# Urban County Council Work Session on 2016-05-03 3:00 PM - Packet - May 3, 2016 > Auto-transcribed civic record · May 3, 2016 - **Permalink**: https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/meeting/3949 - **Source video**: https://lfucg.granicus.com/player/clip/3949?view_id=14&redirect=true - **Date**: 2016-05-03 - **Last revised**: May 3, 2016 - **Length**: 12,737 words - **Speakers**: Chad > ⚠️ **Auto-generated content.** Audio from the official Granicus video was auto-transcribed with OpenAI's open-source Whisper large-v3-turbo model, run locally by The Lexington Times. Structured facts were extracted with GPT-4o; the narrative summary was written by Anthropic Claude. Verbatim wording may contain errors. See [methodology](https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/about/methodology) or [report a correction](mailto:editor@lexingtonky.news). --- ## Meeting Overview The Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government held a meeting on May 3, 2016, at 3:00 PM in the Council Chamber at 200 E. Main St, Lexington, KY 40507, with Mayor Gray presiding. The meeting addressed four agenda items, including public comment opportunities, approval of meeting summaries, new business items, and continuing business with presentations. During the session, the council conducted three formal votes and heard one public comment from a citizen regarding issues on the agenda. The meeting successfully approved both the summary from a previous meeting and new business items brought before the council, while also receiving informational presentations as part of continuing business matters. ## Attendance The following members were present at the meeting on May 3, 2016: • Kay • Stinnett • J. Brown • Akers • Gibbs • Lamb • Farmer • Evans • Scutchfield • F. Brown • Mossotti • Bledsoe • Henson • Hensley **Absent:** • Moloney No members arrived late to the meeting. A total of 14 members were present with 1 member absent. ## Votes and Decisions The council conducted three unanimous votes during the May 3, 2016 meeting. **April 12, 2016 Work Session Summary Approval** [timestamp: 00:30] Councilmember Farmer motioned to approve the April 12, 2016 work session summary, with Councilmember Scutchfield providing the second. The motion passed unanimously. **New Business Approval** [timestamp: 01:00] Councilmember Farmer made a motion to approve new business items, seconded by Councilmember Kay. The motion passed with unanimous support from all council members present. **Neighborhood Development Funds Approval** [timestamp: 02:00] Councilmember Stinnett motioned to approve neighborhood development funds, with Councilmember Mossotti seconding the motion. This item also received unanimous approval from the council. All three votes were conducted as voice votes rather than formal roll call votes, with no opposition or abstentions recorded for any of the items considered. ## Budget and Financial Actions The meeting addressed two significant financial items totaling $408,000 in expenditures. **Real Estate Purchase for Police Department** The council considered the purchase of real estate located at 270 West Loudon Avenue for the Police Department under resolution L0434-16. The proposed acquisition carries a price tag of $350,000. This represents the largest financial commitment discussed during the meeting. **Broadband Analysis Contract** The council reviewed a contract engagement with CTC Technology & Energy under resolution L0420-16. The $58,000 contract would fund a broadband opportunities analysis for the municipality. CTC Technology & Energy would serve as the vendor for this telecommunications infrastructure study. These two financial actions represent strategic investments in both public safety infrastructure through the police department real estate acquisition and future telecommunications planning through the broadband analysis contract. ## Public Comment During the public comment period, one resident addressed the council regarding transportation accessibility. **Edward Crutchfield** spoke about the need for public transportation to Jacobson Park [timestamp: 03:00]. Mr. Crutchfield advocated for extending public transportation services to the park, emphasizing that this would provide access for residents who do not have cars. He specifically highlighted the importance of this service during the summer months when park usage typically increases. The comment focused on improving accessibility to recreational facilities for residents who rely on public transportation, addressing potential equity concerns in park access across the community. ## Public Comment - Issues on Agenda [timestamp: 00:10] The meeting opened with a designated public comment period for issues related to items on the agenda. This portion of the meeting was allocated to allow members of the public to address the governing body regarding specific matters that would be discussed later in the session. No members of the public came forward to provide comments during this portion of the meeting. The public comment period proceeded without any speakers presenting concerns, questions, or input related to the agenda items scheduled for discussion. This agenda item served as an informational component of the meeting, providing the opportunity for public participation while maintaining the structured format of the proceedings. The absence of public comments allowed the meeting to proceed directly to the substantive agenda items without additional input or concerns raised by community members. ## Approval of Summary [timestamp: 00:30] The council considered approval of the summary from their previous work session held on April 12, 2016. Council members Scutchfield and Farmer participated in the discussion of this agenda item. The council reviewed the summary document, which captured the proceedings and decisions from the April 12th work session. Following their review, the council voted to approve the summary as presented. The summary was approved without any recorded objections or amendments to the document. ## New Business [timestamp: 01:00] The council addressed several new business items during this portion of the meeting, with Farmer and Kay serving as the primary speakers for the discussion. The new business segment focused on financial authorizations and contract approvals that required council action. Farmer and Kay presented the various items to the council for consideration, though the specific details of individual contracts and financial matters were not detailed in the available materials. The council proceeded to review and discuss the presented new business items. The discussion appeared to move efficiently through the agenda items without significant debate or extended deliberation recorded in the summary materials. Following the presentations and any discussion, the council voted on the new business items. All items presented under new business were approved by the council, indicating consensus among the members on the financial authorizations and contracts that were brought forward. The approval of these new business items allows the relevant departments and officials to proceed with the authorized financial commitments and contractual arrangements as presented to the council. ## Continuing Business/Presentations [timestamp: 02:30] The meeting included two informational presentations covering ongoing city initiatives. Craig Turner and Jonathan Hollinger served as the key speakers for this portion of the agenda. The presentations focused on two main topics: • **Lexington Convention Center** - An update was provided on the status and operations of the convention center facility • **Sidewalk Program** - Information was shared regarding the city's sidewalk infrastructure initiative Both presentations were informational in nature, providing council members and the public with updates on these continuing city programs. No formal action was taken on either presentation, as they served to keep stakeholders informed about ongoing municipal operations and infrastructure projects. The session allowed for the dissemination of current information about these two significant city initiatives, maintaining transparency about their progress and status within the community. --- ## Decisions - **Motion** — passed (0-0): approve the April 19, 2016 work session summary - **Motion** — passed (0-0): approve new business - **Motion** — passed (0-0): approve neighborhood development funds - **Motion** — passed (0-0): refer the Bluegrass Area Development District to the General Government & Social Services Committee to review options for the work force program and administration of the BGADD - **Motion** — passed (0-0): schedule a public hearing on the FY2017 proposed budget for the Downtown Lexington Management District on Thursday, June 16, 2016 at 6:00pm - **Motion** — passed (0-0): adjourn at 4:17pm --- ## Full transcript Woo! Thank you. Thank you. All right. I'll call the meeting to order. Thank you for joining us today for this meeting of the work session. First on our agenda is public comment for issues on the agenda, that is issues on the agenda for today mr monday has anybody signed up for issues on the agenda public comments all right okay thank you all right that allows us to move on to rezoning or and the docket approval is there any there's no rezoning aggressive and there's no docket to approve this week that allows us to move on to approving the summary is there a motion to approve motion by councilmember scutchfield second by councilmember farmer is there any discussion on the motion right if not then we can vote all in favor please say aye opposed no motion carries there are no budget amendments this week which allows us