# Council Work Session - March 8, 2016 > Auto-transcribed civic record · March 8, 2016 - **Permalink**: https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/meeting/3894 - **Source video**: https://lfucg.granicus.com/player/clip/3894?view_id=14&redirect=true - **Date**: 2016-03-08 - **Last revised**: March 8, 2016 - **Length**: 10,666 words > ⚠️ **Auto-generated content.** Audio from the official Granicus video was auto-transcribed with OpenAI's open-source Whisper large-v3-turbo model, run locally by The Lexington Times. Structured facts were extracted with GPT-4o; the narrative summary was written by Anthropic Claude. Verbatim wording may contain errors. See [methodology](https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/about/methodology) or [report a correction](mailto:editor@lexingtonky.news). --- ## Meeting Overview The Lexington-Fayette Urban County Council convened on March 8, 2016, at 3:00 PM in the Council Chamber at 200 E. Main St, Lexington, KY 40507, with Mayor Jim Gray presiding. The meeting addressed four agenda items, including public comment on agenda issues, approval of meeting summaries, new business items, and an informational report on the Affordable Housing Fund. Council members conducted four votes during the session, approving both the meeting summary and new business items while receiving informational presentations. One member of the public provided comments on agenda-related matters during the designated public comment period. ## Attendance **Present:** Stinnett, Moloney, J. Brown, Gibbs, Lamb, Farmer, Evans, Scutchfield, F. Brown, Mossotti, Bledsoe, Hensley **Absent:** Kay, Akers, Henson **Late:** None Twelve members were present for the March 8, 2016 meeting, with three members absent and no late arrivals recorded. ## Votes and Decisions The council conducted four votes during the March 8, 2016 meeting, with all motions either passing unanimously or being tabled for future consideration. **March 3, 2016 Council Meeting Docket Approval** [timestamp: 00:30] Councilmember Farmer motioned to approve the March 3, 2016 Council Meeting docket, with a second from Councilmember Scutchfield. The motion passed unanimously by voice vote. **New Business Approval** [timestamp: 01:00] Councilmember Farmer made a motion to approve new business items, seconded by Councilmember Hensley. This motion also passed unanimously by voice vote. **Gribbin Drive Item Tabled** [timestamp: 02:00] A motion was made by Councilmember Farmer, seconded by Councilmember Mossotti, to table item D regarding Gribbin Drive until the next meeting. The motion to table was approved by voice vote. **Neighborhood Development Funds Approval** [timestamp: 03:00] Councilmember Scutchfield motioned to approve Neighborhood Development Funds, with Councilmember Henson providing the second. The motion passed unanimously by voice vote. All votes were conducted by voice vote rather than formal roll call, with no recorded individual vote tallies. The council demonstrated consensus on the procedural matters and funding approvals, with only the Gribbin Drive item requiring postponement for further consideration at a future meeting. ## Budget and Financial Actions The meeting addressed several significant financial items totaling over $1.2 million in contracts, grants, and amendments. **Contract Amendments and Corrections** • Resolution 119-16 amended Resolution 10-2016 to correct the contract price with Alpha Mechanical Services, Inc. to $79,267 • Resolution 206-16 changed position titles in the Division of Enterprise Solutions with no associated cost • Resolution 212-16 approved an amendment agreement with Accela Inc. for On-Line Business Tax Portal Transactional Fees **Major Engineering and Infrastructure Contracts** • Resolution 180-16 authorized change order #3 to Bell Engineers for Blue Sky Pump Station and Force Main engineering services contract in the amount of $223,626.79 • Resolution 187-16 approved the transfer of unused right-of-way for Gribbin Dr. to an adjacent property owner at 2875 Gribbin Drive • Resolution 193-16 established an agreement with The Schneider Corporation for Integrated Damage Assessment Model Development for $3,000 **Grant Awards** • Resolution 176-16 accepted a $2,500 FY16 Class B Stormwater Quality Projects Incentive Grant for The Board of Education of Fayette County, Kentucky • Resolution 204-16 approved $880,500 for FY 2017 Transportation Planning Activities **Environmental Services** • Resolution 248-16 authorized an agreement with Environmental Enterprises, Inc. for a Household Hazardous Waste collection event totaling $104,585 The largest single expenditure was the $880,500 transportation planning grant, followed by the $223,626.79 engineering services change order for the Blue Sky Pump Station project. These actions demonstrate the government's continued investment in infrastructure, environmental services, and technology improvements. ## Public Comment During the public comment period, one speaker addressed the council regarding ongoing infrastructure projects in the area. **Council Member Farmer** spoke about coordination concerns between two major road projects [timestamp: 01:30]. Farmer expressed concerns about properly coordinating the Gribbin Drive project with the upcoming Mt. Tabor Road widening project. The speaker emphasized the importance of ensuring that all parties involved would be well served through proper coordination of these infrastructure improvements. The comment focused specifically on the timing and coordination aspects of these two road projects, highlighting the need for strategic planning to maximize benefits for all stakeholders involved in both the Gribbin Drive work and the planned Mt. Tabor Road widening initiative. ## Contested Items The meeting featured one contested item involving infrastructure project coordination. **Gribbin Drive and Mt. Tabor Road Projects** Council Member Farmer raised a procedural dispute regarding the timing of the Gribbin Drive project approval. Farmer requested to table the Gribbin Drive project to ensure proper coordination with the related Mt. Tabor Road project. This request sparked discussion among council members about whether the delay was necessary. The disagreement centered on procedural concerns about project sequencing and coordination rather than opposition to the projects themselves. Farmer's motion to table appeared to be motivated by ensuring that both infrastructure projects would be properly aligned in their planning and execution phases. The discussion focused on the practical implications of moving forward with one project while the other remained in planning stages, and whether delaying the Gribbin Drive project would create better outcomes for both initiatives. The outcome of this contested item was not specified in the available meeting data, though the procedural nature of the dispute suggests it was resolved through standard council voting procedures on the tabling motion. ## Public Comment - Issues on Agenda [timestamp: 00:10] The meeting opened a public comment period for issues listed on the agenda. Council Member Farmer facilitated this portion of the meeting, inviting members of the public to address the council regarding any items scheduled for discussion. This agenda item served as an opportunity for community members to provide input, raise concerns, or offer perspectives on matters that would be considered during the meeting. The public comment period is a standard procedural element that allows for citizen participation in the governmental process before formal deliberations begin on specific agenda items. No additional details about specific comments made by members of the public or the duration of the comment period were provided in the available meeting materials. The item was informational in nature, serving as a forum for public input rather than requiring any formal action or decision by the council. ## Approval of Summary [timestamp: 00:20] The board considered approval of the summary from the previous work session. Farmer served as the key speaker for this agenda item. The summary of the previous work session was presented for board approval. No significant discussion or debate was recorded regarding the content of the summary, and no concerns were raised by board members during consideration of this item. The summary was approved by the board. ## New Business [timestamp: 01:00] The council addressed several new business items during this portion of the meeting. Key speakers included Farmer and Mossotti, who led discussions on various matters requiring council consideration. The new business segment covered financial amendments and project approvals that had come before the council. While specific details of the individual items were not provided