# Rural Land Management Board - November 20, 2019 > Auto-transcribed civic record · Board · November 20, 2019 - **Permalink**: https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/meeting/4903 - **Source video**: https://lfucg.granicus.com/player/clip/4903?view_id=14&redirect=true - **Date**: 2019-11-20 - **Body**: Board - **Last revised**: February 6, 2026 - **Length**: 8,286 words > ⚠️ **Auto-generated content.** Audio from the official Granicus video was auto-transcribed by OpenAI Whisper-1, with speaker labels folded in from Granicus closed-captioning. Structured facts were extracted with GPT-4o; the narrative summary was written by Anthropic Claude Sonnet. Speaker labels and verbatim wording may contain errors. See [methodology](https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/about/methodology) or [report a correction](mailto:editor@lexingtonky.news). --- ## Meeting Overview The Rural Land Management Board convened on November 20, 2019, at 3:30 PM in the Council Chamber. The meeting addressed three agenda items, all of which were approved by the board. The board took five votes during the session and heard one public comment. The meeting focused on routine administrative matters and one substantive land use request. The board first approved the minutes from their October 30, 2019 meeting, then established their 2020 meeting schedule. The primary business item involved consideration of Farm 28-2002, a housing request submitted by Shirley McQuillan, which received board approval. All three agenda items resulted in favorable outcomes, indicating consensus among board members on the matters presented. The single public comment provided community input on the proceedings, though the specific content and topic of the comment were not detailed in the available records. ## Attendance The following board members were present at the November 20, 2019 meeting: • Beth Cawood Overman • Phil Myers • Robert James • Will • Jennifer • Healy • Margaret • Dennis • Zach • Elizabeth • Keith Horn • Shirley McQuillan **Absent:** • Tracy No board members arrived late to the meeting. ## Votes and Decisions The Board conducted five votes during the November 20, 2019 meeting, all of which passed by voice vote. **Approval of Minutes** [timestamp: 02:00] Phil Myers motioned to approve the October 30, 2019 meeting minutes, with Robert James providing the second. The motion passed by voice vote with no opposition. **Meeting Schedule Changes** [timestamp: 45:00] Margaret motioned to maintain 12 meetings per year with the possibility of canceling some meetings when necessary. Healy seconded the motion, which passed by voice vote with one abstention. **Meeting Start Time** [timestamp: 50:00] Elizabeth motioned to change the meeting start time to 3:00 PM, seconded by Healy. The motion passed by voice vote with one abstention. **Housing Request Approval** [timestamp: 1:20:00] Margaret motioned to approve a housing request for Farm 28-2002, with Healy Bell providing the second. The motion passed by voice vote with the condition that approval is contingent on approval from the Division of Building Inspection. **Committee Resignation** [timestamp: 2:30:00] Phil motioned to accept Nick's resignation from the long-range planning and ordinance review committee, seconded by Robert James. The motion passed unanimously by voice vote. All motions were conducted as voice votes rather than roll call votes, so individual member voting records were not recorded. The Board demonstrated efficiency in processing routine business items while ensuring proper procedural requirements were met for each decision. ## Public Comment The Board received one public comment during the November 20, 2019 meeting. **Shirley McQuillan** spoke in support of the Purchase of Development Rights (PDR) program [timestamp: 1:25:00]. McQuillan expressed her appreciation for the PDR program and its role in protecting agricultural land. She noted that while she was not initially aware of the program when she purchased her farm, she has come to value its importance in preserving farming operations and protecting agricultural properties from development pressures. ## Appointments The Board addressed one personnel matter during the November 20, 2019 meeting. • **Nick Carter** resigned from the long-range planning and ordinance review committee The resignation was noted by the Board, though no additional details were provided regarding the timing or reasons for Carter's departure from the committee role. ## Contested Items The November 20, 2019 Board meeting featured one significant area of disagreement regarding the proposed 2020 meeting schedule. **2020 Meeting Schedule Reduction** Board members engaged in a heated discussion over a proposal to reduce the number of regular board meetings from 12 to 8 for the upcoming year. The debate centered on practical concerns about scheduling difficulties that had plagued the board throughout 2019, weighed against the operational need to maintain sufficient meeting frequency for timely board approvals and oversight. Proponents of the reduction argued that fewer meetings would alleviate persistent scheduling conflicts that had resulted in postponements and difficulty achieving quorum. They contended that eight strategically scheduled meetings could accommodate the board's essential business while providing more predictable scheduling for members. Opposition to the proposal focused on concerns that reducing meeting frequency could create bottlenecks for time-sensitive decisions requiring board approval. Some members expressed worry that fewer meetings might compromise the board's ability to provide adequate oversight of ongoing initiatives and respond promptly to emerging issues. The discussion became particularly intense as board members debated whether the scheduling difficulties experienced in 2019 were representative of ongoing challenges or temporary issues that could be resolved through better coordination. Members also disagreed on whether the proposed eight-meeting schedule would provide sufficient opportunities for thorough deliberation on complex matters. The outcome of this contentious discussion was not immediately resolved during the meeting, with the item requiring further consideration and potential revision before final adoption of the 2020 meeting calendar. ## Approval of the October 30, 2019 Minutes [timestamp: 02:00] The Board reviewed the minutes from their October 30, 2019 meeting for approval. During the discussion, a minor amendment was identified regarding the applications and donations report section of the previous meeting's minutes. Key speakers Phil Myers and Robert James participated in the discussion of the proposed changes to ensure