to move on to new business is there a motion to approve approval motion by Council Member Farmer, second by Vice Mayor Kaye. Is there any discussion? Please sign on for discussion. Council Member Lamb. Thank you, Mayor. Item D. I guess Ms. Item which one? Item D. D as in dog. I'm just, can you explain what this item is going to be used for? Sure. This is a study with our consultant to look specifically at the area of the county outside the urban service boundary. So they're going to look at a few things. One is they're going to provide a sort of high-level engineering and cost estimate. They're going to talk with stakeholders. They're going to talk with potential providers because this is an RFP that's looking for a public-private partnership. And then lastly, they're going to build a financial model so we can understand sort of the ongoing costs of a public-private partnership for this part of the county. Does this have anything to do with the broadband RFP? It does. So this would inform the RFP so that respondents to the RFP can have more information. We are looking for private partners, and so this would provide them with more information to respond to the RFP. So is the RFP still on hold, or has it been, I was looking at Ms. CAO Hamilton, I know that's not. The goal would be to hold the RFP until we had this information. Okay. Okay. Well, that's all I know then to ask. at that point on this. I know I'm sure Mr. Hensley will, Council Member Hensley will have something maybe to follow up. Item H, if I remember correctly, this was an item that was the purchase of 270 West Loudon Avenue. It was removed from the agenda in January. And I'm just wondering what's the difference between then and now? What's been changed? The key thing is we've got the environmental studies conducted at this point, I believe at the time before we were waiting for some of those to be finished and we have finished those at this time. So everything is clear in terms of what we need to do to move forward with it. As to what you can build on and what you can't build on? For the most part, yes. So we've got a little map here we can show. We showed previously where the trio will go through. This is one of those things that is going to serve dual purposes. This is something the balls are going to sell and we were able to kind of work together to get a keep the paddock for the police department and then also make a section for the legacy trail to come through Coolerton Park. So not the easiest to see there. But there is a section there that will show where the trail is intended to go through. And this is to connect up to the existing Coolerton Trail between Coolerton Trail and the legacy trail. So this is kind of the last little section that will help that part through Coolerton Park. So was this The cost $350 is just to purchase the real estate, the parcel, but is there an additional cost? We've got the cost for the trails already budgeted, and that construction will take place later. But this is just for the purchase of this property, correct. And it's just going to be used for trails? No. There is a section where the legacy trail will go through, and then it will remain the paddock for the police, horses, the mountain patrol. That was something where this property was going to be sold, and it might have gone away from it. It was being, police were being allowed to use it. Now it is under their control. So they will be able to stay there, and that is the key thing. And then we will be able to use it to get the legacy trail through there. So it's a win-win? It is a win-win. Okay. Thank you all for that. Yes, ma'am. And then one last one is item O. It has to do with the revised schedule A and B with Anthem health plans for administrative services, rates, and fees. and I was wondering what are the changes between the current and the new plan? Sure. We negotiated a three-year contract with Anthem. We're in year two of that contract, and year two they did allow for an increase in the administrative fee. That's just the fee to process the claims. It's a 3% increase. It amounts to $1.03. per employee per month. So does this increase have to come out of the general fund or is it coming from employees? It will come it's budgeted, it's going to come out of our medical fund. So it's an it's it's more cost yeah, thank you. There's a separate medical fund and that's what this is going to come out of. Okay, alright. So are we increasing that medical fund this year in the budget? We have a budget that balances in that medical fund. So this increase was incorporated in that budget. Okay. All right. Thanks. Thanks. Thank you, Mayor. Thanks. All right. Thank you. Council Member Hensley. Thank you, Mayor. On item D, I would like to commend the administration for allowing these funds to come forward. This is something that I think was needed. The original study did not have any input from the rural and 12th district areas. And so I commend this effort to have this in there, and I would ask for this to go forward to the docket. Thank you. All right. Thank you, Council Member Hensley. Council Member Fred Brown. Thank you, Mayor. Item N, I think that would be Dow, authorization to execute an agreement with Commonwealth of Kentucky. I didn't see, I just wanted a little bit more information on that. Is that a blanket type of, I don't know if it's a reimbursement or what, for operation and maintenance of traffic signals? Are we, is it going to be one section, man of war, or one area? We maintain all of the traffic signals within Fayette County, so even the ones on state routes, which are owned by the state. And so they pay us each year to maintain their traffic signals, and that's what this item is. How do we balance that out as far as the expenses it actually costs us and reimbursement? Does that cover all of our costs? We have a work order system where we track every dollar spent on the state route system, and it's kept track of both labor and materials. So this is the 330 going forward, but it's based on last year's cost? We had 330 last year, too. Okay, good. All right, and T. I'll be the chief. Probably just a little more information than what we have in the packet on that. I noticed a lot of that is for the individual officers. The CLEP fund, yes, sir. This is every year, isn't it, this type of grant here? What's the total? I think back in the packet, the $2,000,004,000 was not all to the officers. I think there was another section there. Let me turn to page 41. Yeah, that totaled $101,860,000. And then in addition, the program contributes up to 31.06% of that total toward the pension of participants, totaling $577,000. Did that go into the police pension? I'm not sure, Councilman Brown. I don't know where that is. Maybe that's a finance question. Irene Gooding is coming to the podium to help. Page 41. I just wanted an explanation there of what we're getting out of this. Okay. Most of the money does go to each individual officer, but we also pay into the pension fund based on that amount. Not necessarily our amount. We're allowed to go up to the KERS amount. Okay. Okay. So that's part of a contribution, pension plan contribution? It is what we're reimbursed for from the state. Right, but we turn around and contribute that back to the KERS, right? No, it goes into our pension fund. Well, that's what I mean. I mean to the pension fund, I'm sorry. So is that in addition to what we're doing on all of our salaries for police? Well, this particular funding to each officer, it is like salary. We have to pay pension on it, so we're not really gaining. Okay, that's kind of like they'll get that as a salary part of their package then. Right. Okay, thank you. All right, that's all. Council members who have signed up for discussion on the motion. So we can take a vote on the motion. To approve new business, all in favor of the motion, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. That allows us to move on to continuing business and presentations. And first is the NDFs. Is there a motion? Second. Motion by Council Member Stennett. Second by Council Member Massadi. Is there any discussion on the motion? All right. Hearing none, then we can vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Next is a committee summary of the General Government and Social Services Committee by Council Member Lamb. Thank you, Mayor. The April 5th General Government and Social Services Committee report out the approval of the committee summary and the security cameras and parks. Monica Conrad, the director of parks, discussed the present use of security cameras by parks and recreation, stated there was currently 49 cameras installed in city parks. Then we had Lieutenant Mike Wright, a representative from police, who reviewed the advantages and disadvantages associated with use of security cameras. And Director Conrad stated that she recommends the development of a task force to evaluate the installation of security cameras in the parks. There was committee discussion regarding the use of the task force versus a subcommittee. And then Council Member Fred Brown stated that he recommended the installation of a subcommittee and pilot projects within one or two parks, and he stated concern for the development of a task force and asked that the item be left in committee until additional information is available. He stated that input should be obtained from neighborhood associations and that item will remain in committee until July. The Council Rules and Procedures, Vice Mayor Kay introduced the item and discussed the history of the topic. He stated that the proposed changes would streamline the Council meeting process and reviewed typical items proposed for legislative review. The committee discussed the need to obtain input on the proposed changes from the council clerk's office and representatives from the mayor's office and discussed concerns with maintaining transparency during meetings. The issue will be reconsidered by the committee in more like, I think, June or July. The next item was the board's agencies and commissions. Memberships, Council Member Scutchfield introduced the item and asked for committee input regarding the information regarding the quarterly report. And she stated the board and committee information would be provided to the council on a quarterly basis, and after a discussion, the item was removed from committee. And then the next item was location and broadcasting of council meetings. Council Member Scutchfield stated that meetings open to all council members should be held in the council chamber so that the meetings can be broadcasted. And after a committee discussion, consensus was reached that this item should be considered by the committee of the whole. A motion was made by Scutchfield to move the item into the Committee of the Whole and seconded by Councilmember Evans, and it was passed without dissent. And the meeting adjourned. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Councilmember Lamb. Next is a presentation at the Lexington Convention Center, an update. And Mr. Craig Turner. While he's coming to the podium, I'll ask Craig, with all the work that you've done on this project as a citizen soldier representing the city, do you still have a regular job or have you abandoned it entirely? I think I got fired last week. We thank you. You're welcome. I'm here today representing the Lexington Corporation Board, Lexington Center Board. But I'm really here because of six other stakeholders besides LCC. You as a Lexington-Urban County government, Visit Lex, Commerce Lexington, Bluegrass Hospitality Association, Downtown Lexington, the Lexington Downtown Development Authority. Because of those efforts, we obviously were successful in this last session. because of a team. And I'm here to tell you that it was a lot of interesting times in Frankfurt, but I think we were fortunate enough to prevail. I do want to give, if I start naming people, I will always forget someone, but I do want to give a special thanks to Bill Owen, who's here today. Bill's president of the Lexington Center. and Mary Quinn Raymer, Bob Quick, Andy Johnson, Judy Taylor, Ellen Williams. There's just a whole slew of people that were truly involved in this. It's been a tremendous amount of hours and efforts, as well as planning and strategizing of how to best present our case. We were fortunate to do so. So with House Bill 626 passed, it's because of those efforts, I thought I'd very quickly review with you what took place. House bill calls for the state to invest $60 million in and on behalf of the Lexington Convention Center. Part of the bill is a 2.5% transient tax that's required to be passed. A half a percent of that transient tax will go to repay the state's investment and their return. The other 2% will be to support the LCC bond issuance of approximately $175 million. It also requires that the City of Lexington make an equity injection into the project of $10 million. So what we've got when we end, we've got a 76% locally funded project and a 24% state funded project. There has been a construction committee put in place on the LCC board to start working on this project immediately. The highlights of it are the exhibition space will increase from 66,000 feet to 100,000 feet. That will allow us to go from reaching 65% of our market to about 90% of the market that's out there. 22,500 square feet of new ballroom space, which is a 30% increase, and an additional 30,000 square feet of meeting space. I think the most important thing that I would echo is the Lexington Center is a real economic engine and has a tremendous economic impact on the city. Historically, over the last several years, it has averaged about $42 million of its economic impact. the building and revitalization of the convention center downtown, the study showed that that economic impact should increase from about $42 million to about $57 million. In addition, the state's going to collect about an extra million dollars in sales tax. There will be new jobs. There will be additional dollars spent for hotel spending. And obviously, it's going to permit the opportunity and promote the opportunity for new development, as well as increase our tax base. We have a memorandum of understanding in place with the Commonwealth. Again, the condition is that Lexington would lead these efforts. So I would tell you that it's important from our standpoint that as you look at the things in front of you, as your budget comes up, we do need to request that you do pass the $10 million equity injection for the 2017 budget and also the passage of the 2.5% transient room tax. I think the concept is that transient room tax would get approved. We'd give about 90 days to let everybody in the hospitality business get their computers and their systems reorganized. And so about September 1, we would want to start collecting that tax, of which we will escrow until the bonds are issued and the project literally gets underway. with that obviously I'm excited that I have the opportunity to be back in front of you on a positive note and I think this is transformational for the city of Lexington and what it'll do for both downtown as well as central Kentucky so with that I'll if there's any questions I'll be happy entertain them all right very good questions all right thank you thank you thank you thank you thank you thank you phil allen stein is here andy thank you all thank you all right thank you all very much Thanks for joining us today. Next on our agenda is the presentation of the sidewalk program by Jonathan Hollinger. Good afternoon. I'm here today just to give you a status update on the status of our sidewalk program. There's some money in the Mayor's proposed budget for a couple different projects. to walk through just a general overview of the sidewalk program, our different types of sidewalk projects, our missing sidewalk ranking process, which we just completed, as well as a walk you through the request system, which we've also just completed. So an overview is we have 53 miles of roads that are missing sidewalks on both sides, and an additional 38 that are missing sidewalks on just one side. So that's a pretty big number. And if you think about general cost estimates, of about $75 a linear foot that can add up to a lot. That being said, not all the projects are probably completely viable. To give you a sense of how that's dispersed, it's really everywhere. If you look at this map, you can see that you have some neighborhoods that were built without sidewalks very purposefully at the time. You also have some sections that are just missing. We do have a requirement in new development for sidewalks, but for areas that haven't been redeveloped that weren't built without them, many of those sections do still lack them. There's effectively two project types that we've identified through this process. We have major local projects, which have significant design and planning that's required. They likely involve right-of-way acquisition or utility relocation. They're effectively a large capital project, much like a transportation project. And usually they will be funded by grant funds, but potentially they can be funded by local capital funding, depending on the scale of the project. We also have local projects. The design and planning is usually less complex for these projects. It does not usually involve acquiring right away. Sometimes you may have some minor easements here and there. And these can be funded with local dollars and they would not be eligible for grant funding. So to give you an example, Southland Drive, which is in the mayor's proposed budget, is a major local project. It's a local road that's significant. It has access issues that have to be dealt with. It has stormwater issues that have to be dealt with. We have design funding in fiscal year 2016 of $250,000. We do have a contract for that consultant. Additionally, the mayor's proposed budget includes $1.85 million in local capital dollars for construction of that sidewalk. Another example is a section of Haritsburg Road. It's about 800 feet where the sidewalk abruptly ends and then picks back up. This is actually a project that Council Member Henson is doing with some of her funding. But it's a relatively low cost assessment. It already has curb and gutter. The only easements that are needed are temporary construction easements. So it's relatively cost effective for a pretty major connection that will create a lot of pedestrian connectivity in this area. So as we thought about these projects, we came up with a criteria to rank them. And we wanted to do that in an automated way. So we used GIS data, and we actually purchased some data to help us with this process. What we were trying to prioritize was areas that have high pedestrian activity, that have documented collisions with pedestrians, nearby destinations that are on or near transit, have some other demographic indicators of need, and also have the potential for connectivity, meaning that they connect to existing sections of sidewalk. This criteria is largely based on the 2007 Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan, which is the last time that plan was completed. And it was completed internally by Transportation Planning and GIS. And so I'll give a lot of credit to Scott Thompson and Kenzie Gleason in Transportation Planning and Chris Dorch in GIS for really completing that analysis. It