: 00:07:30], covering the organization's strategic targets, recruitment efforts, and operational challenges. **Key Presentation Points** The presenters highlighted a significant gap between the types of business leads Commerce Lexington pursues and the types of businesses that ultimately locate in Lexington. While manufacturing represents a common category of leads, the actual locations secured are predominantly in high-tech and professional services sectors. This discrepancy stems from land use constraints that limit the availability of suitable sites for manufacturing operations. **Speakers** - Jenna Greathouse - Kimberly Rossetti **Outcome** This agenda item was presented as informational, providing the body with an update on Commerce Lexington's activities and market conditions rather than requesting a decision or action. ## Monthly Financials [timestamp: 00:40:53] Commissioner Bill O'Mara and Melissa Leuker presented the monthly financial report for the period through the first seven months of the fiscal year. **Financial Overview** The presentation highlighted a $6.2 million positive variance overall. This favorable position resulted from a $9.8 million expense surplus, which more than offset a $4.1 million revenue shortfall. **Key Findings** The speakers attributed the financial fluctuations to timing differences in tax collections. Rather than indicating structural budget problems, these variances reflected the normal timing of when tax revenues are received and processed throughout the fiscal year. **Outcome** The presentation was informational in nature, providing commissioners with an update on the financial status of the organization. ## Items Referred to Committee [timestamp: 00:59:32] The committee discussed several items that had been referred for consideration, including the Solid Waste Task Force, Activity-Based Costing, Wellness Center RFP, and the Jobs Program Review. **Key Participants** Stinnett, Farmer, and Brown participated in the discussion of these referred items. **Items Discussed** The committee addressed the following referred matters: - Solid Waste Task Force - Activity-Based Costing - Wellness Center RFP - Jobs Program Review **Outcome** The Jobs Program Review was removed from the committee agenda. The overall discussion on items referred to committee was deferred. --- ## Decisions - **Motion** — passed: Motion to approve the summary of the January 27, 2015 Committee meeting as amended - **Motion** — passed: Motion to remove the Lyric Financial Audit from Committee - **Motion** — passed: Motion to remove Collaboration Strategy Among Economic Development Agencies from Committee - **Motion** — passed: Motion to remove DDA 10-Year Development Plan from Committee - **Motion** — passed: Motion to remove Jobs Program Review from Committee - **Motion** — passed: Motion to adjourn the meeting --- ## Full transcript There's a sign On February the 24th, I'd like to welcome everyone to the Budget, Finance, and Economic Development Committee meeting. First up on our agenda is the approval of the summary. Do I have a motion? Second. Second. A motion and a second to approve the summary on pages 1 through 3. Are there any corrections, additions, commentary? Question. Councilman Brown. First page there on the bottom down there. Were you turning your microphone on? I have it on. All right. Good. First page as you turn to it down at the last paragraph. Yes, sir. Last line. Further exploitation should be probably explanation. That doesn't sound too good on the end of minutes. Okay. Needs to be corrected. We'll make that correction at the bottom before we read it out to council meeting. You didn't think I read this, did you? I'm impressed for your first year back. Anyone else? All right. Do I have a motion to approve as amended? I mean, approve as amended. Everyone say aye. Any no's? Okay. moving right along. Our first our second item is the jobs fund update and Wes welcome. If you'll give us your name and address. I'm just kidding. Wesley O'Brux 3576 Green Lawn Drive. Wes thank you for coming today. I know this is going to be new for some new council members but it's our first opportunity to have an update since we enacted this about a year ago so thank you for being here. You're welcome and I provided a little bit of background. We've gone around and met with a few of the new council members just to try and bring them up on the program. We're still planning on sitting down with the rest to just do a deeper dive to make sure everybody has a good handle on what it is and the types of funds and what sorts of businesses we're talking about whenever we talk about the jobs fund. But just as a brief background, the council initially allocated $1 million for the jobs fund incentive program. Sorry, I should probably... There we go. $1 million for the jobs fund incentive program during 2013 fund balance discussion. the FY 2013 fund balance discussion and we worked over the course of that fall and into the spring designing the policies and guidelines that govern the program and then reconstituting a board previously that had solely dealt with the industrial revenue bonds. Two of the main features of the program and these are the two things we talk to companies about when they ask just for the gist of it. The companies must be proposing net new full-time job creation, and the wage rate is at an average of $17.43 an hour. And then any number of jobs is acceptable, and the reason for that is when you look at some of the state programs like KBI, they have a floor of 10 jobs. And so we wanted to make sure that we were able to serve any company that was working in Lexington and not just companies that were eligible for state incentives. Since the program has been in place, and I'm sorry if this is a little difficult to see on the screen, but we've had five companies that have fully completed and submitted applications. Those companies have been Sumitomo Electric Wiring Systems, Summit Biosciences, Anulox, which is a chemical manufacturer, MedSignals Vital Signals, and then MakeTime. And all of these are companies that are based here locally in Lexington that we're looking to expand. And down below each, you can, if it's easy to see on there, we'll indicate what they applied for. We had four of the five companies applied for a grant. One of the companies applied for a loan. And then the number of jobs varies between each company. But in each case, the median wage and also the mean wage, the average wage, is well above the $17.43 per hour threshold. In that time, two companies have been awarded incentives by council resolution. The first one was Sumitomo Electric Wiring Systems, and they were awarded a $100,000 grant for the retention of 28 current jobs and then also the creation of 10 new jobs. MedSignals, Vital Signals, which was awarded a loan incentive for the creation of 11 new jobs. The other two companies, or the three companies, excuse me, two of them were asked for more financial information before the board moved forward with their applications. Those are Summit Biosciences and Anulocs, and those are both. That additional financial information has been provided to the board, and that will be taken into consideration at the March 4th board meeting. and the fifth company Make Time submitted an application that didn't fall within the guidelines of the program and so