Hm. Yeah. Mm. Mm. Mm. We could go ahead and call the meeting to order. We'll try to get on down the agenda. The first item on today's agenda is public comment on issues that are on the agenda. Does anyone wish to address the council? Seeing none, we'll move along. We do have a docket for approval today. I move approval, Mayor. Second. Thank you very much. Motion by Councilmember Stephens and a second by Councilmember Gordon to approve the docket. Any discussion? Then those in favor of approving the docket, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. We also have the April 29th summary for approval. Do we have a motion by Councilmember DeCamp and a second by Councilmember Beard to approve the summary of the April 29th meeting. Any discussion? I see none. So those in favor, please vote aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. We have a few budget amendments. Move approval. Councilmember Gordon has moved and Councilmember Myers has seconded that the budget amendments be approved. Any discussion? Those in favor of approving the budget amendments, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. That takes us down to the items of new business. The floor is open for a motion to approve those items. Councilmember Beard has moved approval of the items of new business. Councilmember Blues has seconded that motion. Any discussion? Very well. Those in favor, please vote aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Brings us down to the presentations, the first of which is a report from the Committee of the Whole. And I'm not sure, Vice Mayor Gray, is that your report? Yeah. Well, I think I can summarize this quickly. The Committee of the Whole has met most recently today and received a report from Commissioner Coe on capital projects and debt. And that meeting occurred actually this morning at 1130. And there are some follow-up – there will be some follow-up reports from Commissioner Coe to the Committee of the Whole. Does anyone have to add anything to what I've said so far? Is that good? Okay. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you very much. Councilmember Gordon. Vice Mayor, I just had a comment in the summary. The summary said that I had requested the names of all government employees who were at the top of their range, and I actually don't want the names. I just wanted the number of employees who are at the top of the range and will not get a pay increase under the current proposal. I don't need names. Thank you. Any further items for Vice Mayor Gray? Thank you very much. Mr. Hancock, I'll turn the podium over to you for an introduction. Thank you, Mayor, Vice Mayor, Councilmembers. It's my pleasure today to introduce some pretty special people to you who have done something rather extraordinary here in Lexington and deserve a couple minutes of your attention. They've done something that we can all be very proud of, particularly how hard it was and how they represent us nationally in an outstanding way. But to introduce them and their program directors, let me introduce someone from Parks who's also rather extraordinary. Evelyn Bologna is a superintendent of special programs who has been involved with and has been the director of the Bluegrass Wheelchair Basketball Championship for 28 years. So, Evelyn is here to carry out the program and introduce our star players here. Evelyn? You're aging me, Jerry. I know you were going to taunt how old I was, Jerry. Good afternoon, Mayor, Vice Mayor, and Councilmembers. I appreciate you allowing us to come here today and introduce some, it's really, you know, some great players. Some of them I've known for a long time, but it's my great pleasure this afternoon to introduce you to some outstanding athletes from our community and region. We have with us today, over in this corner over here, members of the 2008 National Wheelchair Basketball Association's Division III National Championship Team, Heel on Wheels. This team was formed a mere six years ago. Three years ago, they were ranked 17th in the country. Last year, they finished fifth, and this year they are number one. So, we're excited about that. The pictures that you're going to be seeing, that we're going to go up here in just a second that you'll see, just show some of the team's road to success this season, culminating in their championship victory in March in Columbus, Ohio. They earned this honor by coming out on top in a field of 26 teams from across the United States. So, they didn't have to just, it wasn't like the Final Four, they didn't have to beat just four teams, they had to come out on top of 26 teams from across the country. The Heel on Wheels team is sponsored by Cardinal Hill Rehabilitation Hospital and is coached by Julie Duncan, Director of Spinal Cord Injury, Recreation, and Athletics for Cardinal Hill, who formed this team about six years ago, I think. Before I introduce Julie and ask her to come up and introduce the athletes that are present, I would like to recognize someone else here from Cardinal Hill. I would like to recognize Beth Monarch. Beth, if you would stand, please. Thank you. Beth is the Executive Vice President, Chief Operating Officer of Cardinal Hill. I think I got that right, Beth. I would, before we introduce, before I let Julie come up and introduce the team, I would like to just give you a very brief, and I promise I'll be brief, overview of the outstanding long-term relationship that the LFUCG's Division of Parks and Recreation's Therapeutic Recreation Section has had with Cardinal Hill over the years. The Division of Parks and Recreation, as Jerry mentioned earlier, coordinates the annual Bluegrass Invitational Wheelchair Basketball Tournament. I know that's a mouthful, but it draws 20 of the top Division II and Division III teams from all over the country. For most of the past 30 years of that tournament that we have been hosting that tournament that long, Cardinal Hill has played a significant role in its success with its sponsorship, its in-kind contributions, volunteers, Beth can always be seen at the scores table during the tournament, so we're appreciative of that as well, and the involvement of the Hill on Wheels team as the host city team and Coach Julie Duncan as a member of the organizing committee. So as you can see, this has been a true cooperative effort between our division and Cardinal Hill to promote this sport. For the past three years, Parks and Recreation has reciprocated in assisting Cardinal Hill and Coach Duncan in a similar endeavor by providing assistance with the National Wheelchair Basketball Tournament for Division I and II that was held here in Lexington for the past three years. So that, again, was a national competition that came here. Just recently, Parks and Recreation and Cardinal Hill have teamed up again in providing an adaptive golf clinic in order to build the future utilization of golf in the rehabilitation process at Cardinal Hill. Parks and Recreation recently purchased five accessible golf carts for this purpose and for the community use and access. So I am very excited about this continued relationship with Cardinal Hill and Coach Duncan and with the team, and I look forward to much continued success of the team. Now that you all have done the best that you could ever do, well, you know, we've got all this every year, but we are really excited for all the athletes on the Hill on Wheels team, for the Cardinal Hill, for the coach, for Julie, and for all the staff and all the support folks that she has with her group. And we're just very excited just to be here today to honor and to recognize them. At this time, I'm going to ask Julie Duncan, the head coach, if she would come up, and she's going to actually introduce the players that are here today and make any remarks that she'd like to make. Once the introductions have been made, if it's okay, I would like to present to the team, on behalf of Parks and Recreation, as our way of saying thanks and congratulations and all that, we've had a national championship banner that we've made, and we would like to present that to them and have them display it, hopefully, at Cardinal Hill, and then hopefully get maybe a picture, if that would be okay with you all. So, Julie, welcome. Thanks, Beth. Thank you very much. It's an honor and a privilege to be here, and it's an honor to present Cardinal Hill, the city of Lexington, and the state of Kentucky, the very first national championship ever achieved in wheelchair basketball. So, I'll ask the guys, as I introduce them, to come to the front so that you can get them, know who they are. I'll start with our rookie, Kelvin Combs. And Kelvin, this is his very first year playing wheelchair ball with us, so we may have to keep him around, because we did win a national championship with him here. And he really helped us a lot in practice and getting ready for that. David Hartzik started the season with us and then had a shoulder injury. You may recognize David. He teaches tennis for the Parks Department, as well, so we appreciate all his efforts. Justin Warren Harris is one of our guards who has made incredible progress. He is a serious gym rat. He eats, drinks, and sleeps basketball worse than I do, but really has really peaked this year, gave us some, you know, 40 minutes every game. And as Evelyn was saying, we had to work our way through 26 teams. We played five games in three days. And the first, we defeated Cleveland. We defeated them pretty soundly. Then we beat the number two-seeded team, Fort Wayne, by one point a last-second shot. Then we beat the number one team, Moran, which is kind of