did include 14 elements, and I'll go through each of those. The criteria include points for connectivity at each end, the amount of people who walk to work in the area based on census data, the same for biking to work and transit to work. We did give higher point values to roads that have higher speed limits, because that's certainly more dangerous for pedestrians. We gave higher point values to areas that had higher housing density. We did include pedestrian collisions, both mid-block and intersection collisions, as well as a project impact. And that's a professional judgment based on transportation planning as to what impact that project would have in terms of providing access for pedestrians. Additionally, the more sort of geographic analysis we did was bus stops within a quarter, and then within a quarter to a half mile. Also, households in poverty and vehicle availability, because those are both correlated with lots of high pedestrian activity. And we also did purchase some data to figure out the number of employees within a quarter mile and between a quarter and a half. Also, businesses and community destinations. The community destinations are parks, community centers, schools, both public and private, among other destinations. So that sidewalk ranking criteria really establishes the need for sidewalks based on anticipated amount of volume, but it doesn't really help to gauge public support for those projects. So as a companion to that criteria, we've created an online sidewalk request system. and I sent you a link just before this meeting so you can go and try it out. It's intended to allow people to submit projects where they would like to have sidewalks, provide some status tracking as projects get funded and completed, that will be indicated there, as well as voting. So you can come on and actually add your support to somebody else's request if you would like to. And this is all very transparent. You can see all the requests as they come in publicly. Obviously, we do have some validation in terms of the voting. It sends you an email that you have to confirm. All of that personal information, name, and email is not public. It's just the request. And I'll actually walk through an example of one here in a second. I'll skip over these screenshots because I'm actually going to walk you through the live version. The next steps right now, the mayor's proposed budget does include funding for the highest ranked major local project, which is Southland Drive. It also includes an additional $500,000 for local projects. And I sent you a list shortly before this meeting that has both complete lists of major locals and locals. So what we really need to do now is refine our cost estimates for those highly scored projects. For the local projects, we used a generic engineering estimating linear footage amount. For the major local projects, we have actually not completed cost estimates other than Southland Drive. So we're going to go through. We do have some information about some, but that does need to be refined. We're also going to continue to evaluate and test our ranking criteria. This is our first shot at the ranking criteria. We by no means think that it's perfect. And so over time, as we're able to collect better data and build that into our ranking system, that only will improve the validity of those rankings. So we're going to continue to improve that. We also need to develop a project implementation process. This is the first time if the $500,000 were to be funded in the budget that the city has had a fund specifically dedicated to go to these local sidewalk sections. So we've done that in an ad hoc way, but we're going to formalize that process so we understand how those projects will flow. And with that, I'm actually just going to walk you through really quickly using the sidewalk request system just as an example. And so when you first come here, just ask me where you want sidewalks. And I'm going to do Councilmember Fred Brown a favor and put Armstrong Mill in. So if hopefully we have Wi-Fi in the council chambers, this will work. Try it again here. There we go. And so after you enter that, it just asks you to type in a little bit of information. So in this case, we'll put in Tate's Creek Road to Green Tree. And then it asks you some general questions. In this case, we'll say it's needed on both sides because it does lack it on both sides. It would connect existing sidewalks. Say it has high traffic. And then all you have to do, you don't have to register for an account. You just have to type in your name. So I will go ahead and fill this out. And so what that does is then it fires off an email to the email I just typed in. I can confirm my vote. And if I wanted to just add my support to other projects, as soon as I confirm that via email, it will show up on this list. and I can come in and click the thumbs up and put in my name and email and add my support to somebody else's submission. It does validate that information, so you can only vote once with each email. And so that's basically the system at this point. It certainly can use some improvement over time. I mean, I think it would be nice to be able to submit projects using a map and other things like that, but this is our first iteration of it, and so we're going to continue to try and work on this over time. So with that, I'll take any questions that anybody has about the presentation or the system. Thank you. I've got a couple people lined up, starting with Council Member Maloney. Thank you. I've been following the sidewalk for a long time, and I thought we'd put this in a committee, public safety committee, and as it's been discussed, I see you've got a criteria formula and all that, and I figure when you put these in the public safety, you would discuss your recommendations, and the committee would come out and say, yeah, this is a good idea, but did you have this discussion with any of the council members about the criteria? Because I assume it's supposed to be in public safety, because this has been a big issue for a long time. I believe that this item was in the planning committee, and it was Commissioner Paulson made a presentation regarding that, and we were tasked with coming back with the rankings, which is what we're here today to present. Okay, I just still wanted to keep going around and around. We have a process that we follow. Now, it seems like maybe we would have brought this into that committee, and the council or that committee would oversee to make sure of these criteria. Did you have council members involved with the criteria and all that? We used the 2007 bike and pedestrian master plan and drew the criteria out of there. There's actually a project ranking score sheet in there, So we extrapolated some of that information and used the best data that we could to develop that criteria. Okay. Thank you. Council Member Henson. John. He got deleted. All right. Council Member Stennett. Thank you, Mayor. Jonathan, are you planning to come back to our planning committee and present this and their criteria rankings? Because I'm the one that put in committee, and this is the first I'm seeing of it. And I know none of the council members had input about their districts. And I think, I mean, I know you're relying on a 2007 master plan, but, you know, thoughts changed since then. And, you know, Vercel's Road Sidewalks, for instance, didn't even make the top five, and I find that hard to believe. Well, you know, and actually, so the, there's a couple things I'll say. The list that you got is the missing on both sides sections, right? And so there may be some state road sections that are missing one side, and we're working through those as well. The other thing I would say, large parts of Versailles Road actually do include sidewalks. They may not be up to what we would consider to be our modern standards, but they do exist. And so this was really aimed at gathering the missing sidewalk data. But we can certainly bring this back to any, whatever committee is appropriate. I believe the intent was to provide a presentation to the entire council prior to their budget process, since there is the $500,000 that's allocated there as well as the money for Southland Drive. And that's fine. And I appreciate the money for Southland Drive. That's well needed as well. But I think the council members may have an idea about how these sidewalks should be ranked. I don't remember the message being only unsidewalked areas. I think there are sidewalks that need repaired for ADA reasons. There's other issues I think need to be fleshed out before we say this is our priority list. So I appreciate all your work. The request system is great. Thank you for your input on that. But I think, Chair of our committee, this should go back to our committee, and we definitely need to have council input on each district and what sidewalks they think are number one. And then real quick, when we were tasked in the fall to talk about this, which is what led to this second presentation that John just gave, it was about sections where we have no sidewalks. We have not been tasked to look at places where sidewalks are deficient. We do have some processes that are in place that we do put in ADA ramps. We have funding both in MAP and also as we go through the pavement system. But we were, I think our key thing here was, because, again, we do not maintain sidewalks, that is a citizen's role and responsibility at this point, was to find out where we do not have. And, again, we've got, as Jonathan showed, quite a lot of sections of road that do not have any sidewalks, which was really what we were tasked to try to bring back to you and, again, to bring that ranking system. The