The End ¶¶ Hello, everyone. Greetings. We'll call a meeting to order. And we're fortunate tonight to have with us Father Dan Knoll, pastor at Mary Queen of the Holy Rosary Catholic Church. Father Dan, thank you for joining us. My pleasure. Let us pray. God of power and might, wisdom and justice, through you authority is rightly administered. Laws are enacted. Judgment is decreed. Assist with your spirit of counsel and fortitude, this council and its meeting tonight. Guide their thoughts and discussion so that they may thoroughly understand the problems this community faces. Judge them with your knowledge and wisdom and decide upon actions which truly give glory to you. May the members of this council always seek together the ways of righteousness, justice, and mercy. Grant that they may be enabled by your powerful protection to lead our city and county with honesty and integrity. We ask this of you with hope. Amen. Thank you, Father Dan. All right. Next on our agenda is minutes of previous meetings. I'll ask for a motion to approve the minutes. Is there a motion? Second. Motion by Council Member Scutchfield, second by Vice Mayor Kaye. Is there any discussion on the motion? All right. Oops, wait a minute. We've got to back up here and do a roll call. I missed the roll call. Madam Clerk, will you please call the roll? Thank you. Ms. Bledsoe? Yes. Mr. Fred Brown? Here. Mr. James Brown? Here. Ms. Evans? Here. Mr. Farmer? Here. Mr. Gibbs? Here. Ms. Henson? Here. Mr. Kay? Here. Ms. Lamb? Here. Mr. Lane? Here. Mr. Maloney? Here. Ms. Massadi? Here. Ms. Scutchfield? Here. Mr. Stinnett? Yes, ma'am. Ms. Akers. Thank you. All right. Thank you, Madam Clerk. All right. We have a motion to approve the amendments. We have a motion and a second. Is there any discussion on the motion? All right. Hearing none, we can vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Next on our agenda is ordinances for a second reading. Madam Clerk, if you'll please give us a reading of ordinances for a second. Ordinance number one, an ordinance amending certain of the budgets of the Lexington Fayette Urban County Government to reflect current requirements for municipal expenditures and appropriating and reappropriating funds. Schedule number one. Thank you, Madam Clerk. Is there a motion to approve? So moved. Motion by Vice Mayor Kay, seconded by Councilmember Farmer. Is there any discussion on the motion? All right, if not, I'll ask the clerk to please call the roll. Ms. Bledsoe? Yes. Mr. Fred Brown? Yes. Mr. James Brown? Yes. Ms. Evans? Yes. Mr. Farmer? Yes, ma'am. Mr. Gibbs? Yes. Ms. Henson? Yes. Mr. Kay? Yes. Ms. Lamb? Yes. Mr. Lane? Yes. Mr. Maloney? Yes, ma'am. Ms. Massadi? Yes. Ms. Scutchfield? Yes. Mr. Stennett? Yes, ma'am. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Clerk. The vote reflects passage of the motion. Allows us to move on to ordinances for first reading, and first I'll call on Council Member Massadi for a motion. Thank you, Mayor. I need to move to have a scheduled public hearing for the ordinance changing the zone from a P1 zone to a planned neighborhood residential R3 zone for 1.3385 net acres for property located at 3900 Boston Road. It's a motion by Council Member Sadi. Is there a second? Second. Thank you. There is a second by Council Member Evans. Mayor, I need to schedule a date with the Council's pleasure. We need to hear this by the 26th of August. So we can either come back on a Monday or come back after a Tuesday work session. I proposed either for the 18th or the 25th, which are both Tuesdays, and that would be right after the work session, 6 p.m. or so. All right, so you want to? I'll just go ahead and move to have it held on the 18th. And I know Mr. Simpson is there. Does that work with your schedule, Mr. Simpson? That's fine. Okay. All right, there's a motion which includes August 18th, That would be after the council work session? Yes, 6 p.m. Okay, at 6 p.m. Is there any discussion on the motion? Council Member Lane. Thank you, Mayor. Since this received the unanimous approval of the Planning Commission, and it's a down zoning from professional office to residential, I just wonder what the rationale for their objection to the zoning change and, you know, if it's really necessary for us to have a hearing on this. Council Member Sadi. Rationals, I have objectors from the neighborhood to the zone change. They would like to hold a public hearing. All right. Any further discussion on the motion? All right. Hearing none, then we can vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. No. Motion carries. Madam Clerk, if you please proceed with the reading of the ordinances for our first reading. Thank you. Unit Development 2 PUD2 Zone for 1.3183 Net, 1.5272 Gross Acres for property located at 128 Eddy Street, 128, 130, 132, 134, 136, 137, 138, 140, 141, 142, 144, 146, 151, 154, 156, 166, 168, and 174 York Street, Noli CDC Corporation, Council District 1. Number four, an ordinance amending the authorized strength by abolishing one classified civil service position of traffic engineer, grade 520E, and creating one classified civil service position of traffic engineer senior, grade 525E, in the Division of Traffic Engineering. Number five, an ordinance amending the authorized strength by abolishing one classified civil service position of budget analyst senior, grade 521E, and creating one classified civil service position of budget analyst, grade 519E, in the Division of Budgeting. Number six, an ordinance amending certain of the budget. Wait just a minute. We've got a motion to amend, I believe, by Councilman Maloney. Thank you, Mayor. I move that ordinance six on the docket for first reading be amended to include a budget amendment in the amount of $500 for Sister City. this will provide additional funds for sister cities to receive the same pay raise as LFUCG as approved during the budget approval process. So moved. Second. Motion by Council Member Maloney and seconded 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. Madam Clerk, please continue. When you're ready. Number 6, as amended, an ordinance amending certain of the budgets of the Lexington-Fayette-Urban County Government to reflect current requirements for municipal expenditures and appropriating and reappropriating funds. Schedule number 2. Number 7, an ordinance amending certain of the budgets of the Lexington-Fayette-Urban County Government to reflect current requirements for municipal expenditures and appropriating and reappropriating funds. Fiscal year 2015, Schedule number 70. all right thank you madam clerk are there any motions for walk-ons or suspensions for second reads all right councilmember henson thank you mayor i moved to place on the docket under first reading of ordinances an ordinance amending the sick leave bank program so moved motion by council member henson who is the second second by council member lamb is there any discussion on the motion i'll go council member brown fred brown i'm sorry i didn't get on there go ahead and order go ahead and order all right there's no discussion then we can vote all in favor oh i didn't say that all right council remember evans like i still have some some questions about maybe what the original intent the addition of the maternity and paternity leave i've still got some questions about that but i i think what i what i overheard council member fred brown talking about is um perhaps sending this to committee to talk about that um but i don't know if uh glinda Ms. George can talk about why the maternity and paternity leave was included. I know the state level, they're doing that, but for me, reading the state regulations, I'm not so sure that was really the intent. It might be being used that way. So I think I need a little more discussion about the inclusion of that and why I guess the law department thought that was necessary to include. Councilmember Lane. My question is, maybe HR could touch on this, but is there an economic impact to the budgets of the urban county government by trading out time off and things like that? Do we have an analysis on that? Who can speak to that? Tammy? Sally, you want to introduce? All right. Tammy, thank you. Hello. We did an analysis of the most recent example of someone that had some time donated to them. And just as one example, there were 72 hours donated to this individual. her rate of pay as the recipient was $12.06 per hour. The value of that time received to that employee was $868. Looking back at the seven donors that gave time, the value of the time that they donated at their rates of pay was over $2,000. So it's just one example of many, but what it can show is the time that's donated can be a higher value based on the person who's giving the sick time, basically. It could also be lower, but the assumption is that, you know, in a lot of cases, there really isn't going to be that significant an impact, especially based on the very small amount that's donated each year. Right. Well, you know, my concern is we put this in as a policy. it's very unlikely we're going to rescind it at a later date. So it seems like before we do that, we should study it very carefully and determine what the cost of the government would be. I mean, I'm not opposed to it, but I'm not in favor of it either. I just think we need to have more information. That's all I have. Thank you for your comment. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Council Member Lane. Council Member Fred Brown. Yeah, my concern was that this is the first that I've seen of this, and I'm not so sure. I don't have an opinion either way, but that's a pretty big change from 600 hours to 80 hours, and I think we ought to probably vet it a little bit in committee form. Thank you. Council Member Lamb. Thank you, Mayor. I would actually like to ask Ms. Walters, do you have the statistics as to how frequently this has been used in the past? I looked over the past three years, since the beginning of 2012, and there were 28 instances where an employee had some time donated to them. It could have been anywhere from eight hours. I think this is one of the higher ones at 72. So it really isn't taken advantage of very frequently, to be honest. So there's 28 instances where the time had been, so that means that there were 28 recipients, or was that meaning 28 donors? There were 28 recipients. Okay, all right, thanks. I, you know, having been a former employee, I remember when they put this in place, and I often wondered why that the number was so high because it actually prohibited people from being able to participate oftentimes, and so I do advocate for this change, I think that it can be a positive, and I hope that you all would consider supporting it. Thanks. All right. Council Member Maloney. Question for HR. From what I understand, if you have over $600, you get paid every year like we do. And if someone has over $600 and they're willing to give up a bunch of hours to go under the $600, hours, we could end up saving money as long as they know that they're helping the full of employees. So in other words, we could save money out of this. Yes, that's possible. Currently, our policy states that you must have over 600 hours to be eligible to donate and can't go below the 600 hours. Right now, nobody, hardly anybody's giving up their 600 hours to, because we wouldn't be having this discussion if somebody's not willing to give up they're to help sick so people within 300 250 hours or would be no there may be a long time before they ever get up there so working at the state this is one of the most i was proud of what state does on this because we had a lady who had a child had cancer and she read it who's out her vacation and everything and our staff i mean our my department ended up giving her over a thousand and ours. So she got to spend the rest of her time with her wife, I mean her daughter before she died. And these are the kind of things that I think bring unity to the employees. So I would support this and I think the rest of it and I hope the council, I know there's some questions about money and all that, but in the long term, this brings the morale up and it really brings a lot of people step up to help out other people. So I hope you all do support something like this. Thank you. Council Member Massadi. Thank you, Mayor. I guess Council Member Hanson, did some employees come to you and ask you about this? I just wondered what precipitated the ordinance. As I said in my email, it came to my attention when an employee who has a very serious illness was losing her time, which would mean she would also lose her benefits and everything, and her illness is very, very serious. So Sally, our CAO, Sally Hamilton and I talked about it, and Sally had said that when we did the compensation study, this is something she had intended on bringing up. So this just shed light on it for me because I didn't realize that, I guess, as council members, we don't get sick time and accrued time. So I just felt that this situation was very serious to this lady that works here. And it would open up opportunities for other employees to help her. I guess, Tammy, if you don't mind coming to the podium, please, thank you. So this is a policy that we've had in force, and we're just trying to basically amend it. Yes, ma'am. I just wondered, was this the only employee that this has ever happened to? I'm certain throughout the years this has happened previously, hasn't it? Yes, there are people who, over time, have asked for time to be donated to them. And the premise, I guess, behind the change is that more people would be willing to donate their time if they had the capacity. And, you know, we don't have as many people over 600 hours as we do below 600 hours. And so it just opens up more opportunities for people to be generous with their time. And is 600 hours the max that you can accrue? 600 hours is the threshold. At the end of each calendar year, every employee's balance is reviewed. And if you have over 600 hours, you're paid for that time and left with a balance of 600 to continue accruing the next year. I think it's a good idea, and I appreciate you bringing it forward, Council Member Hanson. I just wish we would have done it earlier. It sounds like we could have used this policy a lot earlier. Thank you. Thank you. Vice Mayor Kay. Thank you, Mayor. I have a question also. I guess I wasn't clear about the people donating and the people receiving. How do you calculate the cost to the city? I presume on the number of days, the amount that's actually paid to someone who is out of sick leave. So if I'm working at $20 an hour, you calculate those hours. If I'm working at $60 an hour and donate it, I'm just donating that time. So the cost to the city is the cost of the particular employee. Is that correct? I think there are a lot of different factors, which makes it really difficult to calculate a cost, because it depends on the employee, like you said, who is asking for the time and their rate of pay. So if they're going to go unpaid for two months at $12 an hour, that's a potential issue. Plus, it's the rate of pay that the employee who is deciding to donate. And you wouldn't really know that until the person reaches out and makes that effort and says, I want to donate X number of hours. Then you could see, okay, well, what's their rate of pay? That's why I tried to give an example of at least the most recent one to show that, you know, for this 72 hours this person has received, to them, that amounts to 868 hours. But if you add those same 72 hours calculated at the rates of pay of the people who donated, the hours, that's over $2,200 for that same 72 hours. But that latter figure is not a cost to government. That simply donated time. Absolutely. Yeah, there's no cost associated with it. Okay, thank you. The other thing that struck me about this is that if you look at the information we got, Lexington was way out of line with just about everybody else who's on this list. Highest next was, I think, 240, 280. But this would take us down from the highest to the lowest. And I understand that there's maybe a pressing need. And I'm wondering if, although it gets a little complicated, if we could amend the number of hours down for the moment and then give and basically put this in committee and have further information provided so that we understand exactly what the implications are and how it would work and then figure out what a reasonable number of hours is. I don't want to hold this up. On the other hand, as I say, I think dropping from the top to the bottom is maybe a little bit precipitous. So I won't make that motion, but that's just a thought at the moment. Thank you. All right. Council Member Farmer. Thank you, Mayor. So what was the genesis of 80 hours? How was that picked coming from 600 to 80? It's an entire pay period. Okay. That was all right. The 80, I'm the culprit of the 80 hours. The 80 hours is based on out of the state. They use 75. That was your threshold. And that 75 was based on a 37 and a half hour work week. So they did two, they've always run with two weeks. So that's your 75. So when we tried to parallel that, we went to two 40-hour weeks, and that was the genesis of that 80 hours. There's a memorandum in the packet or in the motion document here that shows different hours for different locales and groupings. And I just took that column without the 600 and added them up, and the average of those is about 140 hours, which is just more than the 80, but places us kind of in the median rather than at the very bottom. And if we're going to do this without committee work, I might be more comfortable with a different amount of hours, but I will wait for others' potential action before I take any. Thank you. Back to Councilmember Evans. Thank you, Mayor. I guess maybe I should have directed my question to you. Again, I'm still confused about why the maternity and paternity leave was put in there, because, again, it seems like the intent reading, I guess, our reading the state was when there's chronic illness or severe illness. So I guess I'm trying to, I just need some answers about that. And because from what I understood, that was not Council Member Henson's idea. So it was put in there. So again, I'm trying to figure out what the reasoning behind that was. Correct. When we initially started