accuracy in the official record. The amendment addressed specific details in the applications and donations report to better reflect what was actually discussed and decided during the October 30th meeting. Following the discussion of the amendment, the Board moved to approve the October 30, 2019 minutes as corrected. The motion was approved, officially adopting the minutes with the minor revision to the applications and donations report section. ## 2020 Meeting Schedule [timestamp: 30:00] The Board discussed agenda item III.a regarding the 2020 meeting schedule during their November 20, 2019 meeting. The primary debate centered on whether to reduce the number of scheduled Board meetings from the current 12 meetings per year to 8 meetings. Key speakers in the discussion included Will, Elizabeth, Jennifer, and Margaret, who presented various perspectives on the proposed schedule change. The conversation explored the practical implications of fewer meetings and how this might affect the Board's ability to conduct necessary business throughout the year. After deliberation, the Board ultimately decided to maintain the existing schedule of 12 meetings for 2020. However, they agreed to build in flexibility by allowing for the possibility of canceling individual meetings if circumstances warrant it. This approach provides the Board with regular meeting opportunities while acknowledging that not all scheduled sessions may be necessary depending on the volume of business and other factors that may arise during the year. The 2020 meeting schedule was approved with this understanding that the full complement of 12 meetings would be scheduled, with the option to cancel meetings as needed based on the Board's workload and priorities throughout the year. ## Farm 28-2002, Shirley McQuillan - Housing Request [timestamp: 1:20:00] The Board considered a housing request from Shirley McQuillan regarding Farm 28-2002. McQuillan requested approval to add a mobile home on her farm property to house a farm employee. Beth Cawood Overman presented the item to the Board, with Shirley McQuillan speaking on behalf of her request. The discussion centered on the need for on-site housing for agricultural workers and the appropriate procedures for adding temporary housing structures on farm properties. The Board approved McQuillan's request to place a mobile home on Farm 28-2002 for employee housing purposes. However, the approval was made contingent upon obtaining proper approval from the Division of Building Inspection, ensuring that all building codes and safety requirements would be met before the mobile home could be installed and occupied. This conditional approval allows McQuillan to proceed with her housing plans while maintaining compliance with local building regulations and inspection requirements. --- ## Decisions - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Approval of the October 30, 2019 Minutes - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Keep 12 meetings a year with the possibility of canceling some - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Start meetings at 3 PM - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Approve housing request for Farm 28-2002 - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Accept Nick's resignation from the long-range planning and ordinance review committee --- ## Full transcript It's 3.30, and I'm going to call our meeting to order. We have enough members here to be voting, but we have a few excused absences, and I'm going to proceed. I do have a few announcements that will take a little time. I'd like to welcome Keith Horn. Keith will be our acting board attorney while Tracy is out. Tracy, by the way, is having back surgery today, so I wanted to send our best to her to make sure she is okay. Wish her well. Also, I'll say, today is my husband's birthday, so I'll wish him a happy birthday as well. We do have enough in attendance that we can carry on. I'll start by asking for the minutes. Have all of you had an opportunity? Thank you, Beth, for sending these minutes to us in advance. I will say that I think Beth's minutes are very good. She covers the information very well and is very clear about what's going on at our meetings. Can I make one little change to the minutes? Yes. Concerning the applications and donations report, on page 6, it's about 8 lines down. Just to clarify, talking about the database, particularly so everyone can begin recruiting, we're going to wait to develop the messaging, so we're sharing the database to get the names on and we'll just hold right there. Just wanted to make sure that's understood by everyone. Thanks. He said about 6 lines down. Okay, so just cut out from after format, just from there on. Okay. All right. Are there any other changes, additions, deletions? If not, the chair will entertain a motion for the minutes. Phil Myers made a motion to accept. Is there a second? And Robert James seconded. All in favor, please try to signify by saying aye. Have you all tried to sign in to all of your work? Okay. I'm signed in, but the issue's not up. Oh, yeah. There's one over here. She's already put you out. All right. You may sit wherever you like. All in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. The motion did not come up, I don't think, on the board. The motion has been made and carried. The next thing on our agenda is, as you all know, this room has sometimes been difficult for us to reserve. Beth has done more than due diligence to look through the calendar for the next year to try to always reserve this room for the last Wednesday of the month, as we have done previously. If you all noticed in what she sent, the meetings, again, would be on the last Wednesday of the month, and I'm going to read through this and then we'll open the floor for discussion on this, except for November and December. And that's because of Thanksgiving holiday and the December holidays. And we have suggested that we start the meetings at 3 rather than 3.30, since we are going to be having applications and reviews and business. And, as you know, this past year, a time or two, the room was reserved after the fact so that after we had a closed session, we had to leave, go to another room for the closed session, and could not come back in here to make our motions because someone was in the room. So Beth has tried to reserve this room for us on the dates listed in the e-mail she sent from 3 to 5. So knowing that, I'll open the floor for discussion about this. Anybody? I'd like to add something if I may. Yes, Will. So I'll bring this point up. I had brought this up earlier in the year, so for those that are new to the board, I'll kind of bring you up to speed. This board used to meet six