we asked them to make an amendment to that application and are waiting for that to be returned. Just some highlights of the program activity. Like I mentioned, all the companies have been local companies that are expanding. Whenever we were talking about the program, we discussed how over 80% of our job creation here locally comes from local companies expanding. and so we found that to be true in our applicants. The recipients of the incentive fund so far have made commitments to create 21 jobs with the incentives as an inducement to that job creation. And then one of the incentive awards was a company that was thinking about leaving, but due to the incentive award, they're retaining over 250 other jobs here in Lexington. so that the incentive program provided a pretty significant benefit for folks that were already employed here in Lexington. And just to go through the sort of numerical terms, just to see the initial allocation being $1 million, we have about $650,000 left in the fund, and there have currently been $50,000 dispersed so far. That's it. Any questions? Thank you, Wes. Council members, if there are any council members that have questions or comments, I know Council Member Sadi, you had put this issue in the committee. Do you want to say anything on this issue? No, I think we're good. Thank you. Okay. Anyone else have any questions, comments? All right, Wes, you did good. All right, thank you. Thank you, sir. next on our agenda is our quarterly update from Commerce Lexington and we're going to take a little bit different path as we get these quarterly updates obviously all the council members we get a packet distributed to us instead of regurgitating that packet like we have in the past we're going to touch on that but we're also going to look at some other things that they are doing to create jobs in Lexington as part of our funding and their efforts in the minority business area as well as today's is land use and how they work with companies when they're coming to Lexington and ask, hey, we need a spot. And they're going to kind of take us through how they relate with those companies. So Jenna Greathouse, Head of Economic Development for Commerce Lexington, and company. And company. So I'd like to introduce company. Kimberly Rossetti is our Assistant VP and Hannah Huggins from our team. Our Manager of Existing Business Project is here. And I don't know if Tyrone came or not. And Tyrone did not come, but most of you all already know Tyrone. We'll start with the presentation. Thank you again for inviting us to be here, and welcome to the council, to all the new council members, and congratulations again. Happy birthday, Kevin. Thank you. So we're going to start with, do you all have the presentation? Do you just have it paper? Yes, we have it in our packet. So I wanted to go over a little bit. Again, a lot of you already know, but we do actually have a process for the types of companies that we're recruiting. So we're going to go to, I don't think they've been passed out. They have. Everyone should have them. Okay. Page one. Do we have it on the overhead? Is it? Okay. It's okay. I'll just read through the. Hold on a second. Okay. Let's see if we can get on the overhead. Stacy, will we have it on the overhead? Okay. Good. Good. We can wing it. Well, I'd like the public to be able to see what we're talking about, too, if we can. Give them one minute, and we'll get it up there. Tell you what, while they're doing it, go ahead and start. Okay, so we'll go through the slide real quickly on strategic targets, because I do want Kimberly to spend some time on our land use issues and those kind of things, And I know, Kevin, you saw her presentation to Derek Paulson's committee a few weeks ago. So strategic targets. Three years ago, we went through a strategic planning process with a company and evaluated Lexington and the region for the types of jobs that we should be working to recruit. And the strategic targets that we actively engage in recruiting are renewable energy and clean technology. And we have companies here, just to put that in perspective for you. Alltech is one. Injimat. We have some niche companies with biomass and algae. Computer sciences, software and IT, of course, we're home to Lexmark, HP, Xerox. Niche companies in that area that you may not know of in terms of the gaming community would be Frog Dyson Super Bowl, Super Bowl, Super Soul. Business and professional services, you can also go back to Xerox on that one. Aramark is one. Bingham McCutcheon, one we gained and unfortunately lost was another one, but we're still working to try to find a replacement for that one. Life sciences and biotechnology, animal sciences and equine companies such as HFL Sports Science, USEF, Neogen, and all kinds of other R&D. Advanced manufacturing is one of our niches, too, that we're working on as a part of the BEAM initiative. And then visitor industries is a recommended target. Lots of people come to Lexington not just to tour here, but they do all kinds of conferences and we're working with the CVB to help work on a strategy for that. And Jenna, we have it on the overhead, so we'll go page by page if you have it there in front of you too. Okay, I can see it better. Okay, thanks. They're going to do it. Perfect. Ready? So a year in review for 2014. Each year our team holds meetings and we set goals, so we're not just randomly trying to pick a number of companies. We set goals based on consultants and visits and things that we're going to do. So each year we set these goals, 150 prospect leads. That means new projects that we're working on that we try to work on, 150 existing business visits. That means Hannah's out in the community calling on companies to try and give them the tools that they need to grow and expand. Site visits, this would be people coming into Lexington that we're working with to show them the community and buildings and properties and the university and other things. That means we get someone here as a result of the travels and the trips and the marketing that we do for our community. Locations, that's when we can say we worked with this company, that located here or expanded here. Direct jobs, we have a goal of direct jobs. We also have the indirect and induce, which we'll go through later, and then capital investment. We met the bulk of our goals last year. prospect leads, existing business, site visits we were a little down and locations we were a little down but the big thing was we met our job goal and our capital investment goal and the average wage was higher than what we went through. I want to walk you through a breakdown of the type of leads so the breakdown over leads the majority of them were manufacturing so and our leads are generated not just for Lexington but for the region However, the majority of these locations were in high-tech and business and professional services. Hold on one second. Council members, if you have questions on each slide, instead of having to backtrack, go ahead and chime in, and we'll ask it on that particular slide. That way we can keep on task. Vice Mayor Kay. Thank you, Chair. So if you could back up to the prospect leads. Yeah, that's the one. So I've raised this question before. I need to raise it again. As I understand it, the format for reporting for businesses, et cetera, included median wage as