like a U.K. Duke rivalry there, so we were very happy to win that game by one point, last-second shot. And then defeated Port City. We actually beat them twice. And they were a two-time national champion, so we were excited about that. Bob Davis, who is a forward, gives us some good baskets, but his key is defense. He really works and sets screens and really works the floor well, and he's one of our captains, so we're very happy with all his efforts on the defensive end. Dennis Ogbe, who is a gentleman who we are really happy to have. Dennis, he came back to us. He started with us three or four years ago, took a break, fell in love, you know, got married, decided to get a master's degree. You know, his priorities, now they're back. Now he's back to basketball. Really helped us a lot coming off the bench, his speed and his height in the lane. You saw several pictures of him and a lot of crashing and banging going on there, so we appreciated that. Last but not least, player-wise, is Jim Green. And Jim was a member of the all-tournament team for the national tournament. And it was a close call. One of our other players, Joe Wittkamp, was named MVP. It was a close call if it was going to be Jimmy or Joe. They worked well. He scored, out of those five games, four of those games, Jimmy scored 25 points in each game. So he's an incredible ball player and will also represent our state at the wheelchair vet games in July in Omaha, Nebraska. So we are very appreciative of that as well, as he is a veteran. I would like to introduce Ada Marie Johnson, who her job was to try to keep me from getting in trouble on the bench. And every so often, I'd feel somebody grabbing my leg. Sit down, Julie. Sit down, Julie. She joined us this year as well as our equipment person and just basically did everything that we needed. So again, we could not do this without the support of the city and, you know, of course, Cardinal Hill. But it's such a great, it's the ultimate community partnership. I can't say enough, you know, Jackie and Alana and Angie are all here. We've worked together for a long time. Evelyn and I started out together 25 years ago, which is amazing since we're both only 29. So but we started out together and there's not a finer person in this world than Evelyn Bologna and her dedication to this sport and to this city. So we thank you and we would love, we'll even let you hold the trophy, Mr. Mayor. So thank you very much. Thank you. Okay. We do not show it on the agenda today, but I think there has been some communication from Commissioner Askew about the presentation today by FM Solutions and I believe you all have been given copies of a presentation that they'd like to present. Part of it is a matter of public record, part of it is not. And I'd like to go ahead and have the folks from, well, I guess Mike Webb come forward and introduce all the folks from FM Solutions. I would ask the Council, in light of the significance of this information, that we be a little lenient with the 15-minute requirement today so that we can have as comprehensive an understanding of the issue as possible. So if there's no objection to that, we'll turn it over to Mike. Thank you, Mayor, Vice Mayor, Council members. And as part of the 2008 budget, an RFP was created to do a real estate study or facility study of a group of downtown facilities. After going through the applicants, Facilities Management Solutions was selected as the consultant who best fit the needs that we felt we had. The contract was approved by the Council and early this year, Facilities Management Solutions went to work on that contract and they're now here today to do a presentation on the study that they did in the report. I'd like to introduce those folks to you. We have Curtis Slyfe, President of Facilities Management Solutions, and two team members that we work very closely with, Peggy Lundeen and Bubba Benz. With that, I'll turn it over to them for the presentation. Thank you. It's very nice to be here today. My first slide, I'd just like to go through the agenda. We would like to go through the facilities planning process that we went through, and several members of the county helped us through this. Operations and Maintenance, Facility Condition Levels, Space Utilization, Scenario Development, Preferred Scenario, the Financial Impacts of this Scenario, and Keys to Maintaining a Master Plan. The buildings included in this study were the Government Center, Building and the Garage, Police Headquarters, Government Center Annex, Phoenix Building, Annex Garage, Phoenix Garage, Public Safety Lease, the Kentucky Theater, State Theater, and Soweto Building. This is the planning process that we went through. The weeks that we were in town, we asked that Mike create a steering committee for us. They helped us get through some of the policies in Lexington, where our sounding board, as we came up with new ideas, whether they would be appropriate or not appropriate, and also we wanted them to be the cheerleaders and enroll others in our master plan. This is our planning process. Phase 1, before we even got into town, we had a two-page list of things we wanted to look at before we got here. So we had some existing documentation. We interviewed Don Blevins, Renee True, some of you council members, several commissioners, department heads, some of the administrative staff, and the maintenance team. We like to interview across different levels because at different levels of the organization, the buildings mean different things. We also did some high-level facility assessments. We walked through all the buildings from the basements to the roof. With the steering committee, we created a mission and goals, guiding principles, and a priority evaluation matrix, which you will see in just a minute. We also created some developmental tools that Mike and his staff will be able to use in the future, the gross square feet per person target and planning formulas. Then we went through some workshops. We had three workshops that were three hours long. The next phase was exploring alternatives. From the workshops, we created four scenarios. The steering committee met and saw the scenarios and decided on a winning scenario, if you will. We priced that scenario. We wrote a report, which is the action plan, and we're presenting it to you today. The future vision is the implementation of the scenario. These are the initial observations. There was a real excitement surrounding the compatibility of the council and the administration when we were interviewing people. The downtown facilities are conveniently located to serve the citizens. The service ethic is strong and very customer service oriented. There is a strong sense of leadership, establishing an accountable culture, and that's the way we've always done it. As we were walking through, we also saw some improvement opportunities. We need to address deferred maintenance in the downtown facilities, look at the space utilization in those facilities, address the current and future functionality of the data center, develop and adopt a set of facility standards, and address some growing concerns in the police headquarters. With the steering committee, we created a mission and goals, and this is what we were here to work on, provide the government with a plan that optimizes facilities to promote the delivery of quality services to its public in a manner that is efficient and accessible. That is the mission, and as we went through this process, this is what we kept in mind. We also had some goals to optimize the space, provide flexibility, and implement facility improvements so your investments would stay valuable. We also looked at guiding principles, the location perception and image, site consolidations that enhances your services, adaptability and functionality to improve the efficient use of assets, and economic business factors. With the steering committee, we used the guiding principles that you just looked at to create an importance weighting factor, so when we judged the scenarios, later on, ahead of time, we already had a weighting factor, so if somebody liked a scenario better than another, this weighting factor took into consideration the goals and principles we had. Location and perception, 27%, site consolidation, 16%, adaptability and functionality, 26%, and the number one economic business factors, which I'm sure isn't a surprise to you all, 31%. The square footage that we looked at in these downtown facilities is 536,000 square feet. That included the space in the buildings and also the garage square footage. The total value of those assets is $55.2 million. This doesn't include the land that those buildings are on, and it doesn't include the furniture, fixtures, or equipment inside. What this would be is if one of the buildings burned down, this would be the replacement cost. So it's just a portion of the actual value of these total buildings. Part of what we do is we look at several different things about the buildings. One of those is the operations and maintenance. We benchmark for some 20 years with the facility manager roundtable. What you're seeing here is Lexington is in white, and the facility manager roundtable is green. The cost for your utilities per gross square feet is $5.00, I'm sorry, $2.53 square feet, 53 cents. The maintenance costs are $2.07, and the custodial costs are $2.20. We've broken this down per building. The red line is the facility manager's roundtable average, and the green is per building. So you can see some of the utility costs are lower than the average, and two of the buildings are higher. The