times a year as opposed to 12. And when Gloria came on board, there was a lot to do. There's still a lot to do, and I appreciate that. I do think, just kind of looking back at the year, you know, we canceled our May meeting, and we've had at least two meetings that were really rather brief, kind of 30 minutes or so. I wanted to kind of gauge the board's temperature on maybe reducing the number of meetings from 12, maybe not back to six, but perhaps eight. I'll speak for me, and I think maybe for some of the other younger members of the board, if I can say that, where we haven't reached senior enough positions in our organizations to take off just as much as we might. To see if there's an appetite for having maybe eight meetings a year, meeting every six weeks. My only comment to that is scheduling the room is difficult, and it's much easier to cancel the meetings than it is post them and advertise them like we need to. That's the only comment I would make about that. When you all speak, make sure you turn your microphones on and lean in so that it picks it up for the minutes. She just commented that she couldn't hear some of you. Your red button on the left on your mic. Got it. Got it. I would suggest, rather than going to six-week intervals for meetings, that we possibly take out one or two of the summer meetings, and then the meeting in December over the holidays and during the summer when people travel. That will lighten up the schedule a little bit, and I actually really like starting at 3 o'clock instead of 3.30. Other comments? Jennifer? First of all, let me ask you, can you not see when we chime in to read? Does that not come to you? It has come up that I can see that there was a motion. I would suggest that we follow the council schedule, very much like what Elizabeth said. I think our last meeting is December 5th, and then we're off until January, like the second week of January, and then we don't meet in July and August. And I think that was very similar to what she has suggested. That would be mine, and I would say 3 o'clock as well. Okay. Healy? I'm of two minds. I think we've, for this being my second term, I'm really encouraged with how much effort we've been making with this program. I think we've really come a long way, and it's because of your leadership and such that we're doing that. I think these committees are very helpful. I don't want to dilute that. I don't want to lose that momentum. That's my only concern is that. So if we can stay focused and continue to make good strides and be purposeful with this, then I support that. But if we lose momentum, I'd be disappointed, to be honest with you. Margaret? When the program started, we did meet monthly, and my question really is to Beth, and that is if we meet only eight times a year, is that going to hamstring you in terms of closings and reimbursements, et cetera, et cetera? I'm sort of of the mind that Gloria is in that we schedule them, and if we don't need them, we cancel them rather than reducing the number of meetings. But, Beth, I'd like your input as to whether eight meetings would be sufficient from your standpoint. Well, so it probably would be okay as far as reimbursements, things you're talking about, appraisals, because we have to give them at least 30 days for appraisals and then offers, and so usually there's a little leeway with that. The one thing it could hold up sometimes is the housing request if someone wants to come in. But I also, you know, I do understand July and some of those months are tough. November might be one we even could look at because this one did come three weeks after our October meeting and then meet again in four weeks. So maybe there's one or two, a summer one. I think we had a whole lot of people out in July this year. So maybe there are a couple we could look at and reduce it some. And also, Lori and I could make an effort, if we keep them all, to look at it and say, okay, it's a light day. We have a few items on the agenda. Is there anything that could wait until next month? And be cognizant of the fact that you all would like us to cancel if there isn't anything pressing. And I guess a question I would have really, Will, these committees and your committee has particularly spent a lot of time, is that compounding part of what you're referring to or not? I think it's a fair question. Really, I was kind of thinking about earlier in the year. So to be honest, I don't think the committee really is impacting it. We have spent a lot of time, but I've really tried to, as Elizabeth and Robert can hopefully attest, try to keep everything very streamlined and only meet when necessary. I was really thinking about earlier in the year when I think we had a period in January and February where we met maybe three times within four weeks and then had another meeting in March. And really, I mean, I think you'll recall I wrote a letter. We weren't getting very much done with what we were discussing in closed session. So just trying to kind of keep in mind that it's a volunteer board and just to kind of use our time as effectively as we can. I like the idea of keeping them all scheduled, but keeping in mind that we would like to cancel two of them or three throughout the year as workload permits. It's a good point. You don't want to hold up housing requests. We want to keep from the public's, we want to keep what they have to do is moving as quickly as possible just to keep Because things are moving much smoother now. We don't want to lose that. And I don't know. Beth and Margaret can answer this better than I because I've not been involved in this in the past. If and when we send out the request for new applications and they come in, Beth has a limited amount of time. She has to deal with those to make offers. And I suppose, depending on how many we get, depends on having those meetings. Is that correct? You two. The beginning of the year, in our situation, we're probably going to be doing our advertising for new applications with a probably February deadline, I would say. And so soon after that we'll be in the heat of the budget process for the city and the federal application generally comes due. So those first five to six months likely will be busy in a time that we may need to meet monthly. But we could look at possibly July and November might be times or however you all would like to do. Margaret. I just wouldn't want to hamstring the program by, you know, going into it thinking that we're, I think we should schedule the 12 and then if we have the opportunity to cancel them because we don't have a need to meet, then that's one thing. But I think it would be a mistake to start out with only eight, given the amount of board approval that is necessary