well as average? The format that we turn in on our form, the former form we turned in to you, had the median. We can add median in for you. We've got it. This is just goals that we set. So we can get you the median of last year. Okay. Okay, so I guess I'm interested in seeing that the median become a part of the goal package because the average wage does not tell us enough about what kind of jobs we're really generating. And we can only get that from the companies if they'll give it to us. So they don't always have a median wage. But we can set a goal, but we can't always get it. But we'll add it and make an effort to do it. Okay, so when we talked about this before, my understanding was that that was information like much other information that you request, and I guess I don't understand why a company would not. And it's also if they apply for incentives. So some of these we won't know because they don't necessarily all receive incentives. Okay. Well, so I understand that. We'll do our best. Promise. Okay. So I just want to, I've done this before, but I'm going to do it again. and explain why I think that the median is, in addition to the average, important. Because if the 15 of us up here have an average wage, which is probably for council work, around $30,000, if we decided to give somebody, a 16th council member, a million dollars, our average wage would go up by a couple hundred thousand dollars or something. I don't know what it would be. But anyway, so average tells you one thing. Median, I think, tells you much more about the actual nature of most of the jobs. And so I would, I guess I want to stress that that, I think, is an important piece of information for us. And as much as possible, I understand you. We'll do it. And I certainly understand your point. We're trying to get to payroll tax, to how much payroll tax is actually generated, and that's the reason that we've done it our way, but we'll do it. Okay, thank you. You're welcome. Thank you, Chair. Thank you. Councilman Massadi. Thank you, Chair. Jenna, one other thing, if you can incorporate, you said with the businesses, the actual, that some were incentive-based and some weren't. Can you break down that, too, as well? Yep, we can do it. Thanks. Anyone else on this slide? Okay. Keep trucking. Thank you. All right. The breakdown of the leads, so, again, the majority of them were manufacturing. The majority of the leads, the majority of the locations were in high-tech and business and professional services. And that is we'll coordinate with the next five years, which Kimberly will go through in an upcoming slide. And so here's a breakdown of the locations. So high tech was six. Manufacturing was four. Business and professional services was two. Those are just a few examples. And then here's a breakdown of the jobs within there. So business and professional services, 465. High tech was 405. And manufacturing, 372. And then this next slide actually talks about the companies that located and what they do. So I can walk through each one of these. But Funai was a new Japanese company that bought the assets, some assets from Lexmark. It's an R&D center for inkjet printers. Creative Lodging Solutions is a headquarters and provides long-term corporate lodging. they're currently renovating a former Beaumont for an expansion of this new office space CoraSoft is a headquarters mostly software development Butler Animal Health was a retention project and they ended up in Coldstream so it's a distribution of animal pharmaceuticals which falls within our niches as it is a medical device company Xerox we all know consequence management is out at Bluegrass Station Toyota, the R&D and engineering jobs are going to relocate from northern Kentucky to the central Kentucky area, mainly Georgetown. Hydrosoap was, some of you came to that grand opening, a soap manufacturer that relocated from San Francisco. SRC is a remanufacturer of engines. Aventix is a company here that manufactures pneumatic valves and cylinders used in defense and automotive industry. Patent Rank was one of our SBIR companies, as was Gizmo Therapeutics and Nano Ranch. Multiscale was another SBIR company. And then Sherlock was a company that relocated from the United Kingdom. And they've started their sales office and plan to grow into manufacturing. Uh-oh. Do you know the number? Okay. And Councilman Massotti, we can tell you the number that applied for incentives. Five applied for the traditional incentives, the KBI, and then four were the SBIR incentives. And the SBIR incentives are all statewide. KBI is a combination of state and local occupational license fee. Thank you. Can you break it down by who the – I might be able to do it real quick. FUNAI was KBI, Creative Lodging Solutions, KBI. Hold on. Take your time. Everybody's going through the list. Ready? It's a big list, yeah. Okay. FUNI was KBI, Creative Logic Solutions, KBI, Corasoft, KBI, Butler Animal Health, KBI, SRC, KBI, and then all the SBIR companies that we went through. Was that every single job that was as a result of that incentive or just a part? Because you've got direct jobs and you said expanding, so I'm not sure if those new jobs are those expansion of some jobs. That's the jobs that they announced. Total jobs that were new. Total new jobs. Okay, thank you. Vice Merkay had a question. Thank you, Chair. I don't know if I missed it. The Lexington Venture Club? Venture Club is a place where we poll all our small startup companies, technology companies. Each year they fill out a survey for us, and then we measure how many jobs they created. And every year we have an annual celebration of entrepreneurs, and we announce this all in one number. They won't provide all the data back to us unless we put it in one big lump. They don't necessarily like people to know every announcement where their venture capital came from. So this represents investment in this calendar year of $57 million in a range of small to medium-sized, high-tech businesses? Yes, and the investments could have come from venture capitalists. It could have come from friends, family, and founders. It could have come from a few grants. But these are people or companies making investments in our community. Okay. But I guess what I'm trying to figure out is the Lexington Venture Club, a discrete set of individuals and or whatever's who do this kind of work, and there may be other people also investing, but it's not represented here. Is that fair to say? That's correct. This is who we know when we survey companies that we've worked with, So it's companies that whether Warren Nash from the Innovation and Commercialization Center or our team have worked with, and we go in and poll them to say, have you received any investments, not incentives. These are investments in their companies. So this is to show that people always say we have a lack of venture capital here, and we do have a shortage, but people are investing in our companies. Okay, so they report dollar amount invested, excuse me, and number of jobs created as a result of that investment. Yes, and we had our annual, it was in November. In November we do it every year when we have the Global Entrepreneurship Week. So in November we have a little event for all these companies. It was a pretty big event, actually. You all are always invited. And Venture Club is just a group that we host, Commerce Lexington and the Innovation and Commercialization Center. There's a luncheon every other month, and we have a technology company get up and present their idea. And at the end of the year, we go in and support them and celebrate all the good things that they're doing by being here, thanking them for being here. But they're generally smaller companies. Great. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Vice Mayor. All right, on page 7. Okay. I don't have page 7. The next slide. That's our page 7. Do we have it on the PowerPoint? I don't see it yet. It's not showing up. It's marketing initiatives and trade shows. Okay, well, I'm just going to go through my slides. And so we're in marketing initiatives. This is how we do it. So when we're recruiting companies, we pick, like we said, strategic targets for the types of companies that we do. So I just came back from a medical device show. There were hundreds of companies there, and we work a booth with other partners from Kentucky Utilities and walk the floor and try to recruit new business that way. Penny Arcade is a gaming show. Biotechnology and Industry Organization is another event where there are biotechnology companies there, and we're working with them to explain why Lexington and the Bluegrass is a good place. And International Machine Manufacturing Technology Show is one that comes up in the fall. The next one is one-on-one consultant meetings, industrial asset management, Kentucky United and Area Development Forum. These are where the consultants are. We're either out on the road meeting individually with them in other cities or we're going to those consultant professional development opportunities to network with them there. We're on the road. Last year we met with 190 consultants at these various events. Now we have foreign direct investment. So we work on recruiting new foreign investment here as well, SelectUSA, International Trade Missions, and the International Export Initiative. SelectUSA is held in Washington, D.C., and it's a forum for international investors and companies, and we'll be attending that in March. International trade missions, those past missions include Japan, China, the United Kingdom, and Canada. The United Kingdom yielded us Sherlock McGill, so it's a company that we recruited from there. and then export initiatives. Trade missions have been tied to Brazil, Canada, and the United Kingdom. We have a question. Jenna, Council Member Scotchfield. Thank you. I just had a question on the last two slides. Going, just to give us an idea, going to some of these trade shows and different, what has been the response? What are some direct, I guess, people we've recruited to come in? Sherlock McGill last year was one. Boron when we went to Canada or not Canada, China, Boron, Bertley we traveled through China and worked to recruit that company out to the Bluegrass Business Park those are two off the top of my head Robosto Roof Systems many years ago was the first tenant in the Bluegrass Business Park that was from the Society of Automotive Engineers we don't do that show anymore but that was a direct result from that great, thank you and then SBIR, there's an SBIR conference that we attend and that was a direct result of two of the SBIR companies coming here. I'm going to turn it over to Kimberly now to focus more on leads, locations, and land use. Okay, so on this slide, we broke down for the last five years the number of leads we had in locations. And so you can see, again, just like Jenna was talking about, the 2014 comparison, comparison, it really is reflective for the past five years that the majority of our leads come from manufacturing. However, the majority of our actual locations are more high-tech. And one of the reasons why we don't land as many manufacturing projects, I'll talk about in a few minutes, is because of the constraints we have with available land. So we try to be very creative, which I'll address. And then just to point out, too, the locations are expansions and recruitment projects. So it's not all just recruitment. It's the companies that are already located here. And so then the next slide you'll see is again just the 2014 breakdown, just a side by side comparison so you can see again the number of leads we had in locations and again we do get, technology is a very big lead for us but that is where we yield the most actual locations. So just to touch on the next slide on our land and building constraints the first box there talks about some of our available industrial buildings You can see that there are 16 that are 50,000 square feet and over, which is the bulk of what we get. We do get leads that look for smaller space as well. We have a little bit more variety in buildings for that. But for the 50,000 and over, there are only 16 in the region, in the eight-county region. That's all the surrounding counties plus Frankfurt. And out of those, there's not as many that are standalone, which is what most of our projects prefer. So we are a little limited when it comes to our inventory for existing buildings. And then right below that, you'll see, too, when it comes to I-1 land, we are a little bit limited in Lexington. And, of course, we are very fortunate of our Greenbelt and our horse farms, and we sell that when we have prospects come in. But on the other side of the coin, it does limit us on our I-1 land. So we have to be creative in helping them find other locations. So you can see there's 1,500 acres of I-1 land on the market for our eight-county region and approximately 160 in Lexington. so about 10% is located in our county alone. And just to point out, sorry, on that slide also, many times we are, Lexington is eliminated because we don't have the right site for them. We're currently working on a project that the sites we submitted didn't work, so they are still keeping the region in consideration, but they've told us several times that Lexington, unless we have a new industrial site come online in the next few months, that we probably will not be considered because we don't have what exactly they're looking for. But they are still considering a region. Kimberly, one second. Council Member Massadi, a couple questions. Thank you, Chair. Kimberly, how many people have you turned away because you don't have the land, the I-1 land? I would have to look at the exact number. I wouldn't say we turn people away, but that's when we'll say let's show you options in the region because, as I was going to mention in the next slide, even though obviously we want all of those jobs in Lexington because of the payroll tax and the benefit, If they do land in the region, though, those indirect and induced benefits will benefit Lexington as well. So we'd much rather see them here than in Tennessee or Indiana. But, you know, there are times when we just don't have the right option for them. So when you offer them the option in another county, do they take that option? It depends. It depends on the project. Some definitely are like, they're county only. We want to be here. But many, when we explain how small the counties are in Kentucky compared to other states, that when we say eight counties, we're not talking about the Dallas metro region. It's much easier to get around and it's much more accessible. So most are then willing to look at the region. So are you