maintenance costs, these are the things to maintain your buildings, HVAC, things like that. These are the costs for those four buildings. If you'll notice in this, in the government center annex, the county clerk actually provides some of the maintenance services. This cost is probably higher, but these are the costs that we could actually document. These are the custodial costs per building. We also have this slide, it just takes all three of those numbers and puts them together, and you can see where they are compared to the facility manager's roundtable. The total annual operating costs of each building. There's quite a large net difference at $668,000. When we were walking through the buildings, we also just took some photos, and these are photos that we took in this building. I want to explain a little bit about a facility condition level. The first two numbers are predictive and preventive maintenance, that's number one. Number two would be preventive maintenance and pretty much keeping your building in good condition. Number three is doing some reactive maintenance, which means once something is broken down, that's when you fix it, and this is kind of the medium range. And the last two are things that are wearing out and they're not being taken care of. We've also looked at those in your buildings, the deferred maintenance value, the capital replacement value, the facility condition index, and the facility condition level of your buildings. These are a bit subjective, but they are industry standard. Good afternoon. We also benchmarked the space utilization within your downtown facilities on top of the O&M. And to do this, again, we used the Facility Management Roundtable. Just a little more insight on what this group is. Its members include large corporations, government entities, and utility companies from across the nation. To include Nike, your Honeywells, your Fortune 500 companies. And participation ranges from 75 to 100 sites, totaling 160 to 225 million square feet annually, and that changes year to year depending on who's participating for that year. Basically, the FMRT suggests a planning ratio of 300 to 400 gross square feet per employee. That's for administrative type space. That's what you think of as typical office space, a building like this. And that 300 to 400 gross square feet would include your portion of your office, the conference rooms, the corridor, the restrooms. That's a gross square foot number from outside wall to outside wall. That's the entire building. So this chart just kind of gives you a high-level overview of where your downtown facilities are, space utilization-wise. The high, let's see, the public safety lease, that's the yellow line up top. That shows as the most underutilized building at almost 550 gross square feet per person. The most overutilized building currently is the government center annex. That's right on the lower threshold of your gross square foot target range of 300 to 400 gross square feet. This chart will basically give us a high-level view of where buildings will be after 10 years of growth. This is with the assumption of 1% historical growth per year. And if you can see, like, the government center, that's the red bar. That looks to be right on track after 10 years of growth. So this, you can either move employees from overutilized buildings to underutilized buildings and vice versa. This next chart goes over the same type of information, just relays it in a different way. The white bar is your target gross square footage for the current occupant load of that building. The blue bar is your actual gross square footage. And then the red bar would be the over and or underutilized square footage of that building. So according to this chart, you currently already have three buildings that are already feeling tight on space and are being overutilized. And then after 10 years, it just accounts with the 1% growth annually for 10 years. It just shows you what that does to your target gross square foot totals. Now, this space was converted into a capital value or replacement value. The government center, if you notice two slides back, currently has 20,000 square feet of underutilized space. That equates to about $2.7 million. That's the capital value of that underutilized space. On the flip side, the red bars show overutilized space. For instance, the police headquarters is about $1.1 million. If you were to construct a building to accommodate the overutilized space in that building, that's what it would cost. And again, these numbers increase after 10 years of growth. Okay, now we're just going to talk a little bit about how we developed these scenarios for the downtown master plan. There was three workshops basically where we took the participants through the same type of information we've gone through here today. Each group was given the same set of criteria to use during brainstorming. Participants were derived from a cross section of the county so we can kind of get everyone's input on who should go where, why, when, how. And the workshop participants, here's a quick list of who all participated. And then this is just kind of the process they go through of exploring alternatives. Basically, we take them through two extremes. There's retain all your buildings, remain in your current spaces, address your deferred maintenance, remain in your inefficient office space. There's also buy new buildings or build new buildings. And then usually we end up somewhere in between there, stay in some buildings, maybe buy some, lease some. So this just kind of shows the various options that they were taken through. Okay, a total of four scenarios were actually developed from the workshops. Each scenario was then evaluated using the evaluation matrix, which Peg had spoke about earlier. After that evaluation was complete, scenarios one and two had prevailed as the preferred scenarios, but they were pretty close score wise. So we had a gut check with the steering committee. We asked them, did this feel right? Does this feel good to you? We asked them which portions of scenario one they like, which portions of scenario two they like. And we actually created a scenario five, which combined the best of scenario one and scenario two, which ended up being the preferred scenario, which we'll talk about momentarily. And Curtis is going to go through the detailed scenarios. Hi. Scenario one kind of focused on, and again, when we got together at this workshop, it was a real interactive session. And I'd really acknowledge the staff's participation in development of this and all of these. Probably the best government group that we've ever worked with in terms of a collaboration process, willingness to help us. Scenario one, though, focused on, you know, how to, it focused on where should we put kind of a centralized facility. And it kind of started with that. So we looked at the land of the, that we already own. And so we took that scenario, right where the police is and right where the annex and the garage is. We took that and said, hey, that might be a good place to spot some centralized facility. And if we do that, we need to move out all of those people. So what you've got in front of you is kind of the logistics of how we would accomplish that. In the interviews, we found out that the police headquarters was assumed that it needed to be downtown. And the reason for that is there needed to be a presence of security, of safety, and that. And we found out that police headquarters, a lot of it was administration. So it wasn't really providing that, not necessarily that policeman that you normally think. And so there was a distinction, and in fact, the chief was in a lot of, was in our workshop. There was kind of a distinction made between a portion that would provide that safety downtown and then what he called more of an administration group. And so most all these scenarios you'll find have taken the police administration group and moved them to a new facility outside of downtown. So we needed to move them downtown, I mean outside of downtown, to facilitate getting out of that space. We then took the clerk and we put him in a leased type facility for a period of time. We bought 4.5 acres in this case because we needed to download the parking structure. We needed a place to park while we were using this. So what we did is we sent 4.5 acres a little bit outside, make it parked, make a parking ground, and let's look at sustainability where we're busing those people in while this is occurring. So that then allows you to totally tear down that complex, and it basically allows you then to build a new facility that would accommodate the people in the government center. It would accommodate the clerk and accommodate basically everybody downtown, but the Phoenix building would remain. We would then turn around once that's done and basically demo the annex. Well, I'm sorry, then we would basically sell this building was the concept. Scenario two took a little different approach because scenario one was viewed as gosh, that's a lot of logistics, handling people around. And so the concept here was to buy a piece of property that's downtown but not the same property, buy a brand new piece of property, and then build an eight-story building there and construct a four-story parking garage there and then start to move the people in. We did look at, though, this whole new issue of sustainability seemed to be really important. Why, with parking structures, when you're building them at $15,000 to $20,000 a stall, you know, that seemed to be a real high price to pay for parking. So the key issue