by ordinance to deal with new applications. I'd second that. Is that a motion? So moved. The motion's been made by Margaret to keep the 12 meetings a year, and that's been seconded by Healy. And I will reiterate that we can cancel those, and it is easier to cancel than it is add. All right. The motion's been made. Well, we'll make the motion for that first, The motion's been made that we still maintain a monthly meeting with the idea that we might cancel some of those. All in favor of that, please. Here's the motion. It came up this time. Did everybody's screen come up? Beth, it's not recording my vote. Let's just do voice. All right. There it is. Okay. The motion has passed, and we have one abstention, and that abstention goes with the majority. So the next is we will have the meetings monthly with the idea that we might be able to cancel some. And now the time about do we want to do this from 3 and try to be out of here by 5 every time, or start at 3.30? Board's prerogative. She just managed to get it this time at 3 o'clock for every meeting but two, so. All right. Elizabeth has already commented. Are there other comments about that, the difference between 3, 3.30? Okay, Dennis. Do you have a comment? No? And what's the second to start at 3? All right. Motion's been made to start the meetings at 3, and second that by Healy. The motion's up here. All right. It's up for you to vote. All in favor, yay or nay? I guess everybody that's here has voted, right? So that passes. One abstention. And the abstention goes with the majority. Now, for committee actions and reports. Oh, the new business, excuse me. We have one of our farm owners here, Ms. McQuillan. Would you like to come up? Beth is going to present this and will introduce you to our board. She has a farm and a request this month, and Beth's going to present that. And we may have some questions. All right, so they are going to project this on the screen for us, but you will also have this memo in your packet. So this is farm number 28-2002 that is located at 6377 Greenwich Pike. It's approximately 92 acres. It is operating as a horse farm. The owner is Shirley McQuillan, who is here today. The date of the easement was September 25, 2003, and the owner at the time of the easement was Rachel King. It is not a federal easement. It was only local. The protected structures is a historic 1890s Victorian farmhouse that Ms. McQuillan lives in. There is no impervious surface limit in this easement. There is the one primary residence that is the historic house that's approximately 3,453 square feet. She is not requesting any demolition. She wants to add a mobile home totaling 1,680 square feet to be used as a tenant house for a farm employee. The footprint will be approximately 46 by 36. She is not requesting any paving for a road or sidewalk, There will be a concrete slab under to be a foundation for the mobile home. She has included a site map showing us where that will be located, and I've also attached some aerial maps. The permitted use, Section 4 prohibited uses in the deed of easement, prohibits constructing, placing, or maintaining of any building, mobile home, or other temporary or permanent structure or facility on, above, or below the property, except as permitted in Section 5. Section 5 is where the landowner's reserved rights are. And so in Section 5, Item B, it provides the landowner the right to construct single family, detached dwelling, new residence. Chair Martin and I met with Tracy Jones on November 13th, and Keith Horn was there as well, and presented this to her, and she interpreted the easement language reserving the right to construct new housing to be comprehensive and include a mobile home. The other information is Ms. McQuillan purchased the farm in December 2012 and lives in the historic house. She met with the Division of Building Inspection, and will abide by the zoning ordinance language requiring a 300-foot setback from the property boundary, as she has indicated on the attached site map. The easement on this property protects the wooded areas along the creek, which is the Goose Creek Tributary on the bottom left side of the site map, and the mobile home will be placed on the right side of the farm opposite of that. The staff recommendation is approval based on our legal counsel's advice that this is a permitted use per the easement and contingent on the approval of the Division of Building Inspection. I did speak with the Division of Building Inspection staff yesterday, and they said they have not yet approved it because at first they wanted to wait and see, get our approval, and it first had to go to the Division of Engineering because there is a floodplain on the property, but the Division of Engineering has signed off with approval. The conservationist recommendation is not required as this is not a federal easement. And below that, I just have the full text of the easement language for you, and then the PVA info, and then the site map. Can you flip that at all? Does it enlarge? Or if you are okay with it, if your close-up view is probably better than that. Showing us on the left side of that, you can see kind of a blue crooked line there. It says Goose Creek Tributary, so that is the protected area in our easement, that tree-lined area. Over on the very right side, Ms. McQuillan has drawn a little box to indicate where the mobile home will be, and she's noted how it will be the 300-foot setback, and the Division of Building Inspection will also ensure that. And then the next one is just an aerial map of when the farm was submitted to PDR, and then the next is current today, and you can see that it's a little hard if you turn this around. So if you're looking at Greenwich and the entrance to the property, you see over to the right, that will back to Ferguson Road or to the side where she's going to have the mobile home, and that's a tree-lined area. And I think that is it. Ms. McQuillan is happy to answer questions. She did bring photos, I think, of the structure if you all need to see that, and that concludes my report. Thank you. Would you all like for her to put up a picture of what it is she's going to put on the site? Yes? No? Yoo-hoo. Everybody awake here? No. Not necessary? All right. Then do you have any questions for Ms. McQuillan? Anybody? All right. Do you have any questions for us? Can I make a comment? Yes, please do. When I bought this farm, it was already PDR protected, and I didn't know. I'm from California. I had no idea. And the first thing it was, I thought, oh, this is just another step to go through. But since I've studied it and since I've watched what's happened in our neighborhood, I just wanted to thank you all for what you're doing and for