Got me understanding Understanding You got me understanding Understanding Understanding, you've got me understanding. For the first time, you've got me understanding. Oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh Love, love me do You know I love you I'll always be true So please Love me do Love, love me do Love, love me do You know I love you I'll always be true. So please, love me too. Oh, love me too. Someone to love. Somebody new. Someone to love. Someone like you. Love, love me do You know I love you I'll always be true So please Love me do Oh, love me do Love, love me do You know I love you I'll always be true So please Love me do Oh, love me too Yeah, love me too Oh, love me too We'll be right back. Thank you. I'm out. Well, it feels like when you squeeze it tight, when you reach the end, do it over again. I say yeah, yeah. I say yeah, yeah. Ain't never gonna catch, all you gotta do is ask him about profile. Do the bell profile. We'll be right back. We'll be right back. Thank you. I've been holding it so long I've been sleeping all alone Lord, I miss you I've been hanging on the phone I've been sleeping all alone I won't miss you Ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh It was just a friend of mine to sing Hey, what's the matter, man? We're gonna come around the square with some Puerto Rican girls It's just us, me too We're gonna bring a case of wine And we're gonna mess some food around, you know, like we're used to I say Hey, why are we so wrong? Won't you come home? Come home! I've been walking Central Park Singing after dark People think I'm crazy Stuffing on my feet Shuffling to the street Asking people What's the matter with you, boy Sometimes I wanna say To myself Sometimes I say I guess I'm lying to myself It's just you I know I have All I want is your child Oh, yeah. I'm out. Thank you. I've been driving all night, my hands wet on the wheel There's a voice in my head that drives my ear It's my baby calling, says I need you here And it's a half past four and I'm shifting gear When she is lonely and the longing gets too much Chips and the cable coming in from above Don't need to fuck that on We've got a thing that I suppose read our love We've got a wave in the air Read our love The radio's playing some forgotten song Randy's coming on strong The roller's got me lifting tight And I'm spinning to a new sunrise When I get lonely and I'm sure I've had enough She says her comfort coming in from above We don't need no letter at all We've got a thing that's called Red Our Love We've got a light in the sky Red Our Love Thank you. Thank you. We'll be right back. We'll be right back. No more speed, I'm almost there Gotta keep cool now, gotta take care Last car to pass, here I go And the line of cars drove down real slow And the radio played that forgotten song Renderly it's coming on strong And the newsman sang his same song Oh, one more radar lover gone When I get lonely and I'm sure I've had enough She says the comfort coming in from above We don't need to let her go We've got a thing that's called red-eye love We've got a light in the sky We've got a thing that's called red-eye love We've got a thing that's called red-eye love Thank you. Stood there boldly Sweating in the sun Felt like a million Felt like number one The height of summer I'd never felt that strong Like a rock I was 18 Didn't have a kid Working for peanuts Not a dime to spare But I was leaning Solid everywhere Like a rock My hands were steady My eyes were clear and bright My walk had purpose My steps were quick in line And I held firm To what I felt was right Like a rock . Thank you. Welcome, everyone. This is the January 18th, 2022 Lexington Fayette Urban County Council work session. And we'll start with public comment. And I understand we have one person who wishes to speak to issues on the agenda. As soon as he's in, we'll go from there. Mr. Murphy, are you able to get your video going and your audio? No. We'll wait another second for him to get back in. Stacy, are you working on getting Mr. Murphy in? Mayor, he was in and he's completely gone from the meeting now. He just came back on our list, so I'll put him in again. Okay, thank you. I think he must have gotten kicked out. Okay. Okay, hopefully you all can hear me now. We cannot see you, though. We need to see you. I am going to try to cure that. Let's see here. All right. And, okay. There you are. Okay. Welcome. Sorry about that. No worries. I got lost here. Okay. Well, we've had all kinds of technical issues today, so this fits right in. And we're on public comment for issues on the agenda. And you were signed up. And I think you know the council's rules if you'll state your name and your council district. And you'll have three minutes. Welcome. Thank you very much. I'm Dick Murphy. I'm in Council District 5. And as you know, I'm an attorney. I'm here speaking on behalf today of the Clark family, which is the developer of Home Place Subdivision on Deer Haven Lane. Ralph Ruschella is the development manager. I'm here because the Planning and Public Safety Committee is reporting out to you today the street continuity ordinance, and I just wanted to tell you that we, along with a number of other people, engaged before the Planning and Public Safety Committee, and I think the result you have today before you is a true compromise. I know it didn't have everything we wanted to have in it, but we feel it's a workable compromise for us, and we hope you will support it. I did want to mention to you that that draft that is coming to you from your committee does have a grandfathering provision in there, and I just wanted to point out that it's coming to you because that's important to us as a developer, because we develop in units, and we go unit to unit and we've planned ahead out there. We've done units in advance so that our people who live there can know what's coming. We have one unit, for instance, that has gone over the five years for a development plan. We get it renewed now for one year periods. And the grandfathering provision will allow us to continue to get that renewed. We think that's important so we can continue to develop