this, the issue was lowering the number of hours from 600 to something lower. But then in reviewing the whole policy and looking at what the state does, the state's definition is actually broader than ours, and so it does allow for employees to use donated time for maternity and paternity leave. And so instead of coming up with a new definition of disabling illness or injury, we just added in the line maternity or paternity leave, and that was in discussions with Council Member Henson and the CAO. First of all, let me say, I think this is, lowering the number is good. I come from the state, so I'm in favor of lowering that number. Again, my concern would be looking at the state's regulation under the sick leave sharing procedure. It's glaring that it talks about medically certified illness impairment, physical mental condition. And again, I haven't gotten the answers from the state either. So I guess maybe I would ask if you all have really talked to the state personnel to make sure that was really, if the state is even misusing it or if that was really the intent to just be able to use it for anything. So if the state's going to say sick leave is just sick leave and you can use it for anything, that's fine, but that just doesn't seem like that was the intent reading their regulation. So I'd just like some answers about that. overall I'm not opposed to reducing it, reducing the number. We did not verify that with the state. However, we do know people who work for the state who have had donated sick leave. And keep in mind, you can use your own sick leave for maternity or paternity leave. So if someone were donating it to you, you would be able to use it as well. I understand that. I understand that that's what's been going on. But the brief conversation I had with someone in the state, again, I'm not sure if that was the intent. And I don't know if we want to operate in something that wasn't really intended for. Because someone could go to a baby shower and then therefore donate their sick leave. And again, I don't know if that was really the intent of this. Because that's what it allows. And if we're going to treat sick leave as sick leave, that's fine. But, again, I would just like more confirmation, you know, some official confirmation that that's really what is going on. I mean, we all know things happen, state, local level, that wasn't necessarily the intent of the law. But it's being done. So I just want to make sure that we can, we're really doing what the real intent of the law was. Thank you. Council Member Henson. Thank you, Mayor. I guess in light of all the conversation we've had, Tammy, I just, sorry, I just, one question about if we have an employee that has an extremely sick child or has a very complicated pregnancy, they would qualify without this wording, would be my understanding. Is that right? Yes, that's correct. Okay. So thank you. And based on the conversation, I would amend the ordinance to change the hours from 600 to 160, which would be a month's worth of hours and remove the paternity and maternity reference. Second. Motion by Council Member Henson and second by Vice Mayor Kaye. Is there any discussion on the motion to amend? All right. Hearing none, then we can vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. The motion carries. Is there any further discussion on the original motion? Then we can vote on the original motion as amended. Council Member Lane? Just one more follow-up question for you. If someone is on extended sick leave, how does their job get fulfilled if they're not around? Do we have to shift somebody over there, hire a temporary person, or how do we deal with that? I think there are a number of options. And if there are other employees, the workload is shared. If the division has money, they could use temporary funds to fill the position. Not that position, but to get the work done. Okay, so that's been our practice generally, just to shift somebody from a similar department that has similar functions, and they just take over that job on the interim basis? I think it depends on the divisional needs, but most of the time I would assume that's supported within the division. Right. I mean, the reason I ask about that is if somebody was on a long-term extended leave and we had to fill a position, then we'd either have to hire somebody or get a temporary person to fill that job, and there would be a cost incurred there, too. As I said, I'm not taking one side or the other, but I just felt like these questions are good ones to discuss. That's all I've got, Mayor. Thank you. All right. Thank you, Councilman Lane. There's no further discussion, and we can vote on the motion as amended. All in favor of the motion as amended, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. All right, Madam Clerk, whenever you're ready, please give us a first reading. This will be ordinance number eight, an ordinance amending the sick leave bank program, changing the name to the sick leave transfer program, amending the definition of employee to include unclassified civil service employees, amending the definition of family member to include step parents, step children, and qualified adults, requiring prospective donors and recipients to complete forms provided by the Division of Human Resources in order to participate in the sick leave transfer program, decreasing the number of hours required for participation from over 600 hours to over 160 hours, deleting the combined benefits restriction, and deleting the maximum number of hours that an employee may donate annually, effective upon passage of counsel. Thank you, Madam Clerk. Are there any motions to suspend the rules for second readings? All right. If not, then, Madam Clerk, if you'll please proceed to a second reading of resolutions. Resolution number one, a resolution accepting the bid of TOTER LLC, establishing a price contract for roll carts for the Division of Waste Management. Number two, a resolution accepting the bid of Comtronics Incorporated, establishing a price contract for installation, repair, and removal of vehicle electronic equipment for the Division of Waste Management. Number three, a resolution authorizing the Division of Water Quality to purchase a heavy-duty sluice gate for the Town Branch Wastewater Treatment Plant from Business Incorporated, a sole source provider, and authorizing the mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute any necessary agreement with Business Incorporated related to the procurement at a cost not to exceed $25,216. Number four, a resolution amending Resolution No. 588-2014 accepting the bid of Level 3 Communications Incorporated, formerly TW Telecom Holdings Incorporated, and establishing a price contract for Internet access redundancy and authorizing the mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute an addendum to contract No. 281-2014 for additional telephone lines for the LFUCG telephone system at a cost not to exceed $28,878.24 in fiscal year 2016. Number five, a resolution authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to accept a grant from the Kentucky Commercial Mobile Radio Service Emergency Communications Board, which grant funds are in the amount of $703,430.41 Commonwealth of Kentucky funds are for the Lexington 911 PSAP Customer Premise Equipment Upgrade Project for fiscal year 2016, the acceptance of which does not obligate the Urban County Government for the expenditure of funds and authorizing the mayor to transfer unencumbered funds within the grant budget. Number six, a resolution authorizing the mayor on behalf of the urban county government to accept a donation of one $25 Kroger gift card from Joanna Rhodes for client incentives for families served by the Family Care Center. Number seven, a resolution authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the urban county government to accept a grant from the Environmental Protection Agency, which grant funds are in the amount of $200,000 federal funds are for the remediation of environmental concerns identified at the Old Fayette County Courthouse, the acceptance of which obligates the urban county government for the expenditure of $40,000 as a local match, and authorizing the mayor to transfer unencumbered funds within the grant budget. Thank you, Madam Clerk. Is there a motion to approve the second reading of resolutions? Move approval. There's a motion by Council Member Henson. Is there a second? Second by Vice Mayor Kay. Is there any discussion on the motion? All right. If not, then Madam Clerk, please call the roll. Ms. Bledsoe? Yes. Mr. Fred Brown? Yes. Mr. James Brown? Yes. Ms. Evans? Yes. Mr. Farmer? Yes. Mr. Gibbs? Yes. Ms. Henson? Yes. Mr. Kay? Yes. Ms. Lamb? Yes. Mr. Lane? Yes. Mr. Maloney? Yes. Ms. Massadi? Yes. Ms. Scutchfield? Yes. Mr. Stennett? Yes. That is all. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Clerk. The vote reflects passage of the motion. It allows us to move to resolutions for a first reading whenever you're ready. Thank you. Resolution number eight, a resolution accepting the bid of Zimmer tractor in the amount of $33,247 for an all-wheel drive articulating chassis tractor for the Division of Facilities and Fleet Management. Number 9, a resolution accepting the bid of Rexall Incorporated in the amount of $42,392.99 for LED light fixtures for the Department of General Services. Number 10, a resolution accepting the bids of Byrne, Reiney, Hayden, LLC, doing business as Chamois Auto Wash and Mr. Sparkle Car Wash Incorporated, establishing price contracts for vehicle washing for the Division of Facilities and Fleet Management. Number 11, a resolution accepting the bid of Disponet Service Company Incorporated, establishing a price contract for plumbing services for the Division of Facilities and Fleet Management. Number 12, a resolution accepting the bids of Shelby Automotive Group, doing business as Napa Auto Parts, Fleet Pride Incorporated, and KOI Auto Parts, establishing price contracts for truck and auto batteries for the Division of Facilities and Fleet Management. Number 13, a resolution accepting the bids of Peterbilt of Louisville Incorporated, Quantrell Cadillac Incorporated, the Altony Blakely Company Incorporated, doing business as Alton Blakely, Ford Lincoln, Mazda, Paul Miller Ford Incorporated, Clark Power Services Incorporated, Gilly Hyde Ford Lincoln Incorporated, and Worldwide Equipment Incorporated, establishing price contracts for automotive and truck parts OEM for the Division of Facilities and Fleet Management. Number 14, a resolution accepting the bids of Lexington Auto Spring Company, Quantrell Cadillac Incorporated, Alton Blakely Ford, Lincoln Mazda, O'Reilly Automotive Stores Incorporated, doing business as O'Reilly Auto Parts, Shelby County Automotive Group, doing business as Napa Auto Parts, Gilly Hyde Ford Lincoln Incorporated, Diesel Injection Service Company Incorporated, Powertrain of Kentucky, Midwest Parts Incorporated, doing business as Napa Auto Parts, Fleet Pride Incorporated, KOI Auto Parts, and Advanced Stores Company Incorporated doing business as CarQuest Auto Parts, establishing price contracts for automotive truck parts, light duty for the Division of Facilities and Fleet Management. Number 15, a resolution accepting the bids of Lexington Auto Spring Company, Peterbilt of Louisville Incorporated, O'Reilly Automotive Stores Incorporated doing business as O'Reilly Auto Parts, Bluegrass International, Shelby County Automotive Group doing business as Napa Auto Parts, Gilley Hyde, Ford Lincoln Incorporated, Clark Power Services Incorporated, Martin's Peterbilt of East Kentucky LLC, Diesel Injection Service Company Incorporated, Powertrain of Kentucky, Fleet Pride Incorporated, Worldwide Equipment Incorporated, and Advanced Stores Company Incorporated, doing business as CarQuest Auto Parts, establishing price contracts for automotive truck parts, heavy duty for the Division of Facilities and Fleet Management. Number 16, a resolution accepting the bid of Striker Sales Corporation, establishing a price contract for powered stretcher and powered stretcher loading system for the Division of Fire and Emergency Services. Number 17, a resolution accepting the bid of Excellence Incorporated, establishing a price contract for powered stretcher loading system installation for the Division of Fire and Emergency Services. Number 18, a resolution ratifying the probationary classified civil service appointments of Amanda LaFontaine, Administrative Specialist, grade 513N, 24.360 hourly, in the Division of Revenue, effective July 13, 2015. Willis Barnett, Equipment Operator Senior, Grade 512N, 15.607 hourly in the Division of Water Quality, effective July 6, 2015. And Gregory Stewart, Maintenance Mechanic Senior, Grade 519N, 23.316 hourly in the Division of Community Corrections, effective July 13, 2015. Ratifying the permanent classified civil service appointments of Robert Allen, Deputy Director, Grade 524E, 2269.12 biweekly, effective April 27, 2015. and David Ellis, Public Service Worker Senior, Grade 509N, 13.724 hourly, effective June 15, 2015, both in the Division of Streets and Roads, and Renee Morrison, Child Care Program Aid, Grade 508N, 13.564 hourly in the Division of Family Services, effective May 3, 2015, and ratifying the Classified Civil Service Temporary Appointment of Horace Miles, Equipment Operator Senior, Grade 512N, 15.999 hourly in the Division of Water Quality, effective January 5, 2015. Number 19, a resolution authorizing the Division of Human Resources to make conditional offers to the following probationary classified civil service appointments. Marques Sturgis, Public Service Worker, Grade 507N, 12.658, hourly in the Division of Waste Management, effective upon passage of counsel. Kristen Jones, 19.011, hourly, and Tracy Sorrell, 19.414, hourly, both Telecommunicator Senior, Grade 516N, in the Division of Emergency Management, 9-1-1, effective July 13, 2015. Jenny Packer, Administrative Specialist, Grade 513N, 18.299, hourly in the Division of Police, effective July 13, 2015. and Dallas Montfort, heavy equipment technician, grade 516N, 21.184 hourly in the Division of Facilities and Fleet Management, effective upon passage of council. Number 20, a resolution authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute change order number 2 to the contract with Churchill McGee, LLC, for public safety operations center phase 1B renovation, increasing the contract price by the sum of $9,837.88 from $6,127,033.79 to $6,136,871.67. Number 21. Mr. Mayor, I believe there's a public hearing with this one. This is number 21. It has a public hearing associated. All right. Thank you. We are required to have a public hearing on item 21 under resolutions for first reading, so I will declare this public hearing to be open. Are there any comments from the public on this item? Number 21. Bernard, Mr. McCarthy. I hope this project gets built as quick as possible, guys. In the years of fighting over it, it's kind of determined which way I voted in several elections. It's determined, ultimately, where I wound up putting my own house because I found out about property for sale through people I've met in the squabbles over this road. and far more critically, it's wound up deciding which nonprofit agency gets most of my vacation time and some of my money. So please, hurry up and get this thing built as quick as possible, even though the guy in the next cubicle over from me is the one actually in charge over it, and I'm on a totally different project. Thank you, Mr. McCarthy. All right, does anyone else wish to speak? All right, then I declare this public. I believe this is, yes, yes, ma'am. We had an earlier comment for resolution 7 was passed, so are we going to have to wait until the end of the meeting? Well, we're probably not too far from the, it's not too far until the end. This is on the public hearing on the, on item number 21. So we're not too far from, we're not too far from where it's appropriate for a public comment. All right. So I declare the public hearing to be closed. Madam Clerk, please continue. Resolution 21, a resolution authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to approve the change in use of a portion of the property located at 522 Patterson Street and to execute a deed and any other necessary documents to transfer at no cost this portion of the property to the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet, Department of Highways for construction of Phase 2 of the Newtown Pike Extension Project. Number 22, a resolution authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to accept a grant from the Kentucky Department of Military Affairs Division of Emergency Management, which grant funds are the amount of $821,600 federal funds, are for continuation of the Chemical Stockpile Emergency Preparedness Program for fiscal year 2015, the acceptance of which does not obligate the Urban County Government for the expenditure of funds in authorizing the mayor to transfer unencumbered funds within the grant budget. Number 23, a resolution authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute an addendum to the Memorandum of Understanding with the Lexington-Fayette County Health Department for FATS Oil and Grease Training Services, renewing the memorandum for one year at a cost not to exceed $1,200. Number 24, a resolution authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute Supplemental Agreement No. 4 with the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet for the acceptance of additional federal funds for the Newtown Pike Extension Project in the amount of $2,720,038 for supplemental design and to approve an amendment to agreement with the Lexington Community Land Trust, Inc. for additional federal funds in the amount of $2,228,038 for operating, legal, mitigation, and housing construction costs. Number 25, a resolution authorizing the mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute change order number one to the contract with Tennis Technology Incorporated for asphalt repair for tennis and basketball courts at Meadowthorpe Park, increasing the contract price by the sum of $1,707 from $19,654 to $21,361. Number 26, a resolution amending resolution number 278-2015, correcting the name of the division for Matthew Halfley from the Division of Water