protecting us and protecting our farms, and, you know, regardless of whether we get to put this in or not, I just want you to know that you're appreciated and other farm owners appreciate you. I'm sure that we don't tell you often enough, so thank you for that. Well, thank you. Is that all you need from me? And that won't necessarily affect our decision, but thank you anyway. No, I didn't expect it to or I wouldn't have said it. I'm joking. I know some of the hard minds in this group. I know. Having heard Beth's presentation and having heard our applicants' comments, the chair will entertain a motion. I'll make a motion to approve the housing request for Farm 28-2002. Is there a second? Second. Who made the second? Heedly. Motion's made by Margaret and seconded by Heedly Bell. Any other questions or comments? All in favor, please mark on your screen if you can get it to work. Okay. And Beth said to make sure you understand that she will notify building inspection tomorrow, and after you hear from them and get the answers that have come up, then you may proceed. Thank you. Thank you all very much. Thank you. If I may comment also, and I might have recused myself, however, Ms. McQuillan is regarded as one of the very, very best horse chiropractors in this nation. We're very fortunate to have her. I'm sorry she doesn't hear your compliments. Well, she knows it. Really, she's truly a tribute to this community, and I'm delighted that she's here. Well, thank you for saying that. I do have a concern that she purchased the home with the PDR, or the farm with the PDR placed on it and never knew about it. And that should have shown up in her title work, and it also should have shown up, I mean, also the realtor should have disclosed it. So it should have been, she should have known. Madam Chair, if I may. Yes. As your Blue Grass Association Realtors representative, I can tell you that we are working very diligently to ensure that people know when a farm is under a conservation easement, they know about it before they even make the appointment to view the place. That is a critical factor because there is no sense in us showing property to someone, them falling in love with a farm only to find out that perhaps they couldn't do what they planned on doing with it, or if they wanted to, whatever it may be. So speaking personally, whenever I list a farm for sale under conservation easement, I put it in the ad itself that it's a PDR-protected farm. And furthermore, whenever we write or receive an offer on a PDR farm, we include the deed of conservation easement in the purchase contract as an addendum. And then, of course, when it does come up at a title search, no one is surprised. But, yes, you're exactly right. It's extremely concerning and one that we're working diligently to mitigate. It's also a concern that I have had. I have spoken to Margaret about this, having she's also on the Blue Grass Land Conservancy Group Board, because when you look these farms up in PDR, it says PDR-Y. Your average person coming to this community or using our PVA records may have no idea what PDR means, and they certainly may not know what a Y means. So we have discussed the fact that all easements, whether it's PDR or conservancy or PACE or American Farmland Trust, all of those easements should be noted on the PVA website. And perhaps it shouldn't say PDR. It should say something like conservation easement or easement, something that lets people know exactly Dennis's concerns. So that is something that I've actually discussed. Beth and I have discussed at one time with law, and Margaret's committee may be looking at that in more depth. Thank you for bringing that up. And, Zach, do you mind just kind of keeping us apprised of that? Would you keep the board apprised of the progress you make? Well, certainly. I mean, as in any industry, there are specialties. And so we have quite a few or not quite a few, very few individuals who specialize in farmland and sales. And so those of us who transact business each day, we're aware of it, and we're doing everything we can to make our colleagues aware of it. The Lexington Bluegrass Association of Realtors now has a membership of about 3,500 licensees. And that tends to happen when the economic activity has been as plentiful as it has been over the past 10 years. But it's a constant process of education, because PDR is one of those programs that just not many people, through no fault of their own, may not know exactly what our program does, what it means, et cetera. So that's one of the reasons we on the Education and Public Outreach Committee are doing what we're trying to do. Are there any other comments about that, Jennifer? Yeah. In your discussions with the PDA, what was the result of that when you spoke with Mr. O'Neill? We haven't. Or haven't? Not yet. We haven't, no. And Beth and I actually mentioned this to the CAO, that this is an issue, and we might need to take this through committee and through this board to actually get some changes made. I would think he'd be pretty receptive to that. I just wondered if you had spoken to him at all. Not recently. I've seen the PDR on it. I don't think it's the tax assessor's position. Margaret hit it right. The attorney should have noted it, that did the title work for the closing and informed her at that time. I'm curious, Zach, under the contract you use, the form that LBAR uses, would that be a cloud to title the way it's worded or not? Well, I will say that our multiple listing service has recently added, within the past year, a new option when you're inputting a farm on the multiple. And one of the questions is conservation easement. And you check yes or no. We have a standard offer to purchase contract that we use quite a bit that's five pages. We have a farm offer to purchase contract that I think is four pages. But I don't know if it's necessarily a cloud on the title. I don't think I would call it that. But it's certainly an item that I was showing a farm a year or two ago, and I was standing in the main residence. I opened up the door when the buyer and their agent were walking up, and all I heard was the buyer saying to the agent, what's PDR? That's the wrong time for that buyer to learn that that farm is in the PDR program. That buyer needs to know when they encounter the property for sale or when their agent sends it to them saying, this farm may work for your needs. Note, it is PDR protected. Here's a copy of the conservation easement, which is exceedingly easy to obtain. Look it over, and if you think it will fit, let's go look at it. But it's a lot of education left to do. The LBR contract, does it address easement in it? The conservation easement? Not that I can recall. I