just as the units next door have developed. And so we can continue to plan ahead, but also so the new residents who live in the existing units know that when we plan ahead, we will do it the way we plan to do it and that they can know what's coming in next to them. We also have land, a large number of acres that has never been on a development plan, and we fully understand that that will be subject to the provisions of this new ordinance because it'll be a new development plan. So we understand that, but we think it's important that we be allowed to continue with our units that have already been approved, even though we haven't started them, because it's important to us and we feel it's important to our current residents in the subdivision. So, again, we just want to express our thanks to the people who went through the process, and we'd ask for your support for the ordinance as it comes to you from the Planning and Public Safety Committee. And I'll be hanging around here if you have any questions as you get to that discussion at the appropriate place. We'd be happy to answer those for you. Thank you very much for this opportunity to speak to you. Thank you very much. um stacy just to double check there's no one else for public comment correct that's correct all right thank you there are no rezonings or docket approvals so next is approval of the january 11 2022 council work session motions if i could have a motion to approve that please so moved thank you council member plowman thanks council member ellinger are there any questions all those in favor please raise your hand is anyone opposed okay that motion passes there are no budget amendments there is new business if i could have a motion please moved to approve thank you council member ellinger second let's see who did the second i'm sorry vice mayor k seconds now if you have questions if you'll please uh register in please okay um let me see council member maloney thank you mayor uh first uh when y'all vote on the record i would vote no on a just in case it gets piled up my question is on b and i appreciate you putting the monuments on all that on Vassels Road and benches. And my question comes out to there are, well, those benches are going to be in that stone wall. There's a lot of panhandlers, which I know is not against the law, but there's no garbage cans in that area. And if you're going to have people sitting in those benches, I really would hope that you all would put garbage cans in that area because that's going to be a hangout for a lot of panhandlers and people to hang out. And so hopefully we will have, we don't need a trash and debris in that area. So I hope that y'all can get, I assume Mr. Burton is going to look in there too, but please I would ask that we put trash cans up in those corners right there. Thank you. That's a good suggestion. I think also commissioner Albright has heard this. So we'll be sure that gets passed along. Council member Ellinger. Thank you, mayor. Mine was actually on the same one. And I just I was curious on what how this is going to look and what they're going to do, because it looks interesting. We've got four Triple Crown horses here that we're going to be advertising. Could they just explain to you what's going to happen here? Director Burton, did you hear the question? I heard part of it. If you could repeat that. Yeah, if you would, just explain to me what's going to happen, because I couldn't quite understand exactly what you're all going to be doing here with the signage and everything. So we have a couple things that we're going to be doing with this agreement. The first is the silks design. Stacey, I don't know if you still have that. You can bring that up and give a kind of a – and this will be on the batter poles. You know, we have the blue horse signs that say Lexington, horse capital. it'll be similar to the ones you see for those but it has the silks for the actual horses and that's in order to display those obviously we have to have permissions from those who own the rights to those names so that's step one and then step two actually has some large block lettering with the horse's names on each of those four corners along those curved walls so that's that that agreement allows us to this agreement you have before you today allows us to do that we still have to send the silks and those displays back to the horse owners to to get their final sign off on what exactly that'll look like there you go so that's that's kind of what it'll it'll look like and we have one of those basically for every one of the horses with their different silk patterns and their name on there and then what and so besides still what else is going to be on there? So there's four curved walls at the each four corners of Pasadena, Alexandria, and in each of those corners on those on those walls will be block letters with the horse's names. So and again, in order to do that, we have to have permission from the those. Do we have a description of that or a picture of that by chance? uh no and it again it's just big block letters for on the curved walls it's it's nothing ornate just large block letters okay all right thank you it's interesting uh i'm always for supporting our um triple crown winners so thank you thank you it is uh director burton it does look really nice the banners yeah that's beautiful we're happy with it uh councilmember plowman Thank you, Mary. And I also was going to say something in terms of B, which has to go with these flags going out for Sales Road. And, you know, I had not heard of it. And of course, I'm really excited because this recognizes our horse farms that are located out in the 12th district. And I will be promoting it any way I can on my Facebook page and on my newsletters. I was also wondering, will these go out any other quarters like perhaps Paris Pike? Or I don't think that would be able to be done there. But any other possible locations? I'd have to double check exactly how we were to the agreement, because I think it might be specific to this first sales road corridor. But we can double check with law to see if that could be expanded. And again, with obviously the