Quality to the Division of Waste Management, effective retroactive to May 28, 2015. Number 27, a resolution authorizing the mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute a lease agreement with Lexington Downtown Development Authority Incorporated for space located in the Phoenix Building at 101 East Vine Street. Number 28, a resolution authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the urban county government to approve and adopt the affordable housing program requirements and guidelines and authorizing the mayor to approve and execute all affordable housing program commitment letters, loan agreements, grant agreements, deed restrictions, mortgages, notes, or any other document necessary for the disbursement of affordable housing funds. Number 29, a resolution authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the urban county government to execute certificates of consideration and other necessary documents and to accept deeds for property interest needed for the Pimlico Parkway Stormwater Improvements Project at no cost to the urban county government Number 30, a resolution authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the urban county government to execute an amended three-year purchase of service agreement with Hope Center Incorporated for the Housing First Pilot Project at an additional cost not to exceed $18,000 Number 31, a resolution authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the urban county government to accept a grant from the Commonwealth of Kentucky Division of Compliance Assistance, which grant funds are in the amount of $12,000 federal funds, are for remediation of environmental concerns identified at the Old Fayette County Courthouse, the acceptance of which obligates the urban county government for the expenditure of $2,400 as a local match, and authorizing the mayor to transfer unencumbered funds within the grant budget. Number 32, a resolution authorizing and directing the mayor on behalf of the urban county government to execute an amendment to agreement with Risk Management Services Company to include claims manager services in the agreement for third-party claims administration at a cost not to exceed $78,000. Number 33, a resolution authorizing the mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute the purchase of service agreements with American Red Cross Bluegrass Chapter $12,500, Arbor Youth Services Incorporated $150,000, Baby Health Service Incorporated $18,605, Big Brothers Big Sisters of the Bluegrass Incorporated $27,225, Bluegrass Community Action Partnership, $20,000 Bluegrass Council of the Blind Incorporated, $15,000 Bluegrass Rape Crisis Center, $32,160 Bluegrass Technology Center, $19,800 Children's Advocacy Center of the Bluegrass, $56,500 Chrysalis House Incorporated, $87,500 Community Action Council for Lexington, Fayette, Bourbon, Harrison and Nicholas Counties, $27,569 Faith Feeds of Kentucky Incorporated, doing businesses Glean, Kentucky, $6,000 God's Pantry Food Bank, $36,495. Greenhouse 17 Incorporated, $197,572. Hope Center Incorporated includes One Parent Scholar House, $1,185,000. Jubilee Jobs of Lexington, $13,184. Kentucky Cancer Link Incorporated, $20,000. Lexington Leadership Foundation Incorporated, $68,956. Lexington Rescue Mission, $49,000. Mission Lexington Incorporated, $61,187. Movable Feast Incorporated, $140,000. NAMI Lexington, $57,000. New Beginnings Bluegrass Incorporated, $116,232. New Life Day Center, $14,553. Nursing Home Ombudsman Agency of the Bluegrass Incorporated, $48,630. Prevent Child Abuse Kentucky, $4,289. Repairs Lexington Incorporated, $5,784. The Salvation Army, $270,025. Step-by-Step Incorporated, $25,505. Sunflower Kids, $19,150. The Nest Center for Women, Children, and Families, $71,500. United Way of the Bluegrass, $33,750. Volunteers of America of Kentucky, $39,404. And YMCA of Central Kentucky, $79,000 to provide services to the public at a cost not to exceed $3,029,075. Number 34. A resolution approving the granting of an inducement to SRC of Lexington, Incorporated pursuant to the Kentucky Business Investment Act, KRS Subchapter 154.32, whereby the Lexington Fayette Urban County Government agrees to forego the collection of 1% of the occupational license fee related to the project for a term of not longer than 10 years from the activation date subject to the limitations contained in the Act and any agreement SRC of Lexington Incorporated has with the Kentucky Economic Development Finance Authority or the Urban County Government related to the project and taking other related action. Number 35, a resolution approving the granting of an inducement to Harbor Steel and Supply Corporation pursuant to the Kentucky Business Investment Act, KRS, Subchapter 154.32, whereby the Lexington Fayette Urban County Government agrees to forego the collection of 1% of the occupational license fee related to the project for a term of not longer than 10 years from the activation date subject to the limitations contained in the Act and any agreement Harbor Steel and Supply Corporation has with the Kentucky Economic Development Finance Authority or the Urban County Government related to the project and taking other related actions. Number 36, a resolution approving the granting of an inducement to Sumitomo Electric Wiring Systems Incorporated pursuant to the Kentucky Business Investment Act, KRS Subchapter 154.32, whereby the Lexington Fayette Urban County Government agrees to forego the collection of 1% of the occupational license fee related to the project for a term of not longer than 10 years from the activation date, subject to the limitations contained in the Act and any agreement Sumitomo Electric Wiring Systems Incorporated has with the Kentucky Economic Development Finance Authority or the Urban County Government related to the project and taking other related action. Number 37, a resolution approving the granting of an inducement to Butler Animal Health Supply, LLC, pursuant to the Kentucky Business Investment Act, KRS, Subtractor 154.32, whereby the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government agrees to forego the collection of 1% of the occupational license fee related to the project for a term of not longer than 10 years from the activation date, subject to the limitations contained in the Act and any agreement Butler Animal Health Supply, LLC, has with the Kentucky Development Finance Authority or the Urban County Government related to the project and taking other related action. Number 38, a resolution authorizing and granting consent for the creation and operation of a hypodermic needle and syringe exchange program by the Lexington Fayette County Health Department. Number 39, declaration of official intent with respect to reimbursement of temporary advances made for capital expenditures to be made from subsequent borrowings with respect to various capital improvement projects of the Lexington Fayette Urban County Government. Number 40, a declaration of official intent with respect to reimbursement of temporary advances made for capital expenditures to be made from subsequent borrowings with respect to the town branch waterway. And number 41, a declaration of official intent with respect to reimbursement of temporary advances made for capital expenditures to be made from subsequent borrowings with respect to the restoration and renovation of the historic Lexington Courthouse. All right. Thank you, Madam Clerk. Are there any motions for walk-ons? Council Member Henson. Thank you, Mayor. I move to place on the docket under first reading resolutions a resolution authorizing the Mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute an agreement with the Mary Todd Lincoln House in the amount of $1,350 for the Office of the Urban County Council at a cost not to exceed the sum stated. so moved motion by council member Henson second by vice mayor Kaye is there any discussion on the motion the second was by council member Lane all right is any discussion on the motion all right hearing none then we take a vote all in favor please say aye opposed no motion carries council member scutchfield thank you mayor i moved to place on the docket under first reading of resolutions a resolution authorizing the mayor on behalf of the urban county government to execute an agreement with edith j hayes middle school pta 450 for the office the urban county council at a cost not to exceed the sum stated so moved second motion by council member scutchfield second by council Councilmember Henson, 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. Councilmember James Brown. Thank you, Mayor. I move to place on the docket under first reading of resolutions, a resolution designating the speed limit on Short Street between Newtown Pike and Midland Avenue as 25 miles per hour. Motion by Council Member James Brown. Is there a second? Second. Second by Council Member Lamb. Is there any discussion on the motion? Council Member Farmer. Someone coughed when you said the speed limit. Did you say 25 miles per hour? Yes, sir. 25 miles an hour. What is it currently? I think it's currently 35. On Short Street, and this is where we're getting