don't have it in front of me, but I don't think the words conservation easement appear in the boilerplate contract. I think we need to work on that. Yes, sir. That way someone doesn't end up closing the table with a surprise. I don't know if it breaches the contract or what. Well, the way the farm offered a purchase is written, and I'm not very bright. I didn't go to law school. But it says you have 21 or however many days to do all necessary inspections, appraisals, surveys, et cetera, et cetera. I don't think, and I've never heard of a transaction falling through because a PDR deed was found at the last minute during a title search. I think a seller would have an extremely good case for a specific performance in that instance. But, again, I've never encountered it. It's not been an issue. But I will e-mail Justin Landon, who's the CEO of the Board of Realtors, mention that this discussion came up at our meeting and see if the appropriate committee could revise the document to reflect just sort of a disclosure or something that is the property subject to a conservation easement to the knowledge of the seller. I don't believe a farm is subject to their used home is subject to a history. Yes, every single family residence in the Commonwealth of Kentucky, whether it's a residential lot in town or a horse farm with 12 houses on it, the seller is required to fill out a seller's disclosure of property condition form for every single residence or what could be considered or construed as a living space. And so I would have to look, Dennis, because off the top of my head, I don't think the farm land disclosure asks if there is a conservation easement on the property or not. If it doesn't, it should. Let me add to that that our easements do require the property owners, when they sell this, to notify us that it's supposed to be sold and who the new owners are. And let me also tell you, that doesn't always happen. And Beth doesn't always know. And when Charlie Farmer has gone out or Beth to inspect these, the person we have on our list and the contact and the number is not always what is. So there are several slips between the cup and the lip here. And because it's written in and it's required, you would think they would do it, but they don't. But there is no penalty for that. That was my next question. What's the penalty for failure to do so? A slap on the hands by somebody if they discover it, I guess, because there is not a formal penalty. Margaret. This is not just a problem for the PDR program. This also comes up for properties that are under conservation easement with the Blue Grass Conservancy. The conservancy makes every effort to educate the realtor community about conservation easements, the fact that there are farms in Fayette County that are under conservation easement with the Blue Grass Planned Conservancy. So I think if we can, you know, have several bites at the apple, then we're best off in terms of making sure that buyers and sellers both know that they're obligated to disclose and that the buyer knows, you know, on the front end that this is in place. So every effort, we need to continue to make every effort so that that information is readily available. It is available, but it would be best if it was known on the front end, the very beginning of the process, as you suggested, Zach. This actually also came up in Zach's education PR committee about our signage. Is it compulsory? And if it's a federal easement, have the feds required that? I actually met with them this week, and it was one of the questions I asked them about. Our federal easements do not require a sign. Perhaps if all of our easements had signage saying this is PDR at the entry gate or somewhere, maybe that would help because all the farms do not have signs for various and sundry reasons. So there are several things, ways we can address this. Is there any published literature available to buyers who may be looking at farms in the area to say, you know, here are some of the conservation easements we have in Fayette County, and here's what, you know, how to do the research on it? A lot of that's available on the web, so that if you go to the PDR website and you pull up the map, you can see the farms that are under conservation easement with this program, and I think the GIS map also has conservation easements held by others. So it may not specify which organization actually holds the conservation easement, but there are ways to pretty easily gather research about it. Could they be improved? Probably, but there is information available, publicly available information. Well, and that's why education and public outreach is so important because when I'm taking a buyer around, and the majority of our clients are not, our buyers are not from Kentucky. They're usually outside of Kentucky or outside of the country. After three minutes of me explaining to them what the PDR program is, for example, they sit back and they say, that makes perfect sense. And I have never had someone who is not from around here look at me and say, well, that's crazy. I wouldn't do that. Why would anybody do that? It's a resounding, unanimous, what a great idea. And they say, well, you know where I'm from, whether it's California or Florida or New York or wherever. They say, you know, we have a program to protect this region or that region because of either its natural scenic beauty or its economic activity. For us, it's all of the above. But generally what I do, Margaret, as practice is I send an email with a link to our PDR website. I include Beth's name and number along with Gloria's name and number. And say, if you have any questions at all, call them, and they'd be happy to talk to you. And, again, our deeds of conservation easement are, I think, exceptionally reasonable. I've seen some that are not. And I have another farm that I'm looking at right now that's in the PACE program. That deed of conservation easement is only 13 pages and is very reasonable. And so my buyers who are relocating from Southern California, they read it and didn't blink. I mean, it wasn't an issue for them. And so, again, it's just about education. And I think sometimes if you get a question about PDR and you have no idea what PDR is and you're trying to represent a buyer, if I learned anything, it's respond with, I don't know, but I can find out. And that's usually the safest and best response. But to Dennis's point, we've got a long way to go. And Jennifer understands that too, selling real estate. I stay in my lane. And I know with commercial real estate and other venues, I refer business out, and that's always the best practice. Yes, James, Robert, I mean. Would this not be a more pressing issue for tracks we may have easements