telling me that land is the biggest barrier or are there other barriers as well? When it comes to economic development, I would say land is our biggest barrier right now. Okay. Thank you. Would you agree? Council Member Akers. Thank you, Chair. I'm not sure. I don't think this question is for you, but I believe that we have an economic development zone or area of the city, and so this is probably to someone else. What is happening with that land or that zone area, and can it be utilized? I don't know if Kevin wants to address it because he's on the easy land use, but we do recommend, and I was going to get into the next slide, we don't only recommend I-1 land for our project, so we recommend the economic development zone land as well. but because of some of the constraints with that land on time frames of when it will be available, lots of times that doesn't meet the time frame for our companies. They sometimes say, you know, we need a site within 60 days, and if we can't, if it's not ready, then that parcel may not work for them. So, I mean, we've suggested golf courses before. We're like, we'll try to, you know, get you to owner if this is an area you want to be in. So we're very creative. So we don't just recommend the I-1, but just for purposes of what we have that's really readily available, that's about how much we have is 160 acres. But I don't know if you want to address the... Well, the ED land that we currently have available is vacant. It's about 450 acres, basically two owners in our county, and what Commissioner Paulson has pulled together, UK, Commerce Lexington, and other people involved in the community, as to why that has created zero jobs on that land since it was created. And it's still a zone that the city needs, and they'll be bringing recommendations back to the planning committee to take a look at maybe modifying the ED zone so that it can start creating jobs like everyone wants and see what barriers. That's what we're going through right now. What barriers have restrained that land from being able to be productive in our zoning ordinances? So we're looking at it. Great. Thank you. Okay. So on the next slide under competitive realities, you can see these are the different – I'm sorry. Oh, I'm sorry. On the last slide, I did want to mention our land is a little bit more expensive than the surrounding counties. A lot of counties, not just in our region but in the United States, give away land for free, and we don't always have the potential to do that because it's private ownership that the land in Fayette County is mostly owned by. So we are getting eliminated because we can't put that local incentive into the project. So competitive realities, there's so many different factors that companies look at when they're trying to find a location or determine whether they want to expand here in Lexington. Obvious labor availability is a big one, so that would be another, probably our biggest barriers, making sure we find them the right workforce and being creative in that as well. And then also the time frame of finding them available building and site. And then there are more economic development organizations now in the United States, and there are less projects that are being announced each year. So the competition is even greater for fewer projects. and most consultants and companies are looking for reasons to eliminate you off the list instead of keep you on, so that's why we're very regional and trying to make sure we keep Central Kentucky on the list so that we don't get taken off at a first glance because we might not check a certain box as they go through their pre-screening. And then on the next page, I just want to kind of just quickly go over the economic impact comparison of three different projects. We had a study done that we can run numbers through to see the economic impact of different projects, and so we just did three examples here. And manufacturing always is going to be the largest impact because of the multipliers and of what they have, the indirect and induced jobs that are created. So the first example is manufacturing a midsize manufacturing firm, and then we compared it to a midsize R&D high-tech firm. Same amount of investment, same jobs, and same wages. But you can see the manufacturing project produces the most indirect and induced jobs, which entails what's best for the city, is more revenue for our city. And then the last example there is a small, high-tech slash manufacturing firm. So you can see the investments lower, jobs are lower, but the average wage is much higher. And we definitely need those jobs. And we do, as Jenna mentioned, actively work to recruit those. But it does have a lower impact on the indirect and induced jobs. We have a question for you. Vice-Marcay. Thank you, Chair. On the difference between manufacturing and high-tech, can you explain, given that the top numbers are all the same, how you get to a different bottom line? It's on the economic multipliers, and so I'm not an economist, so I'm not sure exactly the back end of the model, but if you plug those numbers in, they look at, you know, if you're building a new manufacturing facility, all the indirect and introduced jobs are going to be greater because you're going to have suppliers and construction. Whereas with a high-tech firm, they may just be buying desks and computers and chairs. They're not putting as much in on the capital investment side as far as the types of jobs that they're creating. So that's why the numbers are a little bit different is because of the multiplier effect. So that indirect jobs in the manufacturing column refers to the fact that in our own region or here, there are people supplying them with raw materials and et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. Yeah, it would be the suppliers. Great. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. Anyone else on this slide? Okay. All right. I'm going to turn it over to Jenna to finish out the last slide. And the last slide was just to show you the impact of the Bluegrass Business Park and the amount of dollars that was generated because of it. So the total regional payroll and total revenue includes direct, indirect, and induced employment effects in the eight-county region. The indirects are the impact of those local industries. They're buying goods and services from other local industries. The induced effects are the response by the economy that occurs as a re-spending. Additional taxes are likely, but they're difficult to measure. So if you can take a look at the numbers, you can see the direct employment of the companies that are out in the park today. There's 1,540 jobs. The average wage, sorry, the average wage, this is how we do these for the model, is $40,000 a year. The direct payroll is $64 million. And then the regional impact and regional payrolls, and again, those are the induced effects that some of these jobs have outside the region, too. So it's not just having an impact here. It's companies that locate in Lexington also have an impact on the counties surrounding us as well. And that park, we purchased that park or we started working on that park. I think it was 1998 when Lobasto first located there, and we sold the last parcel just last year to Harbor Steel. So you're out of land. We're out of land in Commerce Lexington's Economic Development