in the available materials, the discussions involved matters that required formal council action. Both Farmer and Mossotti participated actively in presenting and debating the new business items. The discussions appeared to focus on administrative and procedural matters that needed council approval to move forward. Following deliberation on the new business items, the council voted to approve the matters under consideration. The approval indicates that the council found the presented items to be appropriate and ready for implementation. The new business portion of the meeting concluded with the successful passage of the discussed items, allowing the relevant departments or parties to proceed with their proposed actions. ## Affordable Housing Fund Report Rick presented an informational report on the activities and impact of the Affordable Housing Fund during the meeting [timestamp: 05:00]. The presentation focused on highlighting how the fund has contributed to affordable housing initiatives within the community. The report was delivered as a presentation to inform attendees about the fund's current status and achievements. Rick served as the primary speaker for this agenda item, providing details about the fund's operations and its role in addressing local affordable housing needs. This was an informational presentation with no formal action required from the meeting participants. The report served to update attendees on the fund's activities and demonstrate its impact on the community's affordable housing landscape. --- ## Decisions - **Motion** — passed (0-0): approve the March 1, 2016 work session summary - **Motion** — passed (0-0): approve new business without item D - **Motion** — passed (0-0): table item D until the Tuesday, March 15, 2016 work session - **Motion** — passed (0-0): approve neighborhood development funds - **Motion** — passed (0-0): approve an ordinance amending chapter 10 of the Code of Ordinances to add a section regarding gardens - **Motion** — passed (0-0): extend the presentation time by 5 minutes - **Motion** — passed (0-0): refer an update on the Domestic Violence Prevention Program to the General Government & Social Services Committee - **Motion** — passed (0-0): refer an update on the SAVI program to General Government & Social Services Committee - **Motion** — passed (0-0): refer a revision and review of the procurement regulations to the General Government & Social Services Committee - **Motion** — passed (0-0): refer an examination of the permanent closure of Rose Street into the Planning & Public Safety Committee - **Motion** — passed (0-0): refer a discussion of a program for property tax abatement based on longevity of ownership in areas of extensive redevelopment to mitigate the negative impact of rising property values on long term residents to the Planning & Public Safety Committee - **Motion** — passed (0-0): refer a review of the nuisance ordinance, specifically section 12 of the code of ordinances, regarding properties that are a burden or locations for criminal activities into the Planning & Public Safety Committee, to allow our police to better enforce and prohibit such activities - **Motion** — passed (0-0): adjourn at 4:06pm --- ## Full transcript I heard you laughing, I thought that I heard you sing I think I thought I saw you try That was just a dream That was just a dream That's me in the corner That's me in the spot Life, illusion, my religion Trying to keep up with you And I don't know if I can do it I'm now sad too much I haven't said enough I thought that I heard you laughing I thought that I heard you sing I think I thought I saw you try But that was just a dream Try, cry, fly, try That was just a dream, just a dream, just a dream, dream The ¶¶ Yes, sir. Hello, everybody. Greetings. I'll call the meeting to order. Call the work session meeting to order. Perhaps. Thank you very much. Thank you, Lord Palmer. First on our agenda today is public comment for issues on the agenda. Mr. Mundy, no one signed on? All right. That allows us to go on to the docket approval. There's no council meeting, so no docket approval required this week. That allows us to move on to approving the summary. Is there a motion to approve the summary? Motion by Council Member Farmer, second by Vice Mayor Kaye. 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. No budget amendments this week. Allows us to move to new business. Please sign on. Well, first I'll take a motion. Second. Motion by Vice Mayor Kaye to approve. Second by Council Member Farmer. Is there any discussion? Council Member Farmer. Thank you, Mayor. Mine is about new business item D that has to do with changing part of Gribbon Drive, which is in the 5th District. And I think we need to look at it at the same time we look at an email that we all received yesterday from Mark. That's Mark's last name, Mayor. Frebus? Frabus. Frabus? F-E-I-B-U-S. Anyway, it's an email from him about Mount Tabor notice to neighbors of upcoming project. And this has to do with old Mount Tabor Road, which is what Gribbon runs into. And I'm afraid if you took both of these items without coordinating them, someone would come out on the short end of the stick here. And I just, before we would docket this or take issue or motions on item D, I would like to make sure that all parties are well served by not only the focus of item D, but also the upcoming project, the Mount Tabor Road widening project. So I would just ask that we maybe hold this one, or I guess what would I ask for? A motion to, well, I guess table it until we have a conversation at least. How about if we just table it until the next meeting? That's all right. So moved. Which one? Item D. So it's a motion to table item D until the next meeting? Next Tuesday, yes, sir. Until next Tuesday. Motion by Council Member Farmer. Is there a second? Second. Second by Council Member Massadi. Is there any discussion on the motion? Vice Mayor Kaye. Before we table it, could we just, I see we have a counselor at the podium, and I don't know if people in the administration want to speak to this. I just want to make sure we're not holding it up without a good reason. So if it's appropriate, I don't know to hear first from the administration about the intersection of these two items, and then Mr. Murphy, if you would like to speak. I might just state I'm representing the private property owner who wishes to acquire that. It's part of a closing where the thoroughbred Chevrolet property was being closed. My client's one of the previous owners, and as a result of that closing, the duty was put on him to close this old right-of-way. We are a good distance away from Old Mount Tabor Road. I don't think there's any correlation between the two projects at all, but we don't have a problem with putting it off a week so we can assure you of that because I'm confident there is no connection, but we want to get some information to you to assure you of that. I think there's a property owner that adjoins both pieces that could be egregiously hurt by both of these things taking place at once, period. And I'm glad to talk with you about it. Okay. Thank you. Vice Mayor Kaye. So I think if the Council has no objection, I just want to make sure that it was not impeding something that might need to go forward quickly. But if there's more information to be had before we make a decision on that, that's fine with me. Excuse me. But the only thing I can offer is that this particular proposal for right-of-way closure follows along the line the similar procedure that we normally have for right-of-way closures in that several different internal city departments has reviewed the proposal and had no objections in addition to local utilities. So that being said, if the Council wants to postpone, that's fine. However, just understand that this is an item, like all others, has been reviewed internally. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Chester. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Mayor. Council Member Lamb. I just wanted to add two cents worth. Whether it's walked on or whether it's dealt with today or whether it's dealt with next Tuesday, it would still end up on the same council meeting docket. So relatively, in my opinion, there's no harm whether it's today or next week as far as it's moving forward. All right. Thank you, Council Member Lamb. All right. Council Member Fred Brown. No, no. That's right. Motion to table. We were in discussion. Forgive me. Is there any further discussion on the motion to table? All right. Hearing none, then we can vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Thank you. Thank you. All right, sir. Council Member Fred Brown. Thank you, Mayor. Item F, just a little clarification there. I see where the detail is on page 16 of the packet, which has several areas. I guess that's all grant money. My question is, is there's an additional $25,500 in match provided by a third-party in-kind contribution. Where's that coming from? We're allowed to count the value of the public service announcements as match for that one program. So the public service announcements, would that come through the media, TV, radio? They are all radio ads. This is for the mobility office. we pay a contractor to create the ads but they go out and they get radio stations to run them as public service announcements and the value of those public service announcements we treat as in-kind match. So you have documentation of that attached to the grant application? Yes, we have to have documentation. Thank you. Thank you, Irene. Thank you, Council Member Brown. Council Member Massadi. Thank you, Mayor. I have a question on number E, page 14, and I believe that's any misguding or commissioner. I guess that maybe you can answer it. Okay. So I understand this correctly. We will pay $3,000 a year for basically just having an agreement, but then if we want to utilize it, we're going to have to spend another $4,000. I'm not sure. I'll have to look at the memo on that. I thought $3,000 was the agreement to be able to use it. I just don't understand. I'm not sure Irene's coming. Irene may be able to help you. We'll have the software, and we do pay $3,000 a year for the software When there is a disaster declaration, we activate the software and we have to. We do have to pay that additional fee. Now, that additional fee, we could get reimbursement from FEMA for it. I guess I don't understand why we would pay an annual fee of $3,000 a year. Then when we actually need it, we have to spend an additional $4,000. And I probably can't answer that. It's the way it is. It's not available to us. Unless we have it, it's not available to us in case of a disaster. Well, it's software. I guess whoever set this up made a pretty good deal on this. But I mean, I understand you have to have it, but I don't understand the rationale. And I can't explain the rationale. I'm sorry. We could try to get an answer. I don't think we'll get a good one, but we'll try. All right. I appreciate it. Thank you. It's pretty interesting software, though. It ties into databases and pulls all sorts of values in within a projected area of damage. So it's state-of-the-art in terms of projected amounts. I'm sure it's good, but the marketing is even better. Thank you. All right. Thank you, Council Member Scutchfield. Council Member Scutchfield. Thank you, Mayor. I just had a question on letter A. This is a pretty big number to, I guess, have written down. How did we catch this, and how do we come up with $800,000 difference? All I can tell you on that is lawyer preparing resolution messed it up. Okay, and that's fine. I just want to make sure. It's our mistake, and we caught it. I think the same guy that caught it, you know, that messed it up. So we're sorry. No, no, that's okay. I just want to make sure we, you know, working with numbers, I'm sure looking over them, having an extra eye is always good. Yeah. All right, thank you. Thank you, Council Member Scotchfield. Council Member Akers. Thank you, Mayor. I had a quick question, follow-up on item F for Irene. You mentioned that there's a contractor that, I guess, writes and records the radio ads. Who is that? Right now it is C.J. Miller. Oh, the company. Group C.J.? Group C.J., yes. And then will it be on a variety of radio stations, I assume? Honestly, I couldn't tell you which radio stations. It's not the one that I listen to, but it's... Right. Okay. That's all I wondered. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Akers. It looks like that's all we've signed up for new business. So unless there's any further discussion, we can vote. All in favor of the motion, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. No on E. No on E. No on number E. All right. Thank you. Yes, sir. All right. All right, next is continuing business and presentations. First is the NDFs. Is there a motion to approve the NDF? Motion by Council Member Scutchfield, seconded by Council Member Henson. Is there any discussion on the motion? If not, then we can vote. All in favor, please say aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Next, Council Member Massadi, and a committee summary on planning and public safety. Yes, thank you, Mayor. The Planning and Public Safety Committee met on Tuesday, February 9th. All committee members were in attendance. A motion was made by a farmer to approve the December 8, 2015 Planning and Public Works Committee, seconded by Henson. A motion passed without dissent. Vice Mayor Kay introduced the use of community gardens. A motion was made by LAM to amend subsection 13 of the draft ordinance to add any resident, owner, or organization shall also comply with the requirements of Chapter 4, animals and fowl related to the keeping of fowl, seconded by Henson. The motion passed without dissent. I'll go ahead and forward that motion, so moved. Motion by Council Member Siding, seconded by Council Member Henson. Is there any discussion on the motion? Vice Mayor Kay. Yes, procedurally, I think that's an amendment to the whole motion. and there's two amendments and then the whole motion is what needs to be before council, I believe. So would you like me to continue with the rest of the motions? Is that what you're saying instead of separately? And move the amended motion. Okay, we'll do then. The second motion that was made by Kay to amend the ordinance to delete number one under section D and remove all references to private gardens seconded by Acres. The motion passed by 7 to 2, therefore I'll forward that motion. Okay, so the motion that we originally had on the floor, help me with this, help me understand what's happening. I think what I was suggesting is that both of those motions to amend are included in the final vote on the amended motion, which is what needs to be moved onto the docket. So the deletion of number one under D is not separate then from the last motion? That's not separate? There are two separate amendments to this final motion, which is to move the amended motion to the full council. Okay, I was under the impression there were two separate motions that had to do with two separate pieces of the ordinance. Who else can check with our parliamentarian? To be correct about it, The motion, the first two of the three motions is strictly held to the committee, and the final motion is the one that you need to actually report out to the full council today at work session. Okay, then I'll go ahead and just remove that motion. Those motions are withdrawn? Withdrawn, I'm sorry. Okay, yes, ma'am. Thank you. And then we'll go ahead with a motion that was made by Kay to remove this item as amended and forward to the full council. Seconded by Gibbs. I so move. Motion by Council Member Soddy. Seconded by Council Member Akers. Is there any discussion on the motion? All right. If not, we can vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. The H1NCD notification process was also discussed in committee. The last item was code enforcement penalties and fines. Ken Armstrong, director of code enforcement, gave a presentation of the general operations of code enforcement. And Jonathan Hollinger gave a presentation about the code enforcement database and system information. Items referred to the committee were the issue of safety officers, and that was seconded by Bledsoe, and that motion passed without dissent. That's all, Mayor. I'm sorry, the motion to adjourn was made by Bledsoe and seconded by Scutchfield. That's all. Thank you. All right. Next on our agenda is a presentation regarding the Affordable Housing Fund, and that's going to be presented by Rick McQuady. Thank you, Mayor. Okay, a procedural question here. How do I change the PowerPoint? It's the first time I've ever done this before. Oh, he's got it. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks. I'll mess it up. I'm a rookie. Okay. As the mayor said, I'm here to provide a report on the activities of the Affordable Housing Fund, which was established by the council in September of 2014. Okay, where did I point to? What did I point to? The purpose of the fund is to leverage public and private investment to preserve and produce safe, quality, affordable housing for Fayette County residents whose incomes are at or below 80 percent of every median income. And housing is considered affordable when housing costs are no more than 30 percent of the gross household income. I want to talk just a minute about preservation because I'm pretty sure that when the Council adopted the resolution and created the Affordable Housing Fund, they were thinking we're just going to create more units of affordable housing. And that is part of it. Absolutely. That's important. But also preservation is just as important because we need to maintain what we have. We need to ensure that those units remain of top quality, that they're energy efficient, and that they still remain marketable. Because if we lose those units that are already in service, we will never catch up and we will never be able to address the need for affordable housing in this community. And so when we talk about the incomes that we serve and housing affordability, I have a little bit more information here on what the area median income is in Fayette County, Kentucky. As you can see, per the ordinance, our fund is to provide housing opportunities for those households that are below 80% of AMI. And really, housing is measured kind of at 80%, 60%, 50%, and 30%. And the ordinance also states that the Affordable Housing Fund board and staff, in their funding, are to reflect the awareness of the need of those at 50% and at 30% of area median income. And I'll show you what we've done in that area a little bit later in the presentation. And then if you just – oh, I just turned it off, didn't I? Okay. There we go. I'll get this down. That right there, the affordable housing cost per month, is what's affordable for households at this level of AMI based on household size. And that represents 30% of their adjusted gross household income. So a family at 80% of AMI would want to pay no more than $950 for rent and utilities. somebody at 30 percent of ami no more than 356 dollars for rent and utilities in order for the unit to be considered affordable and as you as i said you'll be able to see later what we've done especially in the 50 and 30 area one of the first things that i did was to establish a board a board of directors in accordance with the what the council directed through the ordinance and it was very important to me to ensure that we had a board of people who, first of all, were not going to apply for any funding. That obviously would create conflicts of interest, and that's something I did not want. So the second thing I wanted is I wanted people who have a financial background, and while I have a financial background myself, it's important to have people look over my shoulder because financial feasibility of these developments is very important. I don't want us to create housing in this community, and then two or three years later, the project is not successful because they don't have any money. And it's something we should have seen when we underwrote these developments. So that's very important to me, to have that group on the board, as well as people with housing experience and are representing various groups, such as realtors, home builders, things like that. So the board's role is to review policies and procedures, to review applications for funding, to review the financial reports, and maybe most importantly, to ensure that this program meets the goals as established by the council and the mayor, as well as meets the needs of the community. Now, I did not want to leave the people out who are out there doing the work, who are out there actually developing the affordable housing in this community. So it's important to me that we establish an advisory committee. And this listed here on the PowerPoint are the members or the organizations that are represented on the advisory committee. And these are organizations that have and have the ability to submit applications for funding. What they do is they help identify housing needs and solutions in Fayette County. They also provide advice and recommendations on how to meet those needs. They share ideas. You know, Community Action Council may be doing something. The AU Associates may be doing something. So they share ideas as to what's going on in their shops related to affordable housing, which really makes us all work as a team. And then I always report on the use of affordable housing dollars to them so that they will be aware of how these dollars are being used. But again, they don't have any, if you will, authority to make decisions on the projects that are funded. Only the board of directors has that authority. I'll just show you just for a minute the application process that we have. And really the main purpose that I want to show with this slide are numbers seven and eight. My role, the board's role, does not stop when the units are placed in service, when construction is complete and households move into these units. There's still compliance monitoring to ensure that these properties continue to lease to eligible families, to families at 80% and below a very median income, or whatever the requirement is, whatever they set forth in their application, we want to make sure they are still adhering to what they said they would do in their application. And then also the servicing of loans that we have made and asset management to ensure the properties remain financially viable and financially able to meet the housing needs of the citizens. So it's important that these projects will be with us for 10, 15, whatever the compliance period is. They will be with us that long, and we will continue to have to do monitoring, asset management, and loan servicing. this is the evaluation criteria that the board has established on how we evaluate each of the projects that we receive each of the applications we receive and you know i think they all make pretty good sense except maybe design of the development what we're really looking for there is amenities do they have washer dryer hookups you know what are we providing in the units but not you know if it's for if it's for families is there a playground for the for the children and things like that. But we also look at outside amenities. Is it close to a bus station? Is it close to a bank, to a grocery store? And also the type of construction. Are they going to be energy-efficient construction? I think one of the biggest issues facing lower-income households now is going to be increasing costs related to utilities. So it's important that we build these things in an energy-efficient manner. So that's what I'm looking at when we look at, or what the board looks at, when we look at project design. And, of course, I've already mentioned financial feasibility. But the whole goal of this is to make sure that we just don't build the units and nobody comes to live there. We want to ensure that these units, these properties, these developments are going to be successful. The council, through the budget process, has allocated $3 million in fiscal year 2015, another $2 million in fiscal 2016, and obviously we're very hopeful, another $2 million in fiscal year 2017. So that's the $7 million then that the fund has been funded over the three-year period. So a little bit about the financial report and what we've done. And I want to say that these financial reports and projections are through June 30, 2017. When we get an application, my board asks me, okay, how much money do we have available to allocate? Well, this is how I track it, and I'm tracking it right now through June 30, 2017. We received $7 million from the council, and I realize I'm assuming an extra $2 million that hasn't been officially allocated yet. We've earned fee income of $23,930. I charge a 1% fee on loan transactions to try and cover some of our costs that are some of the administrative costs associated with these projects. And then we are anticipating loan receipts between now and June 30, 2017 of just over a million dollars. Some of those are one-time only loans, but when I was hired to do this, I did not want to just, if you will, give the money away. I wanted to manage this money in a way that we could build an asset this community would be proud of and could recycle these dollars. And it's not a reason to not fund any more money to the Affordable Housing Fund, but it shows that, hey, we can recycle these dollars and we can continue to do more for affordable housing in this community. And then these are the projected administrative expenses through June 30, 2017. And then to date, we have committed funds of just under $5.3 million. So as applications continue to come in, we had just about $2.4 million available to allocate at this time. So what have we done? As you saw on the last slide, we have allocated almost $5.3 million. $3.4 million, or just over 60 percent of that, has been allocated in the form of amortizing loans. The other is for forgivable loans and grants. Let me just tell you some of the theory on that is the forgivable loans and the grants primarily goes to those projects that are serving lower incomes. because the rents that they can afford, the rents that very low-income families can afford, is not enough