was how can we be a little more sustainable? How can we download some of the traffic that may be downtown and allow actually the customer to come to our services a little easier? And so this whole idea of almost like a park and ride became, again, one momentum in each workshop from a perspective of park outside the town a little bit on paved areas, and let's start bussing them in or shuttling them in, and then maybe the whole downtown starts to adopt that kind of an approach. And it is definitely lead-compatible, that kind of approach. So that's kind of where scenario two was going and actually all the scenarios ended up with. But in scenario two, we actually took and we put the clerk outside the area. I think it's called the Circle. Okay. And basically, we passed that by him, and he seemed to think that that was a pretty decent place to also put his operation. And that kind of completed scenario two. Scenario three was do nothing. It's kind of one of those, gosh, you know, we don't have this kind of money. I mean, FM Solutions, you know, what are you doing? We can't provide this. And so we kind of did an analysis that we think that's important to consider, and that is if we do nothing, we still have to accommodate the growth that Bubba showed you. We still have to accommodate, from our perspective, deferred maintenance, and you still have to bring your buildings up to code because you're going to be developing them in some manner. So you've got to do those three things. And the question is, what does do nothing do? I mean, what does it cost? So if you maintain everything in this building, but you kind of jumble all of the spaces around, but you still bring up some of the things to code, that still costs money. And quite a bit of money in this particular case is because there is quite a bit of deferred maintenance. You do have growth, and there are codes that you have to bring everything up to par in. And then you have scenario four. Scenario four we thought was real interesting, and we went and visited the Chase building that's across the street. We took a look at it, and we actually did a little bit of a walkthrough and a due diligence on it as well. And we wanted to try to develop Chase building because we wanted to develop it in such a way that it was comparable to scenario one and two and brought that up to date as far as any deferred maintenance that we saw there. And so the logistics was less, but you can see the cost is pretty comparable to the others. And then, as Bubba said, you know, we did a gut check with the whole group. And the things that they liked about all of the groups, we had kind of like electronically developed all these costs so you could grab scenarios and kind of tweak it and put it in and insert it. And so you'd get a cost, and you could see how that all interacted. And really what we ended up with was something I thought was real powerful. And quite frankly, as a consultant firm that does this all the time, we find so many creative ideas that come out of your own given staff because they know how they function. They know how they operate. All of those things are there. And this was, I think, pretty outstanding. And that was basically it takes advantage of all your land, and it really takes the headquarters out, as I said. It takes the clerk, and we initially thought put it in four different areas, but we decided, you know, from a cost perspective, let's put them in one area. And then let's centralize everybody into one building that's located where the police headquarters and the annex is to include the Phoenix building so that we've got one place for the government downtown. There's no confusion. Let's bring in parking for 50% of the employees. And we say 50% because the challenge there is 50% of the employees and 100% of your customers. And that kind of forces an issue that relates to kind of the sustainable issue where you do the park and ride, and you do kind of start to establish the need for the shuttling, the need for that to be downtown, and the ability for your whole public downtown to kind of subscribe to that. And then that also gives you the ability to sell this particular building, to sell the Phoenix building. And what we see out of both of those is we see a market for it because we have checked with your local realtors. And we see a way of getting you out of a building that probably isn't as compatible as it needs to be for you, both on an O&M perspective, operation of maintenance perspective, capital. And then when you get into some of the capital renewal concepts that I'll show you in a minute, it's really the best value, we believe. Then you have to compare this against, well, what about do nothing? And we have to look at that because we understand that money doesn't come cheap, you know. It's tough. And the concern we have with do nothing is it doesn't really give you that compatible asset. It brings everything up to code. It brings everything up, and you've got the growth. So you bought yourself some years, but the asset that you've retained has not got the value, functionally or otherwise, that this would have for you. So that's the main street there, and that's mine, and this is overpass. So this would kind of be where the admin building would be. Does that go up there now? I guess you can't see what I'm doing. So this is main. This is vine. So this would be kind of the admin, and this would be the parking structure is what we have envisioned anyway. You can't see it, but we went through, and we take all the cost estimates, and we cash flow it. We cash flow it because it changes the price, the ultimate price of the overall. So if you take it over a 10-year period, right up to here, we've escalated. That's the escalation factor that, based on research, that we recommend be taken. And so each year has a different escalation factor or can. We've also got in your report the O&M dollars, operation and maintenance. We project that it will cost you along with the combined, and then we typically recommend a capital renewal fund be also budgeted for facilities like this so that similar to a developer when you're leasing from them or anything else, you can establish these buildings with the known that there's a life to an air conditioning unit. There's a life to a service entrance, and those need to be budgeted for over the long haul. And we have some recommendations that we've established for that. And just concluding, I think the secret for the master plan working is ownership. When we say ownership, we believe right now I would venture to bet that when, you know, when Peggy was showing you how much assets do you have in your facilities, and I would venture to bet that that capital asset is probably either your top or in your top two or three. And right now, from our perspective, you don't have an owner of that asset right now. And we'd really like, we believe that there's real value in that being managed, and there really being a sense of ownership to that entire portfolio of assets. We believe that leadership, participation, and support, and what we mean by that is that owner needs a place to check his ideas or her ideas out, and we believe it should have an ongoing support system like a steering committee that's made up of a lot of people in the various different, that occupy some of those facilities. So you have an ongoing dialogue of how improvements can be made and what needs to be made and when. Budget forecasting and growth forecasting, we believe we've given you tools. Because a master plan is not stagnant. This is a snapshot in time. And so what we believe we've given you is the tools to adopt to that dynamic part. And even though we've given you a plan, we know that as your culture changes over the next several years, it's probably not going to be exactly what we've mapped out. But we've given you tools of how to escalate those numbers, how to forecast that growth in a way that I think you can adjust to those without having to hire another consultant. So hopefully we're pretty close to your 15 minutes. I didn't. Thank you, Curtis. Let me suggest we proceed in this fashion. To the degree you have questions about what's been presented to this point, it would be appropriate to ask those now. Then I would suggest we go into closed session, deal with the financial information, and take up questions pertaining to those at that point, if that meets with everyone's approval. All right. Are there any questions then on the presentation thus far? Council Member Gordon. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you very much for your presentation. I wanted to go back to the facility management roundtable to be sure I understand who that group is or what that reflects. Okay. Is that national? It's national, yes, it is. And so in that group, do you have a way to plug in our situation into that in terms of the size of our community, the type of government, et cetera, et cetera? Or is it strictly all these entities in terms of facilities and kind of the average of all the national ones? Is there any regionality to it? Yeah. It isn't something you can just plug into. What we did is we took the information that we got from you and all your staff, and because we've been benchmarking for so many years, we plugged it into their definitions so that what you ultimately came out with is what we believe is an apples-to-apples comparison. Okay. An example of that is in your utilities, your utility cost per kilowatt hour is less than a lot of the nation here. What we did, in order to not be deceiving, because ultimately what you're after in utility cost is, are you doing good or not, you know? Are you really saving that kilowatt hour? Because regardless of what it costs per kilowatt hour, you still need to be in savings. So what we did is we took the kilowatt hour in the benchmark, and then we converted, I mean, so we compared the kilowatt hour across the board, and then we applied the appropriate cost to that. So we're actually showing you the way it really is in terms of kilowatt hours. Does that make sense? Yes. It did reflect, then, Kentucky's lower cost, for instance, for electricity. What percentage of those members are government entities? I would say probably, you know, I'd be guessing. Just a guess. I would say probably 10 percent. Okay. On the next page of your under your space utilization, would you mind to show the slide with the gross square feet per employee by building? Because our chart only has four lines. I guess we missed that top. The top one maybe didn't show up. The one back. One back? This one? Yes. So the top one, which I think is maybe not exactly reflected on our chart, is the public safety that you mentioned. Yes. Okay. And that's the lease facility. Okay. Thank you. On Scenario 2, I wanted to ask you, and this is not specific to Scenario 2 so much. I think it's mentioned throughout as the shuttle buses. A couple things just came to mind. I've been having some conversations with some folks related to Lextran and about the skyrocketing cost of their diesel fuel. And when you estimated your operations costs, what exactly did you build in in terms of shuttle buses? Did you build in diesel using buses or hybrid buses, or what did you use for that? I'm just curious. No, I don't know. Just the capital cost of purchasing the bus. It doesn't include any operation of the bus in terms of fuel. Or the manpower. Or the manpower. Right. Okay. Did you consider, and have any of your national group done any kind of partnerships with their local mass transportation, such as we have Lextran? So did you talk about that at all? There was talk about that. I'm sorry. There was talk about that, and the other question you had was, have we encountered other government agencies? Right. Right now, we're actually facilitating discussions with Flagstaff and the county of Coconino County in Arizona. It's a similar type of a concept there. A partnering? A partnering. With the local mass transportation? Yeah. Are they the only ones you're aware of? Well, Mesa County. And when you... Mesa County in Colorado is also looking at that, too. Well, I was just curious. When you do your work for different entities, probably many of them require shuttle buses, or you would recommend shuttle buses. Is that a fair assumption? It is. Some of the issues that we've run across with, and this would be in Southern Cal Edison, and it's in California, it's a utility. Some of the issues you run across is sometimes your employees are not conducive, and they don't see maybe the value in doing that. So the question would be, you know, gosh, you really... All employees should have a parking spot, too, right next to the building or workplace. And so then you run into the issue of, gosh, what should we do? How can we make this transition? And so Southern Cal Edison came up with some, we think, creative ways of help to bridge that gap with employees that was very successful, and so we could share that with you if you're interested. So as you move through the process, that's the kind of decision you make? That's the kind of things that you can run into, yeah. One other question on scenario four, which talks about the Chase building. Did you, on letter E, deferred maintenance, remodel, and move costs, did you actually have an opportunity to go into that building, or is this a guesstimate based on experience? Have you actually gone through the building to... Yes. ...plug in? We actually visited the building with their facility director, so to speak, and we visited and we took a look at the age of the equipment, we took a look at the condition, and so, but it's still, it still is a guesstimate, okay, based on age. BOMA puts out statistical life on equipment, and we kind of take the statistical life of equipment and then you kind of say, okay, if statistically it's going to last 20 years and it's 18, you know, you really probably ought to look at, you know, costing it out for another two years, you know. That's the kind of approach we took. We think it's an educated guess, but it's still a guess. Okay. But you had cooperation from them to a certain degree so that you could make a pretty good guesstimate? Yes. Yes. Okay. All right. Thank you very much. You're very welcome. Council Member Spina. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you for your presentation today. It's a long overdue, but much anticipated, recommended change that hopefully we'll be able to get implemented over the next few months going forward. My big question is on your last scenario, the proposed site, which is an excellent site, in my opinion, on the fifth scenario, talking about this, our main government building, the eight-story building, how did you come up with eight stories? I know when you and I met, we talked about a much higher building, and how did we come up with eight? And what size is each floor? What we took is we took the ultimate growth, okay, that we see over the next 10 years, and we took at times, if you'll remember, the administrative target factors, which kind of gives you the square footage. We then looked at the site, okay, and then we looked and compared that to how many vehicles can we get on that site and still have a parking structure that has some meaning? And so we kind of compared the two. And then we have some factors for parking structures per vehicle that we've, and then if you get much over four to five stories, you kind of, then it kind of gets to be almost when you're leaving a ballgame type of thing, and so we really didn't want to introduce that to employees or customers. And so that was kind of the breaking point there, and so the eight stories accommodates the population, the growth already established in that. So that was it. Now, if in the event that you want to build more, examples could be, you could build retail on the bottom, and that was discussed in some of the workshops and those kind of things, then that eight story would need to be nine story as an example. So I mean, we didn't, we tried to keep it focused on just what your needs were for this particular study. So the eight stories will accommodate that, and that's based on the math that we've given you. And it takes in growth in the future. Correct. Should government want to get bigger. That's right. The first, the retail space, I was going to ask you about that. Did you all look at the first floor retail or incorporate some retail or even an eatery in the government facility for use of employees and or customers and downtown patrons? We definitely had a lot of discussion around it, and there was a lot of pros, and there was also cons. And so we chose, at least in this particular application, to say that it isn't in there for cost. I won't be around anymore. Okay. But we think there's some merit behind consideration of that. The issues start to get into, you know, you're mixing, you know, public and private. You're mixing potentially some security issues. Can that be overcome? I can tell you that we have some cities and counties that have overcome that, so it's kind of like you can do it. It's a matter of do you want to, and is it value-added downtown? And we chose, we didn't feel like that was probably our role. And so we, you know, but we've given you a lot of ability to fluctuate the plan if you need to do that. And then the last question, just curious about the parking situation and the number of spaces. Did you all look at the transit center and what we currently utilize over there for parking for our employees? And will we keep utilizing that space if we build this building? In this particular plan, we kept it isolated, and it wasn't part of, and so we kept that as an isolated, and it would be self-contained on its own. So we'd still have that utilization for the other 50 percent of the place. Based on our plan, you'd have that. So then we may not need six shuttle buses. We may not need as much park-and-ride if we're still utilizing those spaces over there. Of course, my challenge back would be why build the new one if you don't need it, too? Well, you still need a new one, one for customers that we're losing off of the annex garage. Oh, yeah, yeah. Got that. Yeah. Got to have that if we get rid of that garage. Yeah. That's probably the biggest complaint we have is they can't get to our building right now. We're on the same track. I mean, it's kind of like, you know, we don't want you to overbuild parking structures, but we don't want you to underbuild them either, okay? So you're exactly right. If you already got one there and it works for you, you know, why overbuild it? So we'd agree. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. You're very welcome. Councilmember Peer. Thank you, Mayor. Two or three things. When you visited Chase Building, did you explain to them you were going to take the building away from them? No. I think it was explained what we were looking at, I mean, in terms of the overall intent, but there wasn't anything specifically mentioned. And so we were just looking at it for what needed to be done and the kind of condition. I think that's what was relayed on to them. Just a matter of curiosity, if you remember, what kind of shape was the HVAC in? I worked there from 1973 to 1988 and it never worked from day one, so I just wondered if they'd ever fixed it. I'd have to go back through my notes, but my memory is I think they just changed a lot of that out. So, yeah, it has two new chillers. So I mean, it has a VAV system, I believe, didn't it? And so from an HVAC perspective, they'd made some improvements, but there's some other areas that we had to plug in. So that didn't get the big hit. How about the river in the basement? Was that a concern to anybody? Did the what? The river in the basement. Oh. We didn't. Huh? Yeah. You didn't know about the river in the basement. Bubba said it wasn't raining that day, so we... I promise you. In fact, that facility used to report up through me. Did it? Okay. Yeah, I had those problems sometimes. I used to say, would you like to come down and see this stream of water spewing out of the side of the wall? You have some unique issues related to water in this area, I can tell you that. Well, especially on that side of the street. Well, on this side of the street, you've got some on this building, too. Yeah. Buses. Are you anticipating us having dedicated buses or using Lextran buses? Because I guess my guess would be that we'd be hauling people at 7.30 in the morning and 5.30 in the afternoon, and the rest of the time they could run empty like the rest of the Lextran buses. I mean, all I can say is usually these kind of concepts start out with being sporadic, and obviously if you've got employees, you've got to have that every 15-minute type, and you've got to have a place for them to sit and a restroom, you know, in those kind of areas. And I think you've got to play with it. A lot of times you have to have the security around the vehicles to make sure they're not broke into after the fact and that kind of stuff, so we've got to price some of that into it. As related to specifically the bus and how often it has to run back and forth, we didn't really get into that much detail on this particular. We understand you have an administration that kind of really seemed like he was very passionate about buses and transit and all that, and we saw that if we established this as a concept that that guy could really make the best out of it. So we kind of left it up there. Want to add anything? Thank you. You know, that whole thing is kind of tricky as far as I'm concerned. At what end point do you go? How do you decide where the buses go and all that, and how you do that with just four buses? I don't know. Piece of work there, I agree, and yet you have to admit it's great for the environment. I think there's returns, but I understand there's also, as we go through a world that's going through change related to that kind of stuff, we need to be at least open to that as a way of operating. And I think it's also for downtown. If I could park outside of downtown and take a bus, a lot of times that's the best, too. So it's just an option that we put forward. Because the alternative is, you know, it's not as attractive when you take $15,000 to $20,000 a stall and you apply that to, you know, so many stalls. It adds up real fast. So there's a return there. And then one other comment, I guess, to Councilmember Stinnett's comments concerning the transit center. I think some of those spaces may be taken up by the fact that it's supposed to be developed. Right. And, you know, how much of that parking space are we going to have to surrender to whomever occupies that building whenever that might happen? And that may be a moot point. Thank you very much. You're very welcome. Councilmember Stephens. Thank you. Thank you. This is the first I've seen at this presentation of your work. And it looks like a rather monumental task that you took on. But as I understand it, Scenario 5 is what was decided by you and the people you dealt with here in the government. Is that correct? That's correct. And this would be three new buildings, a city hall, so to speak, which would be downtown, a police headquarters, which would be on the periphery of our community someplace, and a new parking garage. Is that correct? That's correct. And DEMO, D-E-F-G, means, what does that mean? DEMO. I'm not familiar with that word. Help me out. Yes, with D-E-M. Demolish. You're talking about D-E-M-O? Yeah. I'm sorry. I took it wrong. That's demolition. It's short for demolition. It's kind of an architectural lingo talk. The wrecking ball. Yeah, that's right. Okay. And, well, this is a lot for us to absorb. And I'm sure it will take a while for it to percolate in our brains and digest in our intestines. Yeah, I understand. I mean, it took us several months to kind of create. And, I mean, I know it's a huge issue. And we tried to do the best we could to articulate it from about every angle we could think of so that it would at least arm you with some information that would allow you to ultimately make a good decision. Of course, were you involved with any of the public in this? I was not involved with the public. The public, you know, are citizens who ultimately pay for it. Yeah, no, I was not involved with any of the public. So your consultation was internal with... Yes, sir. ...primarily members of the executive branch. It was... Many people from the council involved? Yes. I interviewed a lot of the council people that are here. And all the way down, we take what we call a 30,000-level interviews. We call it 30,000 elevation level. We took a 20,000, which is manager-supervisors. And then we took a 5,000, which is kind of the working group, you know, that actually maintains and manages a lot of the facilities. And we do that because it gives us kind of a cross-reference between all the various different parts of the government. And believe it or not, they are not all aligned on times. And so we try to bring that and facilitate that so there's a little bit of alignment. Mayor, I know that we have a closed session coming up to discuss further implications and perturbations of this presentation. And perhaps my questions, I have some other questions. I'll save those for then. Thank you very much. Vice Mayor Gray. Thank you, Mayor. Curtis, could you taxi back maybe to the modeling that you did or the analysis that you did on maintenance costs, average maintenance costs? I believe it was average maintenance costs. Sorry. One that showed the national averages. You had a whole bunch of them there, but give us the one that's... This one? Whichever one is going to give you the best illustration of the overall cost for the greatest... Okay, we've got the greatest number. We've got the highest square footage of space in this building, the government center, right? Correct. Do you know what that square footage is just out of... About 131,000. 131,000 square feet? And so you're saying that these numbers are suggesting that our maintenance is how much more as a percentage, how much greater than the averages? Well, probably what I'm guessing what you're going after is I think it would be about 700. If you were on the mean target of facility management roundtable for all your facilities, you'd save yourself about 700,000 a year. 700,000 a year. A little under that. 680-some thousand a year. Okay. That's across all the facilities. That's just in this inner scope. I'm trying to get headlines here. Uh-oh. Yeah. Not necessarily tomorrow's headlines, but today's headlines. I think don't we have it on over here? Next one back. Oh. There you go. Yeah, because I think it's the financial... 668,129 annually. What we, you know, before we go to where and how and so forth, understanding the financial imperative, the current financial condition is really the most significant takeaway, in my view, from this presentation, not where we go and how, what the height of the buildings are necessarily and those sort of things. Of course, we'll get there. But I think having a firm understanding of your financial analysis is really critical for today's meeting. So that's what I'm trying to get is the sound bites on that. You know, my takeaway is maintenance on these facilities, especially this building, is much higher than average. That's correct. Okay. That utility costs are much higher than average. That's also correct. That much of the facility, the conditions of the facility, especially infrastructure, that is, electrical systems, HVA systems, are, if not outdated, if not dangerous, outdated. That's also correct. And utilization is lower than average. It's definitely not optimum. Right. So the outcome of that for a sound bite is that you're air-conditioning, cleaning, and maintaining score footage that you're not occupying. Okay. So my sort of takeaway is that this is a wonderfully, as far as this building, this is a wonderfully historic building that we're all very attached to. But it's also a money pit that's being held together by bailing wire. I would say that's a fairly accurate description for, and the only thing I'd qualify that as is I think it might be better served by a different function. Okay. That it might actually be very marketable for a different function, but really you've got a kind of a function here that's more of a hotel with the low ceilings and very limited HVAC potentials and all that. If it were used by a hotel type of, you know, occupant, they'd have to spend less money to accomplish probably the same thing. And when you do it as an office, like this is a high ceiling and you don't have a lot of high ceilings in this building if you wanted a council, so it has less flexibility. So that's the only caveat that I would put in it. Let's go back to the financials for just a second. Did you all do, did your analysis