Park. Councilman Rosati had a question. Quick question, Jenna. I can't remember. Can those companies buy or do they have to lease all those that land out there? They buy. They do. We have no land to sell. It was all sold via Commerce Lexington. So how short are you? How short are we? Well, we've got 190 acres left. Okay. Yeah. I mean, we market. And, again, those are 190 acres that are zoned properly for projects. And like Kimberly said, we have marketed golf courses and come to owners who we know might be a nice site for a particular project. It's not all manufacturing. It's headquarters and other things. And we've marketed all kinds of pieces of property and said, please, before you consider somewhere else, let us show you some options. And maybe there's the ability to have something rezoned or changed in order to keep a project here or, you know, keep it from going to Tennessee. And so you've gone the extra step. We do go the extra set. What's a big barrier, then, ultimately? The timeline for rezoning is difficult for us. We need properly, currently zoned land. So having Coldstream is still a great option for us for headquarters and white-collar operations, but if we do have a company that's a manufacturer, that's a more difficult spin for us. And I can't imagine, so if you have this company that's knocking on our door that you haven't come to us and said, look, we need to have your help zoning-wise that we haven't been agreeable to do so. We have. Everybody has worked at their best to do it, but companies don't want to wait. And, you know, the issue is what they see and what we can submit today. So if a company calls and says, or a consultant, and that's where we spend a lot of our time, those consultants are the gatekeepers, and they're looking at Lexington or they're looking at Seymour, Indiana. Seymour, Indiana has a ton of land that's properly zoned. and for us to say, okay, we need a 100-acre currently zoned site, we don't have it. So that's that impact that Kimberly said. They're looking at reasons to cut companies off, cut cities off the list. So if somebody else has it, we don't want to wait three or six months to have something re-zoned. Excuse me, if somebody else that has similar assets can do it for us now. Gotcha. So Council Member, Chair, you were saying that the ED land is going to come to us as well as far as the different proposals. What about the Bluegrass Business Park and some of these other parcels of acreage we have? Will that be looked at as well? Well, there's no land left. There's none left. You have 190 acres. I'm sorry. No, you don't. I'm sorry. We don't have 190 acres. Lexington has 190 acres. They're owned by a variety of owners. Right, right. Commerce Lexington has zero. You're done. You're done. We're done. But the ED land is one parcel is 350, the other parcel is approximately 100 acres. but it's not zone conducive to what they're asking for. Okay, and that's what's going to come to you. And that's what Commissioner Paulson hopes to bring to the council as alternative uses of that and how do we speed that up? How can we play a better role in getting it ready, shovel ready? Because right now we don't have it shovel ready. Makes sense. Okay, thank you. I understand. Any other questions on this? Kessler Maloney. Just to follow up on that, is that the property that we're looking at there in Hamburg and also on Newtown Pike? There is one parcel in Hamburg on Polo Club and then another parcel on Newtown Pike. So that was what we're trying to come back? That's the current ED lands in Fett County. And we do submit those properties, and each time we have a client, we call Dennis Anderson, we call Buddy Calgill and say, is this something that you might consider for your piece of property? Can you explain to me what is the problem, why we can't develop on that? And what is, as a developer, having a hard time getting all that part? Well, there's a lot of infrastructure issues right now, and then there are exaction fees and some other things. And so by the time you add in the exaction fees, the piece of property becomes extremely expensive. And now we have some sewer capacity issues at some of these pieces of property too. So, and again, that goes back to infrastructure. So is that what Derek Paulson is trying to do? Commissioner Paulson is working hard on it. Thank you. And the third piece of ED land was the Central Baptist purchase a few years ago. But obviously that's off the market for now. But they're a participant on that ED committee, on the New Day Zone committee. They're very involved too, as are we. And UK. Anyone else? Okay, thank you, Jenna. We're up next on our agenda, another moment everyone's been waiting for, our monthly financials. Commissioner O'Mara, welcome. Well, thank you, Chair. We have really exciting news. No, we have our usual update. Ready? Thank you. Well, while we're trying to get that on landscape, the first slide that we'll eventually look at is comparing the unemployment rates as we usually do in a graphic format. And let me just go over what those rates are that have been graphed. For the U.S., unemployment rate was 5.8% in November, and it dropped to 5.6% in December. Kentucky in November was 6% in November and dropped to 5.7% in December. The Lexington MSA in November was 4.9 and dropped to 4.0 in December, a very, very large change month over month. And Lexington was sitting at 4.4% in November, and we were reported at 3.8 in December. Those numbers are pre-recession numbers and very hopeful that we will stay that suppressed in our unemployment. One caveat is we do have January numbers only for the United States, and in January it went back up a tenth of a percent from 5.6 to 5.7. Now whether Lexington MSA follows that curve, we'll have to wait and see. The next slide is a three-month rolling average, just trying to kind of smooth out those troughs of up and down variants. And then after that, our leading indicators. And those are mixed for the month of January. We talked about the really good news with the low unemployment rate going down to 3.8%. We don't have any new employment numbers released since June. We're still waiting for the September-October numbers to be released by the federal government. On our permitting, we're slightly below, same time last year, at 1,134 permits versus 1,157 the same time last year. and new business license. Again, we're at 197, which is lower than the 244 that we experienced the same time last year. Home sales are the bright spot. We had 571 reported January of this year as compared to 524 last year and another continuation of good news that the foreclosures are staying depressed. We're at 33 versus 31 last year, and that's coming off a long-term low of 25 this past December. I'll ask Rusty Cook from Division of Revenue come and talk about some of the revenues and then Melissa Luker will talk about the rest of the budget to actual comparison. Good afternoon, everyone. As in prior months, I'll go through the top four revenues in the general fund. I will point out before we dive in to look at the results that, as I've mentioned before, that the first month following a quarter, revenue is very volatile, as you'll see through the following slides. And it's based on the due dates for two of the four categories that really fall on the last day of the month. So it's really hard