to provide for the payment of debt service or the landlord, if you will, the owner of the property, to meet any debt service requirements. So in that case, we are more inclined to give a loan or a grant when you're serving lower incomes. When we serve between the 60 and 80, you can structure these transactions in the manner in which they can afford some sort of a loan. Right now, the majority of my loans are at 2%, a very affordable interest rate, because, again, one way to ensure units stay affordable is to reduce debt service. I mean, the only way you can do it is reduce expenses, which we try to do by ensuring these properties are constructed in an energy-efficient manner, and to reduce the amount of debt service. Therefore, if you want a 2% rate, then obviously we want to see lower rents for the families that we're trying to serve. we've also been able to add another 10 million dollars into these projects and leverage if you will additional dollars coming into these projects that's a little bit less than i anticipated in the beginning but we're doing a lot of rehabilitation projects as opposed to new construction it's just more difficult to get leverage dollars in rehab than it is new construction but that's one of my goals going forward is to increase that number right there and to decrease then accordingly the other number. Although $12,231 per unit, when I look at other community affordable housing trust funds and the amount per unit they're putting in, we in Lexington here are very reasonable. We are right in line with what other communities are doing. So really trying to make this money, if you will, gap financing, that last piece of financing these projects need in order to be successful. Right now in annual loan repayments, we're at $109,050. My initial goal with the annual loan repayments we are to receive is that we will be able to cover all of the operating expenses of the fund with loan repayments. So that every additional dollar that you as counsel allocate to the Affordable Housing Fund, we can put that directly into Affordable Housing. None of that will be used for admin. we'll have the repayments of the loans do that for us. And then we have three loans actually out there right now, three loans that we've committed to that will all involve lump sum loan repayments. So we'll be able to recycle those dollars very quickly. To date, we have funded 433 units, 269 units of preservation, if you will, that have been preserved, and 164 new affordable housing units. And then this is, you know, one of the things that I'm very happy about is that almost 30 percent of our units are available for special needs populations. 24 for survivors of domestic violence, 31 for homeless, mentally and physically disabled, 14, elderly and disabled, 59. So 128 units of the money that we've allocated has gone to special needs populations. and then just following up on that we look at area median incomes that you've served that we've been able to serve the vast majority are at or below 60 percent of ami but then you have some at 50 30 and the smallest category is actually the higher income at 80 percent of ami so so very uh very happy the way that we have been able to reach down and reach down and be able to serve lower income households here in Lexington with this money. Moving forward, there's still a lot to do, obviously. I have numerous developments in the pipeline that I'm working through and trying to get those to present to the board. I want to develop a developer training. There's a lot of new developers, people that I haven't worked with in the past that are interested in developing affordable housing. I think it would be good for us to hold a one-day training session on how to utilize the Affordable Housing Fund. Also, I have some agencies that actually want to sponsor this, so that would be great. But it's something that I want to make sure that they understand, if you will, what they're getting into as far as the program requirements, all of that related to the creation of affordable housing. Compliance policies and procedures, we need to adopt. Just a second. Fifteen minutes is up. Is there a motion to extend the time? So I move by five minutes. Okay. You've got a five-minute extension by Vice Mayor Kaye, seconded by Council Member Henson. All right. Unless there's objection, continue. Okay. And I'm almost – this is my last slide. But we want to update the compliance policies and procedures. We also need to create policies and procedures for asset management of these properties. And then, as I said earlier, I'd like to see an increase in the number of dollars we're able to leverage with these new developments. and with that I'll be glad to answer any questions alrighty so council members if you've got questions or comments please continue council member Maloney I've got a few questions and I have a comment Rick the question I have is not a tremendous job y'all are doing this is amazing I see the group out here that I've seen for years and years for affordable housing let's say for if we have a house up Ohio Street vacant. And we have a person that comes up that is low income that would love to have this house. And we go to the vacant lock property and it comes on that list and we buy it for a decent price. And we have CDBG money that has to be used only for a homeowner. Is there any way we can put that person in that house I mean, a very low interest rate, and then let the CDBG come in and finish it up and put it up to cold, the bathrooms, and everything like that. Have you all looked at anything like that? We haven't looked at that yet. And really, I primarily, instead of just dealing with, and I'm not sure, Richard, what you're talking about, but for sure, we don't deal with individual homebuyers. And I don't do, or we don't do individual mortgage loans for individual families. But certainly, something I'm working on right now is creating a referral service. I work in the same office with Charlie Lanter. And many of those individuals and many of the people in this audience today who work with families in need are looking for housing for them. And what I want to do is try and create a referral service that we know, hey, these units are available. These units were funded with affordable housing dollars. so they are available for lower-income families to either a purchase or lease. And I think that's very important to create that because if you talk to some of the providers out there, they are desperately looking for affordable housing for their clients. And that's one of the requirements that I'm working with on any developer that comes in and wants affordable housing dollars. And you don't want to get in the long process of the first mortgage and all that. Now, for instance, we have PG here at Urban League. You've got REACH, and you've got all those folks there. Hopefully, the way the economy is turning around. And if they run out of their down payment and closing for that, do we ever try to help them with that part for the down payment? It is a loan, I know, but Irene and them get money back for that, a very small interest rate. Do we ever look into that? That is an eligible use of the fund, but we have not looked into that yet. Right now, we're more in the development area. But that is something that obviously is an eligible use of the fund. And really, the council, I mean, I'm really appreciative of the fact that they have provided a significant amount of flexibility in how these dollars can be utilized, which allow us to meet the needs out there. And just as a comment, I just want to finalize what you've worked with the Hope Centers and the programs that you're going around with the veterans and all that, was one of my big platforms to run, and that we're trying to work with the relationship with the VA, with the property there that they have now, with Holly Weedeman on board. I think this is an exciting program for the veterans, especially in which I think if we can put permanent housing on that piece of property, we've been working and be that close to the BCT Community College. And I think this is a win-win for all of us, And I'm sorry we had to wait 20 years after we passed some other things, but finally we got this Affordable House Act done. And what you're doing is tremendous. And I assume Austin and all those guys will commend you too because they've got to be nice to you all if they want money. But all jokes aside, they do respect what you guys do, and I want to commend the hard work that you all have done. Thank you. Thank you. Council Member Bledsoe, and your chairman has arrived as well. Over here. There we go. Harry Richard. I saw the agenda. I didn't think we'd get on until 3.30 today, so I thought you'd not worry about it until 3.30. Thank you, Harry. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you for this presentation. I remember in budget links it was so interesting to see just in a short amount of time how much you've done and to see it now almost a year later. It's fantastic. So I just wanted to go back to page 39 in our packet, and I'm not sure which slide it is. One, fund activity. Based on my numbers, I got the same $12,230-ish per unit. Was that a target you were looking for? Is that better than you expected or lower? It's really a little bit higher than I expected. I was trying to get, my initial goal was to be under $10,000 a unit. But again, just because of some of the transactions we've entered into have been rehabilitation projects, and it's a little bit more difficult to find other resources for that, especially grant funds, which were needed in two of the developments. And so it's just very difficult to get that number down. But that's one of my goals, is to try to get to the point where we can be somewhere less under $10,000 per unit. Okay, good. That was kind of what I was guessing, so I'm glad to hear that's one of your goals. I have other questions, but I'll stop. Thank you. Councilmember Lamb. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you for this presentation. This has been very good. You know, oftentimes we'll implement new programs, and then we don't really hear updates on it, and I think it's very important to see, and it's very positive. The developer training that you're talking about, how do you intend on implementing that? One of the things, I've been approached by the Board of Realtors and also actually by a representative from the FDIC who's interested in doing this to assist. Their objective, obviously, is to help financial institutions earn CRA credits. So just look at how, you know, and then there's a lot of development going on in Lexington and a lot of, I've had a lot of individual smaller developers come talk to me about the program, how it works, and I just think getting everybody in the same room, talking about these issues, and trying to listen to them as well as to the issues that they're facing and doing what they're trying to do, but make sure they're aware that if you want the dollars from the Affordable Housing Fund, there are certain responsibilities that you have to meet as far as continuing to lease to households that are below 80% of area median income, and hey, we are going to be checking on that. We're going to be making sure. And those type of things just want to make sure that they're aware of everything they need to do. And, you know, I've had a lot of questions, and some things we will do, some things we won't do. It would just be great to get out it all in one form and invite developers as well as financial institutions. And also, from the financial institution's perspective, look at ways that they can partner with us. I mean, if a financial institution wants to loan their money at 5% or 6%, I loan my money at 2%, we still might be able to make a transaction work. And that, again, brings more leverage into the transaction. Great answer, and thank you so much. Thank you, Mayor. Council Member Sadi. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Rick, for the update. Can you give me an idea on numbers? What kind of demand do we have? I'll tell you what, I have not had a dull moment. There is a significant amount. I've probably got maybe 400 or 500 units that are being discussed with me in the pipeline. About 150 of those are rehabbed. About 350 of them are new construction. So the pipeline is very strong. It's just I'm trying to get them to the point where they're ready for me to present them to the board. And with that, what's your numbers like as far as those families wanting to get into those? There's a tremendous need. Every time, especially when I go to Charlie's board meetings, Charlie Lander's board meetings, everybody comes up and talks to me, hey, I've got these families that we really need. I've had a phone call from Janice James at the Hope Center just today telling me about the need for, and granted, which is a bad term, but people who complete their recovery at the Hope Center are constantly looking for affordable housing that they can move into. So there is still a tremendous need out there. I just wonder if you had any numbers. I don't have any numbers off the top of my head. I apologize. If you do, if you wouldn't mind sending them to me, I'd appreciate it. Sure, absolutely. Okay. Thank you very much. Thanks for your work. Thank you. Council Member Henson. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Rick, for the presentation. And I know that you pretty much hit the ground running when you started. And it may have said in your presentation, but I was just curious how you compare the rehab to new build. Is the cost per unit? It depends. And I can tell you that in my prior life, as well as this life, when anybody gets into rehabilitation, you think it's going to cost one thing, and then you tear down a wall, and it costs something else entirely. So I'm used to that. And one thing you want to look at is what's the most cost-effective measure doing it? Is it more cost-effective to tear down and rebuild, or is the outside structure good enough that you can go in there and rehab it? And I'll be honest with you, I am not the person to evaluate that. I'm an accountant. A hammer and a screwdriver make me confused. But it's still something that, you know, if I see that the cost per unit of rehab is absorbent, then I'm going to say, you know, this won't fly. We need to look at what would it cost you to do new construction. And so you really have to look at each project individually and determine, hey, what's the best deal for this building? Thank you. And I guess, you know, I look at a lot of properties that are neglected, and so I think I like the rehab part of it. And I was glad to see that a lot of this has gone to rehab. And I was just curious about the cost comparison. So thank you. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Council Member Henson. Council Member Akers. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you so much, Rick. This is excellent. I know that we were excited last year in budget lengths to meet you and to hear from you and your plans. And I agree with Council Member Henson. You have hit the ground sprinting, I believe. To see 433 units funded in the first year is pretty remarkable, especially 164 new. And then when you talk about your plans this year of nearly 400 or 350 of those new again, I think is great because that's what we know is that there was a large gap in available affordable housing units. And so preservation is great, too. I know that we have a lot of substandard housing. So both of them are important. I wondered if you wouldn't mind just for the public's sake to talk a little bit about what rehabilitation means. I think we all understand what new construction, you know, new units are. But what are some examples of things that you've done in different existing facilities as far as rehab? Sure. I'll give you two examples. One is St. James Place and the other is Ferrell Square Apartments. In both cases, those properties were 15 to 20 years old. The energy efficiency in those units was weak or was not effective at all. They were not energy efficient at all. Ferrell Square had those really loud HVAC systems in each individual apartment, which was not energy efficient in any way, shape, or form. They all were in need of sprucing up, if you will, for lack of a – that's not a really professional term, but I'll use it for this case. And there was some exterior work as well as interior work, but most of the work is needed on the interior. When you look at both properties, making sure you're caulking the windows, new appliances for the residences, and just, if you will, a fresh look to the whole facility to ensure that that stays marketable for 25 years, for at least 25 more years. And I'm saying that in reference to Farrell Square Apartments, which was created with a 40-year loan at my former place of employment. So I've told them that I've helped them save for another 25 years, but it's really true that in order to make multifamily affordable, you have to do longer-term loans. And to do that, you know that after 10 or 15 years, these projects are going to have issues, whether they be plumbing issues, maintenance issues, deferred maintenance, things like that. And even though some of these projects are required to have a reserve for replacement account for this, it's never enough money. And so just to, if you will, ensure these projects stay on the market for another reasonable amount of time, but also that they remain affordable and you improve the quality of the units that you're