ready to do the new back-end parking scheme? Yes, sir. very good thank you sir thank you mayor all right is there any further discussion on the motion all right hearing none then we can vote all in favor please say aye aye opposed no motion carries council member maloney thank you i just have a question on number i'm 39 40 and 41. my question is and that and I've gone on record saying it. I do support 39 on what we need to do to go get some of these roads and capital projects moving. Now, 40 and 41, I want publicly and said that I want to wait until we get reports back on each one of these two. I just want to know what, by allowing these to go on this quick, why are we in a hurry to get 40 and 41 on? and we haven't had a report back on the, and I am, everybody knows who I am on the courthouse, and I do have questions about 40. Why are we doing this so quick and not having our study presented to us first before we put these two out there? I'm just curious why we have to do this now. All right, Mr. O'Mara. Thank you, sir. This is standard practice after the budget is made so that we do not have delays in processing the capital improvements. But at the request of counsel, we broke it up into three separate resolutions. Nothing can be spent out of any of the three reimbursement resolutions without authorization of counsel for the actual expenditure itself. And the question I have here is, I assume you can save a lot of money by doing all three of these. and that's what I assume you're trying to do. Are you at one time trying to go out and do it? No, sir, this isn't saying that. So 39, we can go on immediately and do a lot of that because there's a lot of cars and a lot of capital projects in there. But I just, I mean, what authority can they start spending? Can you all start spending money without this council? Have not seen the reason. Right now we're proving you ought to have money on these two projects. It's the way I read this. that if we go on and do the bonds, give you authority to do the bonds, and we have not got the report back. And I'm not saying you will do it. I'm not saying you won't do it. But I just want to know, because I have a lot of questions to ask on a couple of those, and I think my colleagues here have questions on a couple of these too. But I just don't understand why we can't wait until after the studies are done before we bring these two out. Let me explain what the reimbursement resolution does and doesn't do. This is not approval to issue bonds. That will come before this council as a separate action. Ordinances will have to be approved. We're not intending to issue one total bond of $57 million. We're talking about issuing, we are planning on issuing the bond for the $27 million of capital improvements so that we can go to market as fast as possible. We have a separate resolution, though, that would say that if we were to need to spend any money authorized by counsel, this says that we can be paid back by bond proceeds when we issue the bond. That's what this enables us to be reimbursed after the bonds are issued at a later date. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Romero. All right, looks like that's all the walk-ons, motions. Madam Clerk, you ready to give us a reading? Yes, sir. All right, thank you. Number 42, a resolution authorizing the mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute an agreement with the Mary Todd Lincoln House, $1,350 for the office of the Urban County Council at a cost not to exceed the sum stated. Number 43, a resolution authorizing the mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute an agreement with Edith J. Hayes Middle School PTA, $450 for the office of the Urban County Council at a cost not to exceed the sum stated. And number 44, a resolution designating the speed limit on Short Street between Newtown Pike and Midland Avenue as 25 miles per hour, and authorizing and directing the Division of Traffic Engineering to install proper and appropriate signs in accordance with the designation. All right. Thank you, Madam Clerk. Are there any motions to suspend the rules for a second reading? Council Member Henson. Thank you, Mayor. I move to suspend the rules and give second reading to number 19. All right. Is there a motion by Council Member Henson on 19, second by Vice Mayor Kay? Let me just go ahead and get that vote on that. Is there any discussion? All right. All in favor, please say aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Council Member Henson. I also move to suspend the rules and give second reading on number 38, giving the health department the okay to move ahead. Second. All right. Motion by Council Member Henson, second by Vice Mayor Kaye. Is there any discussion on number 38? All right. If not, we can vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you. Council Member Lamb. Thank you, Mayor. I'd like to, on behalf of the administration, request that Resolution No. 13, 14, and 15, I know you like to single them out, but I always... All right. Number 13, these are going to allow fleet services to move forward with their parts that they need for the equipment. All right. I still move. Second. Motion on No. 13, second motion by Council Member Lamb, second by Council Member Farmer. Is there any discussion? if not we can vote all in favor please say aye aye oppose no motion carries i make a motion for number 14 second motion by council member lamb number 14 second by council member farmer is there any discussion if not we can vote all in favor please say aye aye oppose no motion carries and i'll make a motion to suspend number 15 thank you very much second motion by on number 15 Seconded by Councilmember Farmer. Is there any discussion? If not, we can vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Thank you, Councilmember Lamb. Councilmember Scushfield. Thank you, Mayor. I make a motion to suspend the rules and give a second reading to number 43. Motion on number 43 is a second motion by Councilmember Scushfield, second by Councilmember Stennett. Is there any discussion on the motion? If not, we can vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. No. Motion carries. Consistent. All right. It looks like that's all the motions to suspend that we have. So, Madam Clerk, when you're ready, please give us a second reading on 13, 14, 15, 19, 38, and 43. Thank you. Number 14, a resolution accepting the bids of Lexington Auto Spring Company, Quantrell Cadillac Incorporated, Alton Blakely, Ford Lincoln, Mazda, O'Reilly Automotive Stores Incorporated, doing business as O'Reilly Auto Parts, Shelby County Automotive Group, doing business as Napa Auto Parts, Gilly Hyde, Ford Lincoln Incorporated, Diesel Injection Service Company Incorporated, Powertrain of Kentucky, Midwest Parts Incorporated, doing business as Napa Auto Parts, Fleet Pride Incorporated, KOI Auto Parts, and Advanced Stores Company Incorporated, doing business as CarQuest Auto Parts, establishing price contracts for Automotive Truck Parts Light Duty for the Division of Facilities and Fleet Management. Number 15. A resolution accepting the bids of Lexington Auto Spring Company, Peter Bilt of Louisville, Inc., O'Reilly Automotive Stores, Inc., doing business as O'Reilly Auto Parts, Bluegrass International, Shelby County Automotive Group, doing business as Napa Auto Parts, Gilly Hyde Ford Lincoln, Inc., Clark Power Services, Inc., Martins Peter Bilt of East Kentucky, LLC, Diesel Injection Service Company, Inc., Powertrain of Kentucky, Fleet Pride Incorporated, Worldwide Equipment Incorporated, and Advanced Stores Company Incorporated, doing business with CarQuest Auto Parts, establishing price contracts for automotive truck parts to heavy duty for the Division of Facilities and Fleet Management. Number 19, a resolution authorizing the Division of Human Resources to make conditional offers to the following probationary classified civil service appointments. Marques Sturgis, Public Service Worker, Grade 507N, 12.658 hourly in the Division of Waste Management, effective upon passage of counsel. Kristen Jones, 19.011 hourly and Tracy Sorrell, 19.414 hourly, both Telecommunicator Senior, Grade 516N. In the Division of Emergency Management, 911, effective July 13, 2015. Jenny Packer, Administrative Specialist, Grade 513N, 18.299 hourly in the Division of Police, effective July 13, 2015. Dallas Montfort, Heavy Equipment Technician, Grade 5, 16 and 21.184 hourly in the Division of Facilities and Fleet Management, effective upon passage of council. Number 38. A resolution authorizing and granting consent for the creation and operation of a hypodermic needle and syringe exchange program by the Lexington-Fayette County Health Department. And number 43, a resolution authorizing the mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute an agreement with Edith J. Hayes, middle school PTA, $450 for the office of the Urban County Council at a cost not to exceed the sum stated. Thank you, Madam Clerk. Is there a motion to approve? Second. Motion by Council Member Lamb, second by Council Member Henson. Is there any discussion? All right. If not, Madam Clerk, whenever you're ready, please call the roll. Ms. Bledsoe? Yes. Mr. Fred Brown? Yes. Mr. James Brown? Yes. Ms. Evans? Yes. Mr. Farmer? Yes, ma'am. Mr. Gibbs? Yes. Ms. Henson? Yes on all, but I will recuse on number 14 and 15. We'll note that. Thank you. Mr. Kay? Yes. Ms. Lamb? Yes, ma'am. Mr. Lane? Yes. Mr. Maloney? Yes. Ms. Massadi? Yes. Ms. Scutchfield? Yes. Mr. Stennett? Yes, ma'am. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Clerk. The vote reflects passage of the motion. Allows us to move on to number eight, communications from the mayor. Is there a motion to approve? So moved. Second. Motion by Council Member Farmer, seconded by Vice Mayor Kay. 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 is announcements. The floor is open to Council Members for announcements. Any Council Members have announcements? All right. Council Member Maloney. I just want to thank, get ready for the 4th of July. I want everybody to wish a happy Fourth of July and a safe Fourth of July, and hopefully we'll have a dry Fourth of July. And I did hear some good news the other day that there was some entertainment going on down in this hole, that the crane did move, and it actually did help out a building across the street to put an air-conditioning unit on. So there is activity, so I want to know that I've been watching it, so I'm excited to hear that. So hopefully in another month we'll get some good news here. So I think August 2nd, the deadline. So hopefully, Mayor, we'll get some good news. And if we don't, I guess we'll have a backup plan. And before we go on break, you'll give us some idea of what we're going to have to go next. So I appreciate it. Okay. Council Member Bledsoe. Thank you, Mayor. Speaking of fireworks, I'm not sure if many of my colleagues are aware, but our current fire marshal and our risk management director had made a change in our policy this spring to move our insurance requirements for their vendors putting on fireworks from $1 million to $5 million. Clearly looking out for Lexington's best interest and for our own safety, great decision. They extended that policy to all of Fayette County, so a neighborhood group or a church group who maybe applies for a permit also had to carry a $5 million policy, which was a change for a lot of groups that were a little more expensive than maybe they were planning on doing. So I have full faith and utmost respect for our fire marshal and our risk management director and their intent. But I think it might be helpful for us to have this discussion on, is that the best policy for our neighborhoods or for the smaller groups to have the same liability? I mean, they pointed out to me earlier today that there was a group in West Virginia that did have a $4 million claim for a neighborhood. So I don't think it's out of realm to expect that. But I think it's important for us to have that discussion. so that we're all clear and so i'd like to make a motion to put into committee for the public safety committee just a discussion of our fireworks policy so we can have just a formal discussion about that thank you motion by councilmember bledsoe second by council member lamb you got the motion right marilyn all right thank you is there any discussion on the motion all right all in favor please say aye aye opposed no motion carries thank you so much happy fourth Thank you, Councilmember Bledsoe. Councilmember Farmer. Thank you, Mayor. I just wanted to bring to the council's attention that we should have a business item on Tuesday and a potential walk-on item that have to do with a bid opening on Monday that will be to do with plantings along the corridors for the Breeders' Cup. So hopefully it will all be in the packet. However, there is a bid opening, and we do want to be able, since we won't meet and corridors won't meet, we want to create the opportunity for them to move forward with getting these beds and these plantings ready for Breeders' Cup. I just wanted to give you a little bit of a heads-up on that. The 5th District Council Office has been very fortunate in sending out an e-newsletter every Friday during my tenure. And the last time we sent it out, it was to about 2,600 different people. However, something has happened to that list, and I don't know if we were hacked by the Koreans or the Chinese or whomever, but there are folks out there who are used to getting a newsletter and are not going to receive one because we currently don't have a book. We're starting over from scratch. So if you would like to receive the 5th District Council Office newsletter, please let me know. That's bfarmer at lexingtonky.gov. And our IT folks tried very hard to bring these lists back, but I don't know where they went, but they're not coming back. If you'd like the newsletter, please just go to the website or send an email. And then it's always a privilege to serve the city. However, one of the things that I do, besides being a council member, is to be one of the parade marshals for the parade for the 4th of July. And Lexington does many things great, but we do the 4th of July really, really well. And it may be wet, and I have done the parade in the driving rain. It changes your perspective on things, there's no doubt. But everybody should turn out and enjoy the event and enjoy the weekend. Thank you very much, Mayor. Thank you, Council Member Farmer. Council Member Massadi. Thank you, Mayor. And you're right, Councilmember Farmer. I think the 4th of July in Lexington is probably one of the best events that we have here in the city. And I would encourage everyone to participate. And on that same note, Stonewall has its annual neighborhood parade Saturday morning at 10 a.m. at Stonewall School. And they have a fire truck and police escort. Kids decorate their bikes, wagons, and sometimes they even bring their dogs. And it's a lot of fun. And even though it may be raining, we'll be out there having our little Stonewall parade. And if you can't make this event, as Bill said, there's a whole bunch of great events this weekend downtown. And even if you get a little bit wet, it's a lot of fun to participate. I've ran that race with wet sneakers many times. So just come out and enjoy. And thank you to those workers, public safety and city workers who are working Saturday to make this event so special for us and let us enjoy the holiday weekend. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Council Member Soddy. Next on our agenda is public comments, and the floor is available for those who signed up for public comment. And Ms. Williams, this is where you all signed up. Sarah Williams, Gray Dunn, and April Taylor, and Bernard McCarthy. So I would like to start off by saying, obviously the body cam funding is expected to go through, and I would like to thank Council Member Lamb for making that motion to place that on the agenda in the work session. But I do feel, even illustrated in how this meeting has gone about, that politics are kind of played to the fullest to some extent. We were told that we would possibly be able to comment earlier, and that would be at the mayor's discretion. Now we're told having to comment at the end that it would have taken a motion. This is similar to some of the answers that I've continued to receive in attempting to hold the police department accountable and the council accountable, specifically the Lexington Police Department. One of the main reasons why we need body cameras is so that the Lexington Police Department can be held accountable. Just on a personal note, I had an officer in uniform in his patrol car pull up outside my apartment and video me for every bit of five minutes. This is on video. It's now YouTube video, and he had no justified reason to do so. With body cams, you won't have to pull up in front of my apartment and video me with your cell phone. We can have those body cams, and we'll be able to identify who you were based on that body cam footage that you have on. Also, too, in the process of the people speaking up over the past almost three weeks at this point, but definitely two weeks before this 180 was done by the police department and saying whether or not they were able and ready to do the body cams to, oh, we're going to do a 180 to, you know, there being some accountability from the people and their voices being heard to, oh, we're totally ready. one of the issues I have is when it went to an open records request to obtain information about Justin Burnett, which is who ran over the suspect that was being arrested here in the past month, I was told three different things in obtaining that open records request. So I think that, oh yeah, three different things. And I said there needed to be a staff meeting among the people who work the front desk because they weren't giving appropriate information to the public to things that should be available to the public without there being some altered kind of answer to deter people from obtaining that information. So I just want to make a statement to the council and to the mayor as well because there were press conferences changed that were published in the Herald-Leaders to the times, dates, and locations in avoiding hearing certain voices of the cries of the people