ranking system that we used, that Jonathan and transportation planners used, actually shouldn't really change because the criteria are basically the same. It's what's out there in terms of that system, which was created during the master plan process for bike and pad, was designed to help identify where do we need sidewalks, not to rank where are existing sidewalks in deficiency, but where do we need sidewalks where they are missing. Again, it was created during a public master plan process. what we did or what they did was to update it and again use the best data available to to provide that information to you again as requested from that original presentation we could bring it back to as jonathan said to the planning committee i believe as jonathan stated the the request was to bring it here for everyone to see before the budgetary process so i know that the planning and public safety committee has been very busy but we can we can do that and have more discussion of those criteria but we did use the criteria that were available as part of the public planning process previously and we are getting ready to update that plan here in the near future. Yeah, 2007, again, was 10 years ago almost when we did that process. So lots changed. The council's changed. I think having our input's going to be valuable because, you know, obviously we can put it in the budget if we want to. If we don't agree with it, we can take it out. So I think having our input's going to be critical going forward. So if we can have that discussion in committee. Right, and I'll just say this one last thing and I'll let Jonathan get back, is the idea here was to make this as empirical as possible to provide you guys a system which could be, again, that relied on the empirical data with the information that you could not easily get to in terms of businesses, pedestrian activity, all those sorts of things which were identified in the previous master plan. And again, really follow along the best practices that are being used nationally in terms of identifying these sidewalks. So I think that's something that I know Jonathan and the planners did was really look at what other communities are doing, looking at the best practices, looking at that information. And again, I think we never anticipated this would be the final. I think it was always this is something that is going to be for your guidance in terms of how we go about selecting those sidewalks next. Well, I appreciate the word. Don't get me wrong. But, you know, again, we should be part of the process, and hopefully we will be going forward. Thank you. Peggy was in line. Okay. There's a correction here that might be worthwhile. Yeah, Commissioner Paulson. We don't have it in planning committee. I believe it's in EQ. So that's why when he was talking about it. So if you want to bring it to EQ, you've probably got more flexibility than in planning and public safety. All right. Okay. Thanks. Council Member Henson. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Jonathan, for the presentation. I had a couple of questions about the process. What if a person doesn't use the Internet? that well we certainly um if you want to request sections you can they could call me they could call um could you call 3-1-1 well we can certainly set that up potentially to have uh those requests come through um and you know it can be put in on somebody else's behalf certainly so if you did receive a call for example in your council office um you could you could submit that project as well now obviously it does have some restrictions about how you can vote with your email so if you ever need to make any changes, feel free to let me know and we can make it. I was just thinking, you know, we're an aging population in Lexington and a lot of the older individuals, older than me, don't necessarily use the internet. So I wanted to make that point because they do a lot of walking usually. One thing we did do with this, this system is built and it's responsive, so it will work on your mobile device. And if you look at the research, there's actually a large amount of people who may not have the Internet at home do have a smartphone. So it is mobily responsive and would work on a phone as well. Yeah, okay, and they may not have email either, but anyway, something to think about. Now, if you put down existing sidewalks, I mean new sidewalks where there's none that exists, and the property owner would be responsible for maintaining those going forward, do you notify them that that's going to occur? Certainly all property owners along any potential construction would need to be notified. It's likely that we would need a temporary construction easement in any case, so they would be involved in that process. Okay. Thank you. And I guess I look forward to hearing more about the criteria. All of everything that you've listed for the criteria, I think it's good because I know, for instance, from the For Sale Throats study where it was, the corridor study was based a lot on pedestrian and transit service and so forth. So I do think that this is a good criteria from what I can tell. We certainly would like to add some additional items to it over time. It would be great to be able to do site surveys and look for existing worn paths and look for potential utility conflicts that are in the way. And to gather as much data as we can using the GIS data we had at this point, this is probably our best effort at it, but I think we can improve that over time. And, you know, and I do agree with my colleagues about the condition of existing sidewalks in Lexington. And, you know, maybe we might want to, I don't know if the match program exists, but where neighborhoods could improve or a whole entire street and we would match the cost. because it is very costly, and you see the patch that we put in on Harrisburg Road, or we'll put in, and it was $70,000, and you're not talking about a very large piece of sidewalk. And maybe repairs would be somewhat less costly. But I think I would look forward to hearing more about that process. I'm glad Southland Drive's in there. I know there's a need there. And thank you. Thank you again. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Council Member Hanson. Council Member Bledsoe. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Jonathan. I'm just curious. Did you develop that website in-house? Yes. It costs about $7 a month to run. I think that's great. I really applaud your efforts. I think it's well done. It's clean. It's easy to interact with. I think when taxpayers call and they say, point me into a direction, and they feel like they have done something, I really applaud the effort. Thank you. That being said, I just have two questions. So on the rankings, I would just also suggest I didn't see something when we're doing other work. For instance, if we're already going to be tearing up something to do a street repaving or to do some stormwater or drainage that we're also looking at the slide before that time, It just might make sense from a cost saving. And we do have a couple criteria, and they're not actually built into the ranking process at this point, but we have basically a couple extra columns that track both capital projects and potential redevelopment, because if the property is to be redeveloped, the developer would be required to put in the sidewalk. So how we work those into the ranking system requires a little bit more thinking, because development plans aren't always built, and so we need to formalize that. some way, but certainly for transportation projects where the state's going to be coming in and doing an interchange and going to put sidewalks in, that's a section that we would hold off on pending the result of that project. But we do want to build that in, and it's a good point. Good. I'm just always trying to look for the better bang for our buck, and that seems to be a good one. And then lastly, on the Southwind Drive, I'll just say that I think it's really important that we put public money, that we also see private investment. And I know that the Southwind Association in particular has been raising money and is keeping money away to do the amenities on Southland Drive. So it's not just that we're doing the work, but we're doing the sidewalks, and they're coming in and really owning it in some expiratory ways. And I think that's a really good thing. So thank you. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Council Member Bledsoe. Council Member Lamb. Thank you, Mayor. Jonathan, thank you for this presentation. I was actually referencing this presentation last night at a meeting over for Southern Heights neighborhood about a missing section of sidewalks. So one of the things that I have in dealing with this issue over on McDonald's Avenue, I found out that it doesn't appear that we have anything about removing dangerous sidewalk segments. And so I first want to ask the question, if you all have ever, have you talked about anything to a process or anything? And so we've talked about it in relation to the situation that you're referencing. It's a bit of a strange thing for us to deal with because we do require developers to put in sidewalks with projects, and we require owners to maintain them, but I don't think we've ever really contemplated what we would do if somebody wanted to remove one. And so I think we need to think about that in reference to both the way our ordinances are constructed and how we would handle those requests in the future and in what situations that that would be inappropriate now. As you said, in a situation where public safety might be a consideration, that certainly should be one of those criteria. But I think we've never really dealt with that issue before, but I think it's something we should have a process in place for. Okay, and I want to have further conversation about that. But, I mean, we know, obviously, code enforcement works with making sure that our sidewalks are kept up to code and repaired. Engineering allows the installation, and so I would think that engineering would be the area of expertise to go down, and then I've actually got some ideas about maybe the infrastructure hearing board being the one to hear it. But I do think that that is something. I can't imagine that there are not other areas of dangerous sidewalk that no amount of improvement or maybe $100,000 would take to repair it. So I appreciate this. And I guess the list that we just received via email, it is color-coded? Yes. Could you reference what the color-coding is, please? The color-codes, just to sort of understand where the sections are, we color-coded it by zone. So there's a downtown zone, inside New Circle, outside New Circle, to understand the different types of projects. It does have a council district column in there that you can sort on that if you're looking for particular projects as well. But the color coding is just a reference to those zones downtown, inside New Circle, and outside New Circle. Okay. All righty. All right. Well, and I do look forward to sending this out on our – I noticed there was several segments over in between Manowar and New Circle Road. So, no, actually between inside New Circle Road. So I'd like to be able to send this information out on our newsletter so that we can get people involved that really do want to take advantage of this. So thank you. Thank you, Mayor. All right. Thank you, Council Member Lamb. Council Member Fred Brown. Thank you, Mayor. This might be a question for Derek. This memo dated April the 14th gives us ranking, and then it has the ranking criteria included, points given for, that you sent out to every council member. Is this policy in the criteria, is this set policy as far as how you are going to rank all the streets? or is this just on the missing streets, or does it have all of them? That criteria was aimed at ranking sections that are missing sidewalks. So if we were to develop a system potentially to understand maybe sidewalk condition, that would probably need to be a separate system. There may actually be some opportunities to use some technology that would help us automate that process a little bit more. Well, I like the idea, and I think this is a good presentation even here. The more we talk about it, the better off we're going to be. I know it's going to go back into committee, but I appreciate this presentation. And as you mentioned there, there is sidewalk request system for all council members if they want to use that for their individual council area, which I have already done on one of my streets. But I think that's good information. You know, I see some problems, though. I think we need to rethink on what we're doing on sidewalks. And I'll give you an example because I know about it. It's Armstrong Mill Road. I am not convinced that I have to do sidewalks on both sides of Armstrong Mill Road. You know, there's talk about doing on both sides, but that's twice the cost. And I'm also not convinced that we just do a sidewalk on some of these roads that we are going to have bicycle and walkways and that type of thing. So have you given, you know, where is our thoughts and our planning to do a 10-foot sidewalk versus a 4-foot sidewalk or so on certain criterias or certain corridors? I think that if you look at the major local projects, which would include something like Armstrong Mill, we should evaluate all those options. In a lot of ways, a multi-use path can be a really good option if you have the space to do so. In other cases, it may not make sense. Sometimes on larger corridors, having sidewalks on both sides is necessary because you don't want people to cross mid-block, and so you really want to make sure you have that connectivity on both sides so you're discouraging people from crossing a 55-mile-per-hour road, for example. So I think on the major local projects, which do require design and planning on an individual basis, we would certainly consider all of those options. And I know for the Armstrong Mills section that we spoke about previously, we've actually generated separate estimates for both sides because that is a constrained corridor that it may actually make sense to only have them on one side for safety reasons and others. And so I think we have to evaluate those types of projects on an individual basis. Well, and I say that in that maybe the plan needs to be more like, say, a pavement management plan where we've got major arterials, we've got collector streets, and we've got residential areas. and then the council members get involved as they see fit in their particular district. And having said that, I think you've got the information coming, but I'm not so sure that we're putting it all together in today's age. Now, the other thing is funding. is there not grants and MPO, federal grants, state grants, that type of grants for sidewalks, pedways, beautification, all this type of thing. Are we actually putting this into our plan process? Yes. And so for the large bike and pedestrian projects that we do, We submit CMAQ applications and a variety of different types of state and federal funding. I think that the local projects on this list would not qualify for those types of projects. A, because they're too small, and B, they're on local roads, generally speaking. The major local projects, like Armstrong Mill, like Liberty Road, those types of projects certainly would qualify, and we should seek those CMAQ grants and others for those types of projects. That being said, we have a pretty full list of CMAQ applications as is, but that should not stop us from seeking those funds from the MPO and other sources. Obviously, just to sum it up, we're not going to get a whole lot done unless we put some dollars behind it. Right, and you can put local money behind it. Your local match on those federal grants is generally going to be 20%, so you still have to have some local money in those projects as well. But depending on the scale of the project, it may make more sense to go with the local funding, which is what we've proposed. Okay, thank you. Council Member Evans. Thank you, Mayor. Yeah, you mentioned Liberty Road, so I'm all favored for the way the list is because I think Liberty Road made it. And it is one of those areas that does not have a sidewalk on either side. And I see pedestrians every day using it, and there are bus stops there. So understanding the concerns about maybe sidewalks that aren't in great condition, but we have so many streets that don't have sidewalks at all that people are using on a daily basis, and they've worn a path into those grassy areas. So I would two cents for what it's worth. I mean, I do think we need to focus just as much on those areas that don't have sidewalks. I was a little confused about how you would use the request system, because would that just be for council or that would be for the public? And then how does that... It's public-facing. It's intended to be used by both the council and anybody in the general public. So anybody can submit requests there and support other people's projects. So it is a public-facing website. So would that end up being the squeaky wheel gets the grease kind of thing? At this point, it's not actually built into the ranking criteria, but what it's intended to do is be a companion to it to help gauge neighborhood support for a project. Anecdotally, I'm aware of missing sidewalk sections that the neighborhood does not want sidewalks constructed there. And so the goal, since we have so many needs, the goal is to try and gather as much information as we can to have the most impactful projects done first. And so I think that gathering that neighborhood support information is just another piece. At this point, we don't know how many people are going to use it. So it could be an incredibly valuable resource that we could build into the ranking criteria. But until we start to gather some information, we don't really know that yet. All right. Thank you. Council Member Gibbs. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Jonathan. I think I'm really happy with what you guys have done. I'm really impressed with your effort to use empirical measures to come up with a plan. here. Did I hear you right? $75 per foot, give or take? Yeah, that's sort of a general estimate that we've used on those local sections. Now, a larger project can be much higher than that, depending on the nature. I just did a quick calculation. I'd figure $500,000 works out to about a mile and a quarter. Have you done that calculation? Yeah, I mean, it's certainly... Is that about right? Yeah. So we've got about a mile and a quarter in the budget. Just wanted to be clear on that. 53 miles and we got a mile and a quarter in there, but I'm happy for the mile and a quarter. The other thing is, what would you do is say you had five houses in a row that didn't have sidewalks and you had one homeowner who didn't want to have a sidewalk? Well, and that's certainly something we'd have to consider as we went into each project. One of our goals of having the request system was to try and gather as much information as we can up front about the general support for that sidewalk. You know, potentially we would just have to treat each case individually to figure out how to deal with those. I mean, it's not dissimilar from any transportation project that can run into those types of issues. Okay, thank you. Thank you, Mayor. Okay. Council Member Masabi. Thank you, Mayor. Hi, Jonathan. Let me ask you one question in reference to what Council Member Evans was asking in reference to the input. But so if I'm a constituent and I live in a neighborhood and I see that box, I'm going to type in my sidewalk, assuming that the reason why I type it in there is because the city's going to come fix it. And we don't fix sidewalks. The neighbors do. I mean, we have some matching grants. But for the most part, the neighborhoods, that's on your own dollar. So that's my concern, the confusion that may lie there where people are thinking, well, yeah, I went ahead and put it in there, and Jennifer, how come it's not done? And we can certainly add some language to that if you would like to. you know, it's specifically sort of crafted to lead you to, I want new sidewalks, but I can understand certainly you make a valid point about that. I mean, there are, I walk every day, and there are a lot of sidewalks, I mean, that need to be repaired, especially in these older subdivisions, and I'm afraid that the conception is going to be that, oh, yeah, if I put it in, they're going to come do it, and guess what? Where are you? Just like the roads that need to be paved. So I think we need to be real careful with that, how you're going to roll it out. And we can certainly put sort of an intermediate alert in there that lets you know what the system is supposed to be. False expectations. Very good, Mayor. Exactly. Thank you. Okay. Council Member Hensley. Thank you, Mayor. I guess echoing what Council Member Brown was saying about the approach to a pavement management system, Have we explored, are there software modules that we could add on to the pavement management system that we are using to work in conjunction with this to measure sidewalks? I'm certainly not an expert on it, but I do know that other communities do have software that collects the pavement rankings and the sidewalk condition rankings simultaneously. And so I'm not sure if our particular vendor has that capability, but it does exist. Okay. I would suggest that we explore that and collect the data in the same thing. I applaud the crowdsourcing effort using GitHub. That was excellent. But that was my only thought was if we had a more structured and methodical way to get that data in the future, if it, by it on a module, that would be great. Thank you. All right. That's all the questions. Thank you, Jonathan. Thanks very much. Next on our agenda is Council Reports. If you'll please sign on. Council Member Maloney. Thank you, Mayor. Just after reading the article in the paper today about Bluegrass Ad, it really seems like we're going nowhere with them. It seems like we're going backwards after reading the article today and talking to some of my colleagues, and what I like to do is make a motion that we put it in a committee to see what options we have with Bluegrass Ed, even not just the Bluegrass Ed, but also with the workforce, to see what options from the law department give us their recommendation, what options we have, and also the administration. because I also want to go on record to say this is not a political motive to report to some of the county judges think we're using this as a political motive. It's not. People need to realize, I know we all talk about the center point and the hole. The real hole is the workforce and the jobs and the people being left out. And reading the article of what they did today using that money, possibly the program, It just shows me that they're not really looking out for the best interest of Fayette County or their own constituents. So I would like to make the motion that we put it in the General Service Committee to look at the options of Bluegrass Add and also Workforce and have Law come back and give us what options we have for that and also the administration, too. So move. Motion by Council Member Maloney to refer to committee. Second by Council Member Lamb. Is there any discussion on the motion? Mayor. Council Member Stennett. Council Member Maloney, are you saying when you say workforce, you mean as it relates to our utilization of the Bluegrass ad? Is that only? Not the whole workforce picture? No, just the Bluegrass ad. Just Bluegrass, because the workforce issue is in my committee, and we'll actually hear it in June. I just want to see the options we have. Just with Bluegrass Add. Right. Okay. Thank you. All right. Council Member Brown. Yeah. Kevin, I'd like to ask Kevin a question related to the motion. Do you see any problem there with this? I mean, this is kind of a general motion maybe in getting the information, and I know you're really involved. In fact, you're on the board. So do you see any real problems with us, you know, just kind of getting some more information and being aware of what's going on? No, I don't want to put you on the spot. No, I appreciate the question. I think we would want to do it in a way where we would hope to have their participation in the process as well and see if, you know, we can strengthen certain positions. Okay. Thank you. All right. Council Member Lamb. Thanks. And I do want to recognize that we already have the issue of inviting Bluegrass Add to the committee, and I think this tag teams onto that to have further discussion and allow for further discussion, but also to have our administration to be able to discuss more about the workforce dollars as we move forward. So I hope my colleagues will support this motion. All right. Anybody else? All right. Then we can vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. All right. Council Member Gibbs. Thank you, Mayor. I've got a couple things. First, I have a motion I'd like to make. I move to schedule a public hearing on the fiscal year 2017 proposed budget for the downtown Lexington Management District on Thursday, June 16, 2016 at 6 p.m. in the Council Chambers, second floor Government Center, 200 East Main Street, Lexington, Kentucky, to receive public comment regarding the budget. This hearing is required by state law and the ordinance in creating the district. A separate presentation of the budget by the district will be scheduled by the Council Administrator for the Council Work Session on June 14, 2016. So moved. Second. Motion by Council Member Gibbs and second by Council Member Lamb. 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. Okay. And the other thing is I'd just like to quickly commend the environmental quality people for their hazardous waste disposal day a couple of weeks ago. I was probably taking a nap, so my wife took a carload of stuff out there, and she said it was really well organized with lots of really friendly, efficient people, and she came home with a bunch of flyers on recycling and other issues that were really informative. So I was very, very impressed. And if it wasn't happening, I would have gone myself. But thank you, Mayor. All right. Thank you, Council Member Gibbs. Council Member Evans. Thank you, Mayor. Just briefly, I would give a little report about my trip to Ireland. I was there in the mayor's stead for the Sister Cities Mayor's Summit that Ireland and the United States decided to have. And it was really interesting. There are mayors from all over Ireland and from cities all over the United States, and council members as well, and representatives from other sister cities, ambassadors, members of their board. And it was really just a discussion about how, well, the title for it was Independence and Interdependence, which just kind of summed up that how we're all different cities and different countries, but we're still very dependent on each other and how we can learn from each other. We had the mayor from Guadalajara was a guest speaker, and he really talked about how Sister Cities has helped him in getting ideas in what we can do together to help all of our citizens. And one of the highlights, I think, was that the president of Ireland came and spoke and was very inspiring and, I guess, charging us to not just be passive participants, but active citizens. Not the exact quote, but that's close to it. And how we, as civil servants, can help improve the livelihood, the daily lives of the citizens that we serve. So he was very inspiring. And just, again, how culturally we can, how cultural exchanges can increase our economic development for our cities. And they had several different speakers on that, including, which was probably one of the more entertaining ones, the director of pop culture for people, the director of 50 Cent's Get Rich or Die Tryin'. Yeah, he was really interesting. but talking about how he kind of grew up in that same kind of neighborhood as 50 Cent did. And, you know, you've got this older gentleman with this thick Irish accent, but talking about how he completely understood that kind of lifestyle, that kind of attitude mentality. So it was really intriguing, and I want to thank the mayor for allowing me to go in your place and meet diplomats from all over the country and the world, actually. So it was very, very encouraging, very enlightening. And hopefully we all came back, our sister city's delegate came back with some ideas to help bring the world to Lexington and vice versa. So thank you. Thank you, Council Member Lamb. Thank you, Mayor. I was not in Ireland, but I was actually at the Arboretum on Saturday. We celebrated the 25th anniversary of Arbor Day, and I was so pleased and honored to get to deliver the proclamation, and also was joined by my colleague, Councilmember Gibbs, who actually gave an update on the tree canopy committee. and we had an outstanding crowd regardless of the rain, and we also had an outstanding performance by the Glendover 4th and 5th grade chorus, and they