on that are 20 to 40 acres or much smaller where people are really looking more for a home site and, like, a small hobby farm versus the larger tracks, and so they're not even thinking about that there may be a conservation easement on this property? In terms of the surprise of it may have a PDR, because currently our database, we sorted out properties under 40 acres, but even the 60 to 80 acres, if someone's looking for something primarily a rural homestead and with some acreage, that they may be, you know, that they're not thinking about this in advance of visiting the property. I have never, as far as my memory tells, I've never had an objection over if someone was looking for a 20 to a 40-acre parcel with a house, a barn, and an arena. Because even if it's 40 acres with a house and they want to build a barn and they want to build an arena or a ring, that all falls under agricultural purposes anyways. The only, I mean, I think the only objection that I can understand that I do here is if you have a farm that's, say, 80 or 90 acres and it's under easement, you can't divide it any further. But I can't tell you I've had a transaction fail or fail to close because of that. But, of course, Fayette County zoning, it has to be 40-acre minimum anyways. So there's not a lot left out there that would fall under that category to begin with. Any other comments? All right. I'm going to move on to the committee action and reports. I have two comments before that. One, after you committee chairs have your meetings and those minutes are approved, make sure they get signed and they get to Beth so she can then post them on our website so people can see what we're doing. The second item I want to bring up is that Nick Carter, as I announced last month, has been, it's a loss to us but probably a promotion for him, is no longer our extension agent and is now working in the Ag Department at UK. So Nick has formally asked Beth to be removed from the committee, and because of that I'm going to be asking you to also let him be removed from our long-range planning and ordinance review committee, which is Margaret's committee. And after removing him, the new person who will be here for him, Beau Neal, will be taking our extension agent's slot here in Fayette County, and I'm not going at this time to ask him to serve on that committee because I think it would be hard for him to hit the ground running with that and learning all of the zoning and the legal aspects of that. So after I've talked to him, we may pick another committee or something else for him to do. So the chair will entertain a motion that you will please accept Nick's resignation from our long-range planning and ordinance review committee. The motion's been made by Phil. Second. And seconded by Robert James. All in favor, if this will come up, just all signify by saying aye. Aye. And is there any opposition to that? And also to not appoint Beau at this time until he's had a chance to sort of settle in. Is everyone all right with that? All right. Good. Thank you. Now, first up, applications and donations. Will. We have not met since the last full board meetings and no report. All right. Education and outreach. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. We have a meeting scheduled for this week. I'm sorry, next week. We have a draft of new signage that we are very excited to present to you for final approval. That is to come. And we are finalizing, and I say finalizing because we only got one and a half meetings left, our message, our elevator speech for our community, for our taxpayers, for our council members, for our future administrations. And we will present something to you that will be thorough. It will be exhaustive. It will be brief. But it will be something that all of us will be very pleased with. Thank you. Margaret. Outreach and long-range review. Thank you, Madam Chair. The Ordinance Review and Long-Range Planning Committee had a meeting scheduled for November 13th. We did not have a quorum present, so we could not take action, but we did work through the application. There were several of us who were in attendance who were lawyers who were quite knowledgeable about the program. And so we did make some requested additional changes that Beth put in and that are being reviewed by the legal department. So we hope to be able to finalize the application at our next committee meeting in December and bring you the revised application for our final meeting of the year. I will say that I did write and send a letter to the law department as requested by that group and the chair of the Ordinance Review Committee concerning the questions as they related to the applications, and that is in the hands of the law department and I understand will be coming forth. Phil. We did not have any committee meetings since our last board meeting. I am in the process right now of trying to determine a date in December for a meeting where we would have a quorum of members. I hope to have that in the next few days to let the members know and to get the public notice out. Any committee comments? I'll move on to my report, and I will tell you there really has been a lot going on. Beth and I communicate almost daily and sometimes several times a day on all of the things that are coming up or that we need to attend to. I did attend that American Bloom meeting again to promote our rural and our agricultural interest, including the fact that they have adopted a Lexington flower and that should be Fayette County-wide, and there are comments to that effect. Beth and I did attend Jennifer's Council Planning Committee to give the update on the internal audit, and followed by we also attended the council work session, as is required by ordinance, as most of you know, to give the annual report on the PDR program. Beth did a great job of putting together that information, and we got positive comments from the mayor and the CAO. So did you want to comment? I saw you shaking your head. I thought the meeting went very well, and there was a lot of good, positive comments from the council members as well. So you're on a roll, Gloria. Do you feel like we're making progress in communication? You are, but there's still some that don't know a lot about the PDR program because they're newer, and there's some that need some re-education. So I think that helps, and the more that they can come in front of us, whether it's just to give us an update or meet one-on-one, which would be my suggestion with each council member, I think that would be helpful because they have to, again, they have to explain this to their constituency, which doesn't understand it. Unless they're involved in it, maybe you're District 12, like with Kathy, who has