when it comes to LPD accountability and LPD body cams. We want you to know that we do have our eyes on you. We are watching you. We will hold you accountable because you do work for the people. And transformative change is coming to Lexington, Kentucky. And one of the initial steps is with these LPD body cams because we will have accountability. Thank you, Ms. Williams. Is Mr. Dunn? Mr. Dunn, he's not here. All right. How about April Taylor? Ms. Taylor, if you would, your name and just address. That's part of the protocol. That's part of the way that the council proceeds. Okay. My name is April Taylor. I live on West 6th Street. I do want to thank you for putting that motion forward. I do want to echo that there is some frustration with transparency and how things work. This is supposed to be a democratic process. Our government is supposed to be a democracy, which means that people who want to access, whether it's city, state, federal government, of course here we're talking about the city government. When we come forward and we ask questions and we try to engage, we should not meet with people trying to put us off, to give us answers that cause us to be put in circles or to waste more time than we have to give. Luckily, we're in positions where we can devote more time than a lot of people could to pursuing these answers. And so for a matter of transparency, it really would be served well to make, whether it's meetings, whether it's a council meeting, like the press conference that got changed, that was not the first time that we had said, hey, we're going to show up here and have our voices be heard and the meeting be changed. That was actually the second time. The first time it happened was a council meeting that was set to take place directly after the first time. I believe it was the first time the minimum wage ordinance had been heard. It was a working session where several people had showed up, and the comment section was cut short. And so there were several people who had devoted hours of their day to show up to give comments on that minimum wage ordinance. And so, of course, people were frustrated. People were already downtown, had already given up hours out of their day, and decided, hey, we're going to show up at this council meeting because it's not fair that now we can't comment on this until June, which was months down the road at that point. And so without any announcement to the public, the date of that meeting got changed, or the time of that meeting got changed. Rather than having the meeting that evening, you all went ahead and changed the time and rolled it into that afternoon session. And so I ask that as we move forward, that not happen because it turns it into an adversarial relationship, and it doesn't have to be that way. We want to work with you to make Lexington an even better city than what it already is. And so we ask that instead of treating us as adversaries, treat us as people who deserve the same respect you expect to get and allow us to sit at the table and work with you, and then it doesn't have to be an adversarial kind of thing. So thank you for getting the funding put back in. We now have some catching up to do with Louisville when it comes to the minimum wage. It got upheld in court, so we are now officially behind Louisville. let the competition for that begin thank you all all right thank you miss taylor mr mccarthy your honor and members of the council i see four different resolutions on the docket offering tax breaks or tax rebates to businesses to come here i think in general such things are They're bad policy, and the docket doesn't give any details of where you're snatching these businesses away from, whether it's from a place that's crowded and prosperous or from a place that actually desperately needs to keep those businesses way worse than we need to gain them. So in other words, I think some of these incentives are bad policy on general principles, but depending on where you're inducing businesses to move from, it could be inflicting a real disaster on some other community. In other words, I don't mind if you snatch a business away from New York or Washington or Boston, But I sure would hate to have Lexington snatch a business away from Pikeville or Prestonsburg or Paintsville or Hazard. Thank you, Mr. McCarthy. That's all who have signed up for public comment. unless there's any further unless there's further business would come before the council there's one other all right mr. Laurenville was supposed to talk but he had to step out so I'm doing it on his behalf my name is a pledge Lucian Cavanaugh and I'm talking about the same subject they were talking about it's funny because we didn't coordinate it or anything but we're basically all echoing the same sentiment and I typically don't like to even explain my perspective on this because I don't think anybody listens but that seems to be typical too so I'll do it just right now I have an extensive extensive all y'all put together don't have half the experience with the Lexington Police Department that I do and not from the good side not from the you know hey Bob how you doing I'm talking about real serious experiences with the police department and from my own personal understanding there are many things that need to be done in order to make the Lexington Police Department a police force that certain members of the population could deem respectable there are also very vehement efforts on the part of administrators of the system to prevent that from becoming public knowledge. It's criminal in a word. And if it's a fundamental question of ideology, I think. If you all as the administrators actually care about how the society functions and how distinct members of the population feel as they're walking along, which I think you should because it has a direct effect on how the thing functions. This is an issue that you cannot overlook. You can't swipe it aside because it maybe doesn't apply to you directly or because it's not convenient or because it makes us all uncomfortable to talk about. You really have to look at it. You know, it's like a disease. If you deny it, it just grows. Well, I think some of us, and maybe more than just a few of us, are under the impression that we are having to force people to acknowledge the facts of the matter. And that's very frustrating because I don't think we should have to force you to look at the truth. I, for example, in my own personal experience, and that's all I can go on, I have had to dig deep and go through quite a bit of trouble. I've got scars all over my body inflicted upon me by state-sanctioned authorities. I've had to go through a lot of trouble to uncover evidence of the criminality. And I've got it. I've got it stashed all over Lexington in case something happens to me. Now, that's how serious it is. I've got it stashed all over Lexington in case something happens to me. The city has spent $200,000 and counting defending themselves against me when all I'm trying to do is get the information to be public. And their defense is so serious, it's so resolute that I'm not even allowed to present it. I've been court ordered not to give the information to the public. So I can't even tell you what I know. Mr. Kavanaugh. Yes, sir. We just got a rule. I'm going to ask for a motion to give you some more time. There's a rule that's for three minutes, and we're going to ask for a motion to give some more time. Sure, I'll be quick. I'm sorry. It's all right. Council Member. So move, three minutes. All right. Vice Mayor, we got a second. There's no objection. Three minutes. Please go ahead. Yes, sir. Sorry. So I'm not allowed to tell you what it is. Somebody made a comment about democracy. That's not a democracy. If I can't tell you about crimes that are committed by members of the state, then that's not a democracy. if I can't tell you what cops are doing that is illegal that's not transparency and if nobody cares about that then everybody up here is lying and what are we supposed to do with that at a certain point we are going to have to ask ourselves the question I've had to ask myself the question a long time whether or not this process has any credibility whatsoever. I've been informed just today that they've had to go through quite a bit of trouble just to get $600,000 to give cameras so that you can monitor what the police are doing, and there was resistance to that. $600,000 is a drop in the bucket in comparison to what's going to be necessary in order to bring this thing up to par so that you can actually, any one of you as authority figures, can look at what's going on and determine whether it's legitimate or not. That's all anybody's asking. Nobody's saying take my word for it. You don't have to do that. Just to be able to access the information. If we have to try this hard to get something as fundamental as that, transparency in a democratic society, then we have a very, very serious problem. And I'm done. Thank you. Thank you all for joining us tonight. Thanks for being here. Is there a motion to adjourn? Motion to adjourn. Is there a second? Got a second. Unless there's objection, we are adjourned. Thank you.