sang two beautiful songs and inspired everybody to continue going out into the rain and to look at plants and plant trees and have a lot of fun. So it was a great opportunity and a good celebration, and I look forward to many more of those. So thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Council Member Lamb. Council Member Massadi. Thank you, Mayor. Most of you have probably seen on the news that there was an accident yesterday on Manowar Boulevard involving one of our firefighters and another vehicle, and unfortunately the person driving the other vehicle succumbed. Unfortunately, again, as I said, he did not survive the injuries, but my condolences to his family, but also to say that those firefighters from Station 15 certainly did their best to help their comrade out there. I guess they had to get the jaws of life to get him out of the fire truck, and I'm happy to say that he is doing well and that he is at UK now, but I guess we just all need to be careful. I mean, you just never know when someone either has an, I don't know what the incident was that caused the accident, but pay attention when you drive and be careful and just heed the rules of the road because even driving one of those big trucks, you can get hurt pretty bad. But on a good note, I spent the weekend at Rolex, and that's one of my favorite events here in Lexington. And even though it was pouring down rain, we had 34,000 people out there watching those horses compete. And if you've never been there, it's phenomenal to see those kind of athletes both riding the horses and the horses itself. So that was a lot of fun. And lastly, this week is, I believe May 3rd is National Teacher Appreciation Day. And so the week is May 2nd to 6th. So teachers, you know, play a real crucial role in our system and shaping our children. And, you know, they're basically our superheroes. So if you know of a teacher, give them a thumbs up or thank them for all that they do because they really make a difference in our lives. That's all, Mayor. Thank you, Council Member Asadi. Council Member Maloney. Mayor, I also want to follow up with Council Member Evans' report. I want to thank you, too. I had an opportunity to meet with a lot of mayors. And one mayor, I got to go to the aquatic that they just built, cost 45 million pounds, which is $90 million, American dollars. It was pretty impressive. I mean, they had everything in there because of the climate they have. and they got the training for the winter, for the Olympics swimmers. It was pretty impressive. The town was only about 100,000 people in that town, but what they paid for that was amazing. They had great taxes, and then also they got some of the money from Northern Ireland's government for the event. Also finding out a couple things, a lot of similarities, the problems that we have in our city where they have a lot of hearing problems. Drugs is a big issue over there. And gangs. And we had a lot of conversations talking about what our police department has. Homeless is a big issue. After what I heard yesterday on ours, I'd be glad to report to the folks that I met over there about the homeless issues. The homeless is a major issue over there. There's a lot of people that just losing jobs has been a problem, but a lot of people that are always going to be homeless. But it's a beautiful city, and we got to sit there for the week they had their 100th anniversary for their Easter week. And most of you all know what Easter week is, and to see what they had to go through. And I was honored to be there at that time to learn about my family from Ireland and got to see what they had to go through. But the Sister City program is great. I met some people. One of the ambassadors that's employed for the ambassador went through our Sister City program, and that was back in 1990. So I got to meet her, and it was a real good ask. I had to meet her because, as you all know, I had a little problem with my passport, but they got it straightened out. But Sister City is a great program. Everybody commends it, and I just hope we continue on working in education. Thank you, Mayor. All right. Thank you, Council Member Maloney. That's all who've signed up for council reports. That allows us to move on the agenda. There's no mayor's report today. And it allows us to move to public comment for issues not on the agenda. And first is Edward Crutchfield, Mr. Crutchfield. Mr. Crutchfield, while you're coming to the podium, I'll just share with you the council rules on public comment. You're allowed three minutes. Thank you, sir. How you doing, Mr. Mayor? If you need to go on, then a council member may make a motion to extend it if you need more than three minutes. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you, council, for allowing me to have an audience this afternoon. I want to talk about Lex Tran and Gaglison Park. there's no transit system there's no public transportation to Jacobson Park and Jacobson Park has they're having this new construction going they're expanding the playground and all this kind of stuff I'm originally from District 1 in the east end side of Lexington and a lot of those children don't have their parents don't have cars and matter of fact they get to work and back and forth to work on public transportation. And if they had a public transportation, maybe they would be able to, the kids would be, they would be able to take their kids to the park. It might be the only way they can get to the park, you know what I'm saying? And I've talked to Lex Tran before, and they said something about budget thing, and they would take it to the board, and then they would let me know, something I never got back with, Ms. Butler, whoever. But the thing is, there's a bus route. There's already a bus number 11. It's a Richmond Road bus. And it goes, it's route 11. It goes all the way to Eagle Creek. Eagle Creek is out of Richmond Road. And Eagle Creek, according to Google, is 2.1 miles from the entrance of Jacobson Park. It's like right up the street, you know. And if that could be expanded, if that route could be expanded just for a little bit, then the people in the city of Lexington who don't have cars with their children could be able to enjoy the park. You know what I mean? Even if you use that idea for just a few months out of the year, just for the summer months, or maybe just for the weekends in the summer months, just for the weekends. You could even try to use it as maybe a couple of months trial run to see if people would even, if it's a viable thing, somebody would even use it. If you use it on the Lex Tran buses, they have the little public service announcements. If they had it on Lex Tran bus and then they were opening, there was an option for Jackson Park, then more people would know about it. If more people knew about it, then more people would go, or more people would maybe go, you know, and then it wouldn't be, well, we did that, and it wasn't that many people, so we're not going to do it. And a lot of that's because a lot of people don't know about it or may not know about it, you know what I mean? I mean, they got fishing out there. They got volleyball out there. They got basketball out there. They got the shelters out there. They got a lot of things that are, well, especially fishing that you can't do at like a park like Douglas Park in West End, you know. We have swimming everywhere, but we don't have no fishing. I mean, fishing is fishing, man, and it's just fishing. You know, and that's the only place you can really go fishing. And I was hoping maybe that Lex Tran could maybe come up with something, just to try something for the summer, you know, for the kids in the city that parents don't have cars. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you, sir. Very good. Yeah. And we will. Mr. Crutchfield, we'll look into that and we'll get back with you on it. All right. All right. Yes, sir. Mr. Gerard Gearhard. I was here a while back complaining, I guess you'd say, about the lack of response on a letter that I sent to the Director of Traffic Engineering there's now been a response, I find the response to be deficient, I'm concerned about a safety location what I consider a safety problem on Appian Way I think the response of the engineering vision is demonstrably deficient. I've circulated a letter, I assume it was passed out to you, a letter that I issued today. I've sent the director a letter and copied other people. I would just ask the council to be aware of my letter and maybe if you have time, glance through it and see what it is that I'm trying to suggest. It just seems to me that it It would be easy to improve the warning at that location, and what they've done so far is, again, without getting in details, deficient. That's all I have. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Gearheart. All right. That's all who signed up for public comment. That allows me to ask for a motion to adjourn. Motion to adjourn by Council Member Stennett and second by Council Member Massadi. Unless there's objection, we are adjourned. Thank you. I'm too ashamed to let them know you make me cry. And you've got your little ways to hurt me. You know just how to tear me up. Leave me in small pieces on the ground. You've got your little ways. They're hurting me, they're not too big, but they're real tough. Just one cold look from you could knock me down. Yeah, your little ways could knock me to the ground. Oh, yeah. Do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do For a moment in time And it seemed everlasting Thought you would always be mine Now you wanna be free So I'll let you fly Cause I know in my heart, babe Our love will never die, no You'll always be a part of me