to look at the month of like January or April to get kind of a guide on where we're going to be. So for the month, you can see we missed by $6.7 million. Primarily, mostly that's in two categories, employee withholding and insurance, and those are two major timing differences. I'll go into a little more information on what that means on the timing differences on the next slide. And franchise fees also was off by a half a million of one utility payment that came in at the 1st of February. As we look at it from a year-to-date perspective, we're down $5.4 million versus our budget year-to-date. Last month, we were $1.4 million ahead of our budget. So you can see the time of differences that come through, specifically in withholding and insurance. I went through and did some research on companies, some of the bigger ones, and came up with $2.75 million that was received on February the 2nd. That in prior year, it was actually in January. So that kind of contributes to the budget being higher and showing this. And then on insurance, it's the same thing. We received an additional $2 million in February at the first part that had been budgeted in prior months. And again, that's based on the month, the date of due, which is the last day of the month. So businesses will wait until the last day, get it postmarked, and we receive it. It can go back and forth. Next year, we make and put all the budget in February, and we actually get it in January. So it's kind of hard. If you go back and look at history, you'll see it last year in January. We missed it by, I think it was like $3.5 million. And then franchise fees missed. It was a half a million. One utility did not hit that was budgeted in January. We got that the first of February as well. When you compare year over year, you can see those timing differences. Employee withholding was under prior year $406,000. Last month, that was $2.7 million ahead of prior year. So you add back the $2.7 million that I mentioned earlier, and you can see where that would come into play. Those were confirmed to have hit in January prior year. Insurance the same way, the $2 million that hit in February, if that was pushed back into January to be apples to apples, you would see that we were actually up year over year. Net profit's up $1.5 million. That's not a timing difference on that. That's actual growth. The one thing I will mention is our employee, or not employee, I'm sorry, the net profit refunds is actually lower this year, so that contributes to us being higher by $700,000. So if you back that out, we're still up $700,000 year over year. And then franchise fees, which have been up all year versus prior year, are still up. Last year there is one franchise fee missing as well, so there's a net effect in there. our rural overage through January is about $1.7.8 million on franchise fees. So we still have good growth year over year. It's just due to the time of differences, it's hard to see. Next slide is information purposes only. At this time, I want to ask if there's any questions on the top four. Melissa will go over the other revenues now. Good afternoon. I'm going to try to not lose my voice during this, so I apologize. Rusty's talked about the top four, so I'll move down the list here. Once again, just like last month, the other licenses and permits, that positive variance is due to the bank franchise fee. Then avalorum is the realty taxes. And then you'll see something that I haven't said in a while, but services has a negative $1.3 million variance right now. That is due to excess fees and collections. this fiscal year includes end of term fees for the county clerk and the sheriff's office so those were included in our budget spread and we have not received those payments yet I've talked to the county clerk and I believe we're going to be based on his preliminary numbers the final audit is not done but we should be okay there so you'll see that one truing up as the year goes on just because we based our spread on last year's budget and we didn't have the end of term fees last year, and so that's raised our budget this year. So that will be corrected. And then we'll move down to other income, which is our other large variance. That's miscellaneous income. Again, like I said last month, that's the electronic monitoring has a big portion of that, drug test fees. So a lot of the variances are similar, the same variances that we had last month here. You can see if you put all of our revenues together, we have a negative variance of $4.1 million through the first seven months. And Rusty talked about timing with the end of the quarter. So we move on to the expense side. The expense side, personnel, we have a positive variance of $4.5 million. I've done some analysis, and a lot of that is due to vacant positions throughout the government. Our operating variance is a positive of $5 million. That's due to professional services, utilities, repairs and maintenance, fuel, operating supplies. So it's kind of spread out across government. Now we know, given this past week, we're going to have some more utility expenses with the cold weather. That's a variance there. The debt service, we have a favorable variance there, and that's due to some refinancing of some old bonds. So that's not a timing issue. That's actual savings that we've received from doing some cleanup of our bonds. And then the operating capital, we have a negative variance there. People have just spent their capital dollars ahead of what we had projected them to spend, but we're going to be fine there. So on the expense side, we have a positive variance of $9.8 million. If you take into account our revenues with that, we have a variance of $6.2 million positive for the first seven months. So this just shows the difference from last month to this month, the volatility that we have on a monthly basis with the government. Hold on, Melissa, you have a couple questions. Council Member Betso first. Thank you, Chair. So you said that the $4.5 million is because of vacant positions. Is that due because they've retired and we haven't filled them, or we've just not filled them in general? No, we started the year with quite a few vacancies, our fiscal year with quite a few vacancies, and we're doing some analysis because we're filling vacancies, but a lot of our vacancies are being filled internally. So somebody from Division A moves to Division B, well then Division A has to fill it with somebody from Division C. So it may take three or four tries before we get somebody from the outside. So we're just shifting people around internally. So that's what's causing some of our vacancies. And then with police and fire, we wait until we have enough to do a class. So, you know, and those are scheduled. And that process, I'm not an HR expert by any means, but the hiring process is longer because of all the testing that they have to do. So that's why we have some vacancies. Okay, good. So then I follow up. You kind of alluded to it. Which departments are those in? I was just curious if there's one area or two areas that tend to have more vacancies than others. I can get that for you. I don't have it right here. Let's be curious. But I can get that for you. Thank you. You're welcome. And actually, Councilman Bledsoe, we have some of that. Our budget analyst has pulled it, and I'll give it to everyone. Council