include, I'm assuming that it did to get to your current maintenance analysis, to the existing maintenance analysis. How much did, how far did you go back? How far did you go back in time, for example, in your analysis of HVAC systems, the renovation costs for the current HVAC system? You included that? We went back three years. So you didn't include the HVAC system renovations that occurred between 2000 and 2007? No, in order to reflect an accurate representation in apples to apples, you'd say with FMRT we excluded all capital projects from that maintenance number. So that number was quite a bit higher than it even is now. And so we did delve a little bit deeper than that. We removed all capital projects from that. So you really, so this analysis did not include that? It did not. That project. It was strictly operation and maintenance costs. And that was a, yeah. I think it'd be useful if you did take a look at that number and contrast that number, the cost of that project with a new operating system in a new building. I think it, there may be some value in that because just, you know, just looking at it quickly, at least from my point of view, those numbers were really high on a unit cost basis for the product that we got. Not that, I'm not suggesting that there's anything irregular about it, except going into a building and doing a new HVAC system in an existing utilized structure is going to be, is going to be very expensive, and it was. And it's still arguably less than, what's a nice way of saying this, effective. That's what you mean?  In general, we are a consulting firm that really likes to find ways to use your existing assets, and you find us not recommending that here. Okay? I mean, we try real hard to, within cities and counties, we understand finances is not, is difficult to come up with the money, and so we usually try to find ways of using those properties the way they are in some manner. And in this particular case, we financially did not think that that was the right thing for you to do. Okay, this is my last question. I just want to make sure that I'm understanding the numbers correctly. Did you say that we, that according to your analysis, we are paying today a premium of roughly $700,000 a year over what we would be paying if we were at a national average for our maintenance costs for these facilities? That's correct. Did you all take it any further to doing an analysis of how much that would give us over, if we were, you know, just order of magnitude, the capital cost? Was that there? I may have missed it, if it did. Is that $700,000 a year in, if we were to amortize that, you know, in a debt finance, in a bonding finance model? All we've done is we've basically aggregated all together at the very second to last slide where we brought in operation and maintenance dollars per year in, and as you grow or those buildings come on, then the operation and maintenance goes up. But we have categorized, but the operation and maintenance is based on facility management roundtable benchmarking data, not your current. So does that answer your question? I mean, go to that slide. Exactly. I was wondering, I was just asking, I don't think it was. You've given us what that $700,000 savings would translate into if we were debt financing new capital investment in a project, in a new building, or a renovation of this building, hypothetically. Yeah. No, we have not done that. You're roughly at 4 percent, so maybe. That's a good point, but no, we have not done that. Pardon? Oh. Sorry. It's going to give us 10? Okay. So, in effect, we are, if your analysis were, you know, if assuming your analysis is correct, then we've got about a $10 million building or value that we're paying for that we're actually not receiving the value of. That's correct. All right. Thanks. Any further questions on the report so far? All right. I think it might be most effective if we move to go into closed session at this time for purposes of discussing financial information relating to the potential purchase or sale of real estate assets. Jim. I've got a motion to that effect, Mayor. I move that we go into closed session pursuant to KRS 61.810.1B for the purpose of discussing possible acquisition and sale of real property. Second. I have a motion by Vice Mayor Gray and a second by Council Member Gordon to go into closed session. Any discussion? Those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. »» »» »» »» »» »» And I was about to ask, if I didn't get it all way out before I was reminded by the commissioners and ask you, about whether in other markets that you've been in, whether this is a problem or whether they extend hours or how... There's several ways it can be accommodated based on our experience. But I just put it out. It's a compromise no matter how, because if you're a young adult and you've got kids, it's an issue. One of the things that we tried to do is, by putting 50% employees in the parking, is give some options for that. And we're not sure how you would manage that. I can tell you Southern Cal Edison did this. Employees have to pay for parking. But in order to... And what they did is they actually gave each employee a raise. It was like $30 an employee for a raise. And with that, if they wanted to park next to the building, they could purchase the parking spot for the $30 or they could retain the $30 themselves. So it kind of gave them options without impacting them financially. And if they chose to go and shuttle, then they did that. If they chose to take it to convenience and they had kids that they had to take care of, then it really wasn't more money out of their pocket. You gave them a way of bridging into it. I've just given you some options of how you can deplete some of the issues. But it's not to say that it's business as usual. It isn't. I guess another option also would be to put another floor on this eight-story building and do daycare here. Well... Which would be... And we could charge the employees of them for it. Yeah. The only issue you'd run into and the issues that we run into is you wouldn't want... You could give them space or something like that. But I think you'd want to stay out of the daycare business. I think you'd want to maybe... A lot of private sector folks are in it. Yeah. Yeah. But you'd bring them in and maybe give a discount to the employee for their use or something like that. I know. I would anticipate you'd bring in professionals. We wouldn't try to do it out of our own... At least that's in our experience is what we did. Based on a lot of people that have tried it not and failed, they recommend exactly what you just said. Yeah. Thank you, Mayor. All right. I think we... Vice Mayor Gray. Yeah. Curtis, I think my question had to do with FM Solutions' experience with similar projects in other cities. If you could just share with us what this project represents in terms of looking at other cities, similar kind of projects that you all have been involved in or that you know of that others have been involved with. And could you give me a little more guidance in terms... You want kind of what we're doing with each one of them or... Just give us a heads-up as to what the challenges are. You know, I, for example, was going to suggest that some members of the Council, I'm sure, are going to be on the chamber trip to Austin this year. Austin, I think in the last two or three years, has just finished a new government center. So what they went through would probably be a good field trip for us to at least take a look at what sort of heartburn, challenges, opportunities that they experienced in going through that while they did it, why they did it, all those kinds of things. You know, what are we running up against is, you know, is kind of the question. It's tough to paint the picture probably in exactly how it'll happen for you. I can just tell you that the master plan itself won't be any... Even though I think we've done and everybody's done a great job, it won't be, when you're done, won't be the same, okay? And so to handle the dynamics, and you guys have already tossed in, what about this, what about this? And that's the kind of thinking you want done throughout the process. And even when you get the architect on, where he's actually doing the design work, you're going to still be going through these. So this is kind of like what we call, you're taking all these unknowns and you're funneling them. And you don't get to the final funnel until you're occupying the building. It's a huge... Now, all the way through that whole dynamics, you've got all the council people changing. And the dynamics of their change as it affects the master plan, the staff, all of these things, and there might be different approaches in different places. While that's happening, you've got your utility bills most likely going to be soaring up in the next 10 years. I mean, you've got all of this kind of dynamics that you're going to see, I think, over the next 10 years. And you're going to have to deal with all of those. So the one thing I can tell you is you can make life a lot easier in this dynamics is if you really get yourself a dynamic and a very good facility manager that will take over all your assets. Currently, the way you manage your assets right now is kind of everybody owns their department. You know, and what happens is they're not an owner of your total asset. And you're going to need that for the dynamics you're about to encounter. And so, I mean, that to me is a huge issue and then that person needs to be in charge that becomes a regular dialogue with this body. That's our view. As far as