improving that unit where that individual or that family lives to make it if you will more livable and more today you may add some different amenities as well things like that i encourage you to look at um really just point one out st james place what they are doing to those their sros what they are doing to those units is just amazing uh with the money we've been able to provide them and the Same thing, and at Farrell Square, they needed a new roof. Their roof was leaking. That's the old Douglas Elementary School. That property's been in this city for years. And they had to put on, you know, the first thing they had to do was put on a new roof. And also, you know, there are other things like those windows. It's an old school. Those windows are not energy efficient at all. So you have to work on those as well. That's great. I think that's great examples. And you reminded me when you talked about energy efficiency. Is it like a federal standard that utilities be included in the consideration for affordable housing? Yes. Yes. These are – I believe it's a HUD standard as they define affordable housing as rent plus utilities. Okay. Thank you for that. And are the landlords required to maintain, lock in their current rents once they're rehabilitated? No. So when we underwrite these transactions, we underwrite them with a 2% rent increase every year and a 3% increase in expenses, just so we can put them through a strong test to ensure that they will be financially feasible. But as long as the rents, the area median income that I put up there, they will change from year to year. They will increase from year to year, and then you are allowed to increase your rents. Now, if you have other federal monies in there, there may be some restrictions there. But with just my money, just the affordable housing dollars, there is no restriction on if you can raise the rents. The only thing is you have to keep them within that 30 percent number. Okay. Okay? Great. Thank you so much. Thanks again for this report. Thank you, Mayor. Council Member James Brown. Thank you, Mayor. I'd just like to echo the sentiments of fellow council members about such an excellent report and the efforts that you do and the efforts of your board and some of the partners that you have or that you work with. And I think you're doing a good job of leveraging the dollars that you have and to touch base on what Council Member Aker said about rehabilitating current units and keeping them in the market. I think you're doing an excellent job of doing that. I'm eager to hear what you're going to do as far as the referral service and what it will do to help with your initial contact. I think you're doing a great job now. I know every time I meet and talk to some developers that are doing projects, they tell me that you've reached out to them or they're currently working with you. So I think you're doing an excellent job of doing that right now. And then the first district is there's a lot of development going on in the first district, And I think the service that you provide, I think it's helping to protect some of the most vulnerable citizens in our community. I think by keeping affordable housing units on the market and providing an opportunity to create new units, I think that's a great service that you're providing to a lot of constituents in the first. As well as, and I was pleased to hear about your efforts working with the special needs community. I knew that you were providing affordable housing, but reaching out and impacting that community, I think, is just a plus. So keep up the good work. Thank you. And if I may, I can give you an example, Council Member Brown. A development that the board just approved last month is going to create seven units in your district. And, you know, the owner of the property has asked me, he says, you know, are there agencies that you know of that would refer clients to me? And I said, yeah, absolutely. And when I was in one of Charlie Lander's board meetings and I told them what the rents were and where the properties were located, they were all saying, hey, what's the guy's name and number? So, you know, there are ways that we can make that work so that we can have those referrals to those units. Absolutely. Thank you. And just to add to that, another thing I'd like for you to look at, or you're probably already looking into it, is the down payment assistance. I think that's an allowable use for that fund. I think that's also another resource that may help families get into affordable housing units is helping with the down payment assistance. All right. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. Yes, sir. Vice Mayor Kay. Thank you, Mayor. Thanks, Rick, for the presentation. Just a few comments, if I can. And first, I'd like to encourage, especially the council members, but everybody who can see the packet, Rick did not go through the list of projects, but I think it's worth your while to do that. If you haven't done that, just flip through and look at all the projects specifically that have been done and the variety and the kinds of folks that we know are being serviced by this program. I think it's very impressive. Secondly, I want to give a quick shout-out to Harry Richard, who is the chair of our board. who's here, and I saw a couple of board members, and thanked them for their service. They meet diligently. They work hard. I am getting an education about looking at pro formas and how banks think about these things, so I appreciate that. I also want to give a shout-out to at least one person in this room who was there at the very beginning and has worked hard and long to make sure that we had an affordable housing fund, and that's Commissioner Ford. starting way back when there was a task force and then there was a series of groups following on on that. People worked hard for a long time with the hope that what we got out of that was going to be exactly what we see. A commitment of funds from the city and a very good use of those funds to help those folks who need and deserve decent and affordable housing in our community. And lastly, to Rick McQuady, who cut his teeth at the state level and came, as a few other people have already said, not just ready to go, but already going with energy, enthusiasm, commitment. It's been a pleasure for me to work with him. I thank you for your service. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Rick, I believe that's all who signed on. Thank you. Your work is very inspiring. Thank you. All right. That allows us to move on to council reports. If you'll please sign on for council reports. Councilman Maloney. Thank you, Mayor. Could you have Derek Paulson come up, please? Mr. Commissioner. Derek, I left a little message. I saw the other day where we were ruling was that there could be a cell tire put on a property that has already been used for PDR money. And we lost that case from what I understand. The ruling on that, or we may appeal it. My question goes out. Do we get money back from the folks that are allowing that to be on their property? or do we get money from the – how is that going to work? Because, I mean, they're defeating the whole purpose. I'm going to have Tracy come up and talk a little bit about the case. But if I'm correct, I don't believe this farm has had PDR funds. I believe it's in the application process, and they were kind of thinking one way or the other. So they're in the application process. But they have not received money as of this point. So if they were to come to get the money – I believe it's kind of an either-or in this case. To what? I believe it's more of an either-or. I don't believe that they're looking to go – I believe if they get to do the sale tower, they're not going in PDR. Well, let's just say, let's forget this property. Let's say any property that gets a sale tower on their property that had PDR, how will we play that? Since this court has allowed this to happen, there are going to probably be other farms that will probably be requesting for this. So how would that come in play with PDR? I'm going to let Tracy, I'm going to let the ball speak for us real quick. If they have a PDR easement on their property, they wouldn't be eligible to get a cell tower. In other words, their easement that they were already paid for that was recorded would prohibit that. So they can't put a cell tower on their property without being in violation of their easement that's recorded in the Fayette County Clerk's Office. In this particular case, he was in the application process. He advised the PDR staff that he was also seeking a potential cell tower, and he didn't know how that was going to turn out. Since this decision has actually, before this decision came down, he was advised that he was proceeding