Member Maloney. I just want to get something clear here. I see where we have $9 million surplus. I assume that's what we want to call it. We want to call it a positive variance. A positive. Well, and after we just talked about the revenue, we were a little bit behind, but what was it, $4 million or something? What were we behind in the revenue? Revenue, we were behind $4 million. In expenses, we were ahead $9 million. dollars. So we're going to catch up on what I understand on the revenue because you've got guys coming in late on payments so this nine million dollars is a lot more than what we're looking at. Is that wrong? No. Well the variance right now if you take revenue and expenses is six million dollars. So yes that is going to. Is that nine million in that six million dollars? Yes. You take the nine million and the four million. so if we end up getting to catch up on this $4 million is it still going to be $9 million or is it going to be $12 million? It could be $12 million it varies month to month so thank you you're welcome alright no more questions so move on the next two are just for references they're comparing to the prior year and then I will hand it back over to Bill if there are no questions on that thank you Last month, Council Member Farmer asked us to bring forward some information on the economic contingency. Thank you. And so we have a couple of sides to explain that. And the economic contingency was started in 1997 and grew slowly until the ordinance was amended in 2006, where the ordinance was amended to add $50,000 a month cash throughout the year and then have the 25% net fund balance calculation. Then during 2010 and 2011, the ordinance was suspended and no dollars were added to that. That's where that flat line comes from. And then starting in 2012, 2013, and 2014, dollars were added through the calculation as well additional dollars were added per council direction. And so that brings us to our current standing. And so we ended the year 630-2014 at $25.2 million. We're putting in $50,000 a month, so that adds $350,000 year to date. Our interest income is almost $138,000. And then the next one is a soft number because we're required monthly to adjust our investments to market. So there's a bullish market right now. That's all going in our favor. That can disappear if market decides to turn around. But as of the end of this month, that would be another $547,000, which would give us a market value of our cash investments at $26.1 million in the economic contingency. We have one question. Councilor Farmer. This is excellent. It's exactly what I was looking for. It shows us where we are in relation to our history. I guess isn't there implicit in this a target number that we're trying to attain? There is. The target is 10% of revenues, and where we are now is not in there. Okay. I had a slide. Okay. Okay. Is this the secret slide? It was a reference slide in case you wanted to know. Because it's busy. It's geeky accounting. But what we're looking at is from 1996 to 2014. This is before the additions through this year. But we started out at 2.7% of total revenue. As of June 30 of this past year, we were sitting at 8.3. and that gives you a scale as to where we are to our stated goal of trying to get the economic contingency to 10% of revenues of the general fund. Does the ordinance contemplate reaching that goal? Well, it's silent is what you're supposed to do after you reach the 10%. Is that what you're saying? Yes, sir. It doesn't say one way or the other that I'm aware. We can review that to make sure that answer is correct. It doesn't say that. I think we should look at it because, I mean, based on the numbers we're looking at here, we're going to have a sizable contribution potentially this year, it looks like to me. Well, that's an optimistic view. Just one view, yes. I just think we should contemplate a couple outcomes, and I think if you would provide that background, it would be very helpful. But this in and of itself has been very helpful. Thank you very much. All right. And the other moving target is our revenue, budget revenue. Oh, you're right. So this year it's $313 million if we budgeted, so obviously it makes that $26 million look a little different. Yeah. But I think it's just good to follow. We may never catch it. Because this money is in a double-locked foot locker, buried, put away. We can't even find the key until something's really, really bad. But it's good to know we have it. Councilman Brown. I would just like to have another day. I guess the ordinance that we put in place, and I was on council then, and started it, we called it a rainy day. I got my mic there. We called it a rainy day fund, and it's, you know, progress to economic contingency, which I guess sounds better. But anyway, I don't know that, has anything been added to that? In that ordinance, there was a list of things that we could spend that money for. And I'd like to have an update on that. We can give you an update. There's very, very stringent rules as to when dollars can be drawn down. It's a history of preceding years, and it's very, very difficult for us to qualify. We wouldn't want to qualify for having to dip into these funds the way the ordinance is drafted at this point. Right. I understand that, but, I mean, we've never drawn anything back out of it as far as that goes. That's correct. Okay. Thank you. Quickly, just anecdotal. We have budgeted a withdrawal out of the fund, but we didn't use it. Okay. And we totally changed the ordinance in 06, so those things you're referencing are not in there. There's only two ways to get money out. Very difficult, as Councilman Farming alluded to. Anyone else on this topic? Okay, continue on. Well, that concludes our presentation, unless you have other questions. Anyone? Seeing none. Thank you, sir. Thank you. Next up on our agenda are items referred to committee and in preparation for our last meeting before we go into budget season. Going down the list, I'll have a report out on the Solid Waste Task Force update for next meeting in March. Impact user fee will be part of that. Activity-based accounting, Councilman Lane. is not here, but he still wanted to keep that in committee as the last meeting. The Wellness Center lease RFP, when is that due back? They reviewed it today. Okay, so it'll be ready for March, you think? Yes. Okay. We heard the quarterly development report from Commerce Lexington today. The next one's in error. That shouldn't be there. Yeah, the next one is a typo. That should be crossed out. The development agencies need to come out. And then the jobs program review, do we need to keep that in committee? No. We'll have a motion. Move to remove the jobs program review. Second. Motion and second. Any discussion? All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay, we'll remove that. The minimum wage pay rate discussion, will that information be ready for March? Yes, sir. Okay. And then the right to work discussion, will that be any information? Okay. So next meeting we'll have an update on the Waste Management Task Force, the Wellness Center RFP, discussion on the minimum wage pay rate, and our monthly financials. Anyone else have anything to add before we adjourn? All right, motion to adjourn. We adjourn. Motion and second. All in favor say aye. Aye. We're adjourned. Thank you. you