farms, but where I represent suburbs, they don't understand the program. And I would like to note for the record that the 12th District Councilperson, Kathy Plowman, is here again today, as she almost always is, hearing issues. And she and I actually have met this month talking about some of the rural hamlets and the things that need work done in the rural area. The other thing that Beth and I have done is we met with Tracy and Keith about the transition while Tracy is going to be gone, and we've discussed setting the agendas and easements, and he's going to be helping us with those things. I did go to the Ordinance Review and Long-Range Planning Committee, and I did write the letter that they asked, and that should be underway. And Beth and I have spent a lot of time going over the responses from the authors, from the offers that the board has authorized in October, and I did this week meet with Dina Wiebe and Matt Hutchison, who are our federal partners. We had a long meeting with them from about 9 to noon on Monday with anything that has come up, questions. I went with my notepad and asking them about the new farm bill and what, if anything else, we needed to be doing. And those things will be going to the committees. One of the main things I think Beth and I did, and I'm saying this because her report and my report are dovetailed in a lot of ways. We do a lot of these things together. We went to GIS to update all of our maps and to make sure that everything in that ordinance or in the long-range plan that has been adopted, our master plan, that anything she has to give points for is well documented on those maps and is clear in every way. So we spent a long time with them and went through all of the existing maps and updating those and what we can do, and we're going to be meeting with them more as soon as they have done some draft things to make sure those are all in order. And I have touched base with Charlie Farmer about our monitoring. And that's about it. We'll have the rest in closed session. So Gloria did cover most of that. Like she said, we are a duo, so most of the things that she reports we have done together. I did think that our reports to council and to Councilmember Misati's group went very well. We received a lot of feedback that was positive, comments on the record from councilmembers who haven't done so before. So we felt like it was really good. And I actually will send that PowerPoint out to you all tomorrow because Headley has seen it, because we also gave it to planning commission, and we received last month, we gave the same report to them, we're required to do both by ordinance, and we received a lot of feedback from the planning commissioners too. And I think it could even be helpful for new members to kind of hear, because we start with the history to kind of touch on that and some of the economic impact and everything. So I'll send that out to you all. And I will say that I heard from our federal partners after Gloria reached out to them and went out. I just heard from one, actually, Dena Weavey, the state conservationist today, who said how much they enjoyed meeting her and that they were excited too to have someone who was a chair who was so excited about it, and they enjoyed meeting her. So I haven't even gotten to tell her that. And besides that and what she and I have done, and it was her idea to go to GIS. I cannot remember if she told you all this last month, but the large maps that we have in my office and that we give you all sometimes for recruitment, we're going to have a stationary of that that will change probably annually as we add farms. But she came up with the idea to have mylar layers made that we will be able to flip. It's going to have watersheds, all sorts of things. We'll have to have that printed off campus. But the GIS people were excited. Some of the maps we use for ranking, the man who is the director has been here since 2004, and he said those maps were created, they were here when he came. So it's a good time. They needed to be updated. Yes, and the two people who met with us, I think, with all the new technology, they can make this easier for us. Even things like when I calculate the acreage for you all sometimes to tell you the contiguous areas we could serve, I go on the PVA site and click and add up each. And, you know, they're going to be able to set it up to where I can just hit something and it tells me. There's just a lot of technology. And that was her idea that we do that. So that's going to be exciting. And we will keep you, I'm sure, once we have it all ready. We'll show that to you all. And other than that, I think that is it. Other than to say we have our next meeting December 18th. That one is still 3.30 this year. And that is it, I think, for me. Thank you. Oh, I'm sorry. You had something you wanted to say. I'm sorry. No, you're good. I would just like to recognize Tracy Jones, who is having surgery today on her back. And she contributes so much to so many different groups within our community, and we just want to recognize her and a healthy recovery. Thank you. We mentioned that at the very beginning. I hope everyone who's now arrived. In fact, I meant to bring a card. Keith, I've told Keith, pass it on, that we thought of her. Kathy. It is on. Good afternoon. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Board. I just wanted to remind you two weeks from tomorrow is our Regional Land Use Summit. And it's from 9 to 3 at the Boone Center. That is Thursday, the 5th of, believe it or not, December. And if you can join us or if you can send a representative, that would be great. I sent to each one of you a link, or I gave it to Beth, and Beth sent it on out. So it should be a good, healthy conversation, and we'd love for you to join us. And a week from tomorrow is Thanksgiving. And so I am thankful, and I thank you for all the work that you're doing. As Council Member Misati said, all the farms, the rural, is in the 12th District. So I appreciate each of you, and happy Thanksgiving. Thank you, Chair. Thank you. Happy Thanksgiving to you, too. We're thankful to have a council person who's supporting. And, two, another one. We have more than two, but especially for the two in attendance today. If there's no other public comment, the Chair will entertain a motion for closed session. So moved. The motion has been made by Zach. Is there a second? Second by Phil. All in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Phil has made that motion, and the second is by Zach. Please signify if your board has come up. Sometimes they do, sometimes they don't. All right. Thank you, and I appreciate you all coming. Thank you very much, and happy Thanksgiving to everyone. Thank you.