in that fashion and that he wasn't going to be eligible and needed to withdraw, so he's not going to be part of the PDR application process. So let me ask you this question then. If the gentleman or whoever owns this farm will not be eligible for PDR because they put the sale tower on there, and the PDR whole intent is to keep from development from happening, how is this property down the road, if they're going to be told not to get any PDR, and they decide they want to develop, how would that help the PDR program? Because they're not going to be allowed to get PDR now because they're exempt because of their sale time. And I'm just saying is, and I'm trying to make it clear, if they don't get the money, what they want for the PDR, and everybody else is around them getting that money, can they go to court and say, well, since I can't get PDR, and you all are holding my hand tight, can we do what PDR doesn't allow to do? Maybe go and set it like for the 40 acres, they go put the 10-acre lots back in there, or something like that. Can they do that, since they're not allowed to get PDR? I think that's a series of questions, and so I'll try to answer them the best way that I can. First, the PDR program is voluntary, so no one can require them to participate or not. If you do participate, the standards would have to be applied, and somebody that has a PDR or a cell teller on their property, if they tried to apply that, would certainly be evaluated and they would be excluded. In the event someone that has a cell tower somewhere down the road decided they wanted to participate in PDR, I guess they would have the ability to somehow negate their lease with the cell tower company and remove that facility, but I can't predict how that would go or how that would turn out. But as long as that cell tower is there, they wouldn't be eligible. Whether or not someone would try to make some kind of legal claim out of that, I can't really answer that question. I mean, as you know, people can see the government for lots of different things. It doesn't mean they're all valid or that we don't have to handle them. So I'm not sure I can answer that question for you. Well, I know I'm out of time here, but it's just to me, that's something you all need to be concerned about. If I thought of this, I know good and well somebody else is thinking of this, and they're trying to find a way to beat the system, and I'm just throwing that out there. Okay, thank you, Council Member Maloney. Council Member Lamb. Thank you, Mayor. I have three motions to refer three items into General Government and Social Services Committee. The first is an update on the Domestic Violence Prevention Program. If you all remember last year at the budget time, then the director of the domestic or the contractor lady that we had with the Domestic Violence Prevention Program, She was phasing out, and we were creating a new position, and I thought that it would be good to have an update on how that's moving along, and I so move. Second. All right. Motion by Council Member Lamb. Second by Council Member Bledsoe. Is there any discussion on the motion? All right. If not, we can vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. All right. And the second item is very similar. It's the SAVI, the Substance Abuse Violence Intervention, and that was a new program that was being introduced last year, and there's some transition that's happened with that. And I would like to provide, ask for an update on that and the General Government Social Services Committee. I so move. Motion by Council Member Lamb, seconded by Council Member Henson. Hearing objection? All right. Motion passes. All right, and the last one is at the request of Division of Purchasing, I would like to put into General Government's Social Services Committee the revision of the procurement regulations, the review of that, and so move. Motion by Council Member Lamb, seconded by Council Member Gibbs. Is there any objection to the motion? The motion passes. All right. And that's all I have. Thank you so much. Thank you, Council Member Lamb. Council Member Gibbs. Thank you, Mayor. I have a referral as well. UK would like to permanently close Rose Street south of Columbia Avenue. It's been closed for some time for construction. I move to put an examination of that issue into the Planning and Public Safety Committee. So moved. Second. Motion by Council Member Gibbs and second by Council Member Henson. Is there any discussion on the motion? All right. We can vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. All right. Councilor Vice Mayor Kaye. Thank you, Mayor. A couple of weeks ago, on behalf of the Infill and Redevelopment Committee, I as co-chair sent an email to Council about a set of recommendations from the Infill and Redevelopment Committee. And since I was absent last week, I couldn't make this motion while people still had that fresh in their minds, but a part of the recommendation was that we place into the planning committee a discussion of a program for property tax abatement based on longevity of ownership in areas of extensive redevelopment to mitigate the negative impact of rising property values on long-term residents. So this is about basically balancing out the market forces on infill and redevelopment with some investigation of ways to make it possible for people who are long-term residents to continue to live in the area that they've lived in all their lives. So I'm going to move to place that into planning and public safety. So move. Motion by Vice Mayor Kaye. Second by Council Member James Brown. Is there any discussion on the motion? Yes, Mayor. Council Member Massadi. Thank you, Mayor. Vice Mayor, would that be like a homestead exemption? Is that what you're thinking? It would be similar to a homestead exemption where you identify, yes, a class of people who... So it would be dependent upon how long a particular person lived in a certain home? I think the question is, is it possible to develop a program based on a set of criteria? And if so, does the council want to move in that direction? And I assume that would be tied to income? Is that what you're thinking? It might be tied to income. It might be tied to a variety of factors. This was not fleshed out in the infill and redevelopment committee. We thought it was appropriate to basically put it before the council. Okay, fine. Thank you. All right. Any further discussion? All right. If not, then we can vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Council Member Akers. Thank you, Mayor. First of all, I would like to refer to the Planning and Public Safety Committee, Councilmember Sadi. The nuisance ordinance, specifically Section 12 of the Code of Ordinances, regarding properties, specifically properties that are burdened, I guess, if you will, or are locations for criminal activities. As many of you probably know of late, there have been multiple shootings at a couple of the same repeated locations. And I've talked to the police department about enforcing the ordinance that we do have for these nuisance properties, but there are limitations to what they have been able to do. And so I thought that we should reevaluate this ordinance and see how we might be able to strengthen it to allow our police department to better enforce and prohibit certain property owners from enabling criminal activities. So I make that motion. All right. Motion by Council Member Akers and second by Council Member Henson. Is there any discussion on the motion? If not, then we can vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Thank you. And then I have one announcement. Tonight at the Metathorpe Neighborhood Association meeting at 7 o'clock, representatives from Republic Waste will be on hand to share a presentation regarding the proposed transfer station that is planned to be located at 203 Lyle Industrial Avenue. That application goes before the Board of Adjustment at the end of this month for a conditional use permit. and I know that there are lots of residents and business owners that are concerned, and so I hope that you all will all come out and listen to the presentation and have your questions and concerns addressed. And that is, again, at 7 at 333 Larch Lane at the Meadowthorpe Community Center. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Akers. All right, looks like that's all, Council Members, who have signed up for council reports. That allows us to move to the mayor's report. There's no mayor's report this week. And it allows us to move to public comment for issues not on the agenda. Mr. Mundy says nobody's here for public comment. All right. Well, that allows me to ask for a motion to adjourn. Vice Mayor Kay, second by Council Member Fred Brown. Unless there's objection, we are adjourned.