our experience, a lot of our staff actually came from a company that's a quasi-municipality where we did something similar to this hands-on all the way through. So you're talking to people that have already done it, been down the path, been the integrator with the board of that and it's called SRP Salt River Project in Arizona where we did a $35 million project and it was about 10 years ago. So you got hands-on experience in what we've gone through and what we had to go through. The blunders that we made and the ones we won't make and this kind of thing. So we have the ability to go through the whole cycle with you or not. Because we're remote, we would recommend you get local type of designers to take it from here. But you got to start with that one manager that kind of makes this thing happen. Have I done okay? Yeah, sort of. I think maybe if you all go back home you might do a little more digging and give us some similar jurisdictions or similar episodes, other cities that have gone through the process in the last, say, five years or somewhere in the last five or ten years because the world's changed in dealing with these kinds of issues as we've seen in our own downtown not so recently. In our original RFP, I think we've given you almost all of that. I mean, we've gone through Rappahoe County, we've gone to Mesa County, we've done Olathe City. Olathe City and Kansas. So we've got a bunch. We can give that to you again if you'd like as far as, you know, what we've been doing. Okay, thanks. Any further questions? All right. Vice Mayor Gray. Not a question, but I was going to make a motion suggest that as a next step that we place the report into, say, maybe budget and finance since it seems to be all money-driven at this point in time at least that we place the report and examination of it in budget and finance and then bring in perhaps other committees as we need to move downstream. Second. We have a motion by Vice Mayor Gray and a second by Councilmember Stephens to refer the report to the Budget and Finance Committee. Any discussion? Councilmember Beeson. Might this work better in an appointed task force of some sort as opposed to budget and finance? I'm just thinking the length of discussion could really clog up budget and finance at some point. Usually after we pass the budget in June the Budget and Finance Committee kind of coasts until the next December. I would think that we'd have time to... I wasn't aware of that, Dr. Steeves. I didn't know he coasted. I didn't know there was a shady tree anywhere around but I guess there is one. But I think we'd have time and we can certainly have some subcommittees if we need to. Any further discussion? Those in favor then of referring the report to the Budget and Finance Committee let it be known by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Let me express my appreciation to everyone with FM Solutions. It's been a pleasure to work with you and at least from my vantage point it's much easier to begin to kind of get your arms around the whole issue once you have the benefit of the benchmarks that you all provided us and the analysis that you provided us. So we're very grateful for your assistance. It's very helpful. Thanks. Thank you. And right back at you we've really enjoyed working with all of you. We've enjoyed the interviews. You have great people here very passionate about and where they want to go and it's we really are appreciative and had a great time working with you all. Thanks so much. We're now ready for council reports. Council Member Gorton. Thank you Mayor. I have just one item that I wanted to bring to the public's attention and it's a rather rare happening. We all know that when a flag has to be retired the preferred method is burning an American flag and so there is an Eagle Scout in Fayette County who is going to have a special flag retirement ceremony and procedure and so he's partnering with our police department to make that happen and so for the public if you have an old flag that you need to have retired you can drop your flag off at our police headquarters at 150 East Main and then that needs to be done before May the 31st and then this Eagle project will take place after May the 31st I hope that folks who have flags that they've been waiting for proper disposal will go ahead and take advantage of this. Thank you. Vice Mayor Gray Just a quick announcement to the council members we have on our agenda the Committee of the Whole meeting but there's been some conversation that I've had in the last 30 minutes or so that people need the issues on the agenda are really administrative issues that Rebecca thinks she can handle through an email and just conversation with us so absent any objections on that we'll just do it that way. Is that ok with everybody? Ok, thanks. Council Member Mayer Thank you Vice Mayor and Mayor. For my council report the Gainesville Neighborhood Association is going to have a plant exchange from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. The location is going to be the green space on Willow Wood near Green Tree and in case of rain it's going to be at Tate's Brook Baptist Church Basement which is at 3724 Appian Way and that's in our report. Thank you. Thank you very much. Council Member McCord Thank you Mayor. A couple of announcements and I wanted to ask Don Kelly something so if you want to make your way down we'll save some time First off I want to move to approve the capital project fund list for this week Second. Third. I apologize. That's alright. Move to approve capital fund list for this week. There was a second by Council Member Myers. Alright, thank you. I apologize for being distracted there. The motion is to approve the capital fund for this week Those in favor please say aye. Opposed no. Motion carries. Also move to approve the neighborhood development fund list for this week please. I have a motion by Council Member McCord and a second by Council Member Myers to approve the MDF. Any discussion? Those in favor please vote aye. Opposed no. Motion carries. Thank you Mayor. Also May is National Physical Fitness Physical Activity Month and along those lines I wanted to thank Lee and Victoria last week for hosting at their home a discussion of the 9th District parks and what we can do for improvement there and what's going on I appreciate them opening their homes and all that came that night and this is an ongoing discussion within the district for all of us wanting to improve our park system and I look forward to that continued discussion. Also there is coming up on May 17th Bike Lexington which continues to grow every year it's a 10 mile no cars interaction for anybody who wants to come down and bike and this has grown by leaps and bounds over the last few years and what it shows is once you start closing a road and start removing cars from it people will come out and exercise and bring their kids out and this is possibly one of the best events that we do all year so I'd encourage folks to come out to the Bike Lexington event on Saturday May 17th registration starts from 8 o'clock and goes to 930 and then it'll run from 930 to around noon. That same morning the Chrysalis House out at Cold Stream Farm has their 5k run starting at 8 o'clock and for more information if you want to call my office at 258-3215 we can give you information on that as well. Commissioner Kelly I just wanted to ask you we had gotten a legislative alert from Kentucky League of Cities that Governor Beshear's veto of House Bill 79 which had to do with transportation related projects and road projects could be detrimental to cities and causing road projects to stall out and I want to just ask you if that affects Lexington or any of the projects that we have in the pipe. At this point we think it fairly certainly does not affect us at all on any of the projects in the pipeline and hopefully that we may have an opportunity to also get a foot in the door on some other projects as well. So we're comfortable right now with it. Okay. I appreciate that. Thank you Mayor. Thank you Council Member McCord Council Member Blues Thank you Mayor. At 630 tonight at the North Lexington Library on Russell Cave Road there will be the third public meeting in relation to the Green Acres Stormwater project This meeting is for the residents of the Brookfield Chase neighborhood At the meeting the consultants will bring people up to date on the study so far and solicit further opinion on stormwater issues and give some information on how the project will go forward and some timelines Residents of the neighborhood I think would be well served by attending And again that's 630 this evening at the Northside Library. On Monday May the 12th the Windburn Neighborhood Association will meet at 630 p.m. at Martin Luther King Park and I hope all the neighborhood will turn out. Thank you Mayor That's my report Thank you Council Member Blues I have no one else indicating a desire to give a report So we'll move on to the Mayor's report. We have a few commission appointments for your consideration A motion to approve would be in order I have a motion by Council Member Myers and a second by Council Member Ellinger to approve the Mayor's report Any discussion? Those in favor please say aye. Those opposed no. Motion carries The last item on the agenda is the opportunity for public comment on any issue not on the agenda Does anyone wish to address the council? Seeing none we'll entertain a motion to adjourn from Council Member Ellinger and a second from Council Member Myers Those in favor please say aye. Those opposed no. Motion carries Thank you very much