names of the owners of those names, because you can see from the agreement, sometimes it's not the original farm that still on the horse that owns the rights to her names. Yeah. Ali Sheba's naming rights are owned by the Museum of the Southwest. So it's been a challenge chasing all these down. Well, cool idea. And thank you from the 12th district. Thanks, Mayor. Thank you. Council Member Lamb. Thank you, Mayor. My question is on item F. And I believe Ms. Conrad, I had spoken with her earlier and I think Commissioner Ford. It is to do with the consent and release agreement with the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet for the Richmond Road. and I until she had sent a map to me I didn't know exactly where we were talking about because there's not a definitive address on here so I wanted to offer an opportunity just for transparency to provide the map and I thought it was very interesting actually even though this isn't my district I was quite curious so Director Conrad yes thank you Council Member Lamb and I believe the Division of Planning is on here as well. I think Chris with Planning is on here. They've actually been the ones who've been, along with Council Member Worley, really involved in this project. We're certainly excited about its improved safety and pedestrian access for Jacobson Park, but I don't know if she's able to let in Chris from Planning to speak more directly to the actual project. I'm sorry, Director Conrad, who am I looking for? Chris Avila or Director Duncan? I see Director Duncan. Okay. Here he comes. Welcome, Director Duncan. Thank you. I'll turn this over to Chris. You're free to have Chris with you. Welcome. Thank you. Okay, so the larger project here is a safety project. It extends all the way from the Yorkshire Squires intersection down to the elementary school that's off of Spoonsboro. This is what's called an bar cut project. It also has a parallel multipurpose trail as part of this project. And part of this process here is KYTC needs an agreement for the relocation of the park entrance before we really get started with the more substantial work of acquiring right-of-way or utility relocations, which then would lead to the construction phase. There are a couple of important processes that need to take place before this project actually is implemented. Part of that is a public process that KYTC will be managing. That's scheduled for middle to late March. And then the Transportation Policy Committee also has to authorize the federal dollars for this project. That's scheduled for the month of April. The reason why we're looking at a relocation of our entrance here is that in this particular location that you see on your screen here, we have three intersections that are very close together here. And the RCUT concept here really needs a bit more space here in order for some of the U-turn bays and U-turn loons to be able to fit within here. So we need actually one fewer interchange in order to make this concept work. The concept is very effective at reducing the number of crashes. It's also very effective at improving traffic flow through this region as well. I'll be happy to address any questions that council members may have. Does that answer your question? It does. And I appreciate that. I mean, the map and everything wasn't available with the on Legistar. And so I just again, I read it with kind of confusion and I just wanted to be able to better understand and provide that opportunity for anyone watching. I appreciate that information. It's very it looks interesting, the changes on Richmond Road. So thank you, Mayor. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Reynolds. Thank you, Mayor. I just wanted to make a quick comment on item B that everyone was talking about previously. Those things on the corner of Versailles and Alexandria on those four corners, as well as the poles that have the flags, were all part of the Versailles Road Improvement Project that went from Parker's Mill to Mason-Headleap. But when the bid came in higher than was originally planned and that money had been taken out for all of the aesthetic improvements, then the money was taken out for those things. But then with the help of the administration, we were able to find the money to put those aesthetic things back in. So that's why those, the corner there, the four corners, and then the flagpoles and the benches are back in. And they're specific to that project, if that makes sense. So I just wanted to clear that up. And I'm excited about them, too. And I echo that we all follow up to make sure there's plenty of trash cans. So thank you. Thank you for that clarification. Anyone else have new business questions? All right. All those in favor of the motion to approve, please raise your hand. Is anyone opposed? Right. That motion passes. We have one item on continuing business, and that is Council Member James Brown with the Planning and Public Safety Committee summary. Thank you, Mayor. Planning and Public Safety Committee meeting November 2, 2021 report out summary. The meeting was called to order at 1.02 p.m. The first item on our agenda was the approval of the September 21, 2021 committee summary. There were no additions or corrections to the summary, and it was approved without dissent. Next, we had an amendment to revise standards for street patterns and continuity. Planning staff explained that the intent behind this is for a better network of local streets with better connections, which would provide alternatives for shorter trips and reduce traffic volumes on arterials and collector roads. Proposed amendments include a change block length requirements, revising street continuity requirements, revising cul-de-sac requirements, and updating public facility frontage requirements. While the committee had a lengthy discussion on this item, most of the concerns centered on approval of development plans where the build is not complete and the developers could potentially be required to submit a new plan to adhere to the new regulations. Motion to amend the block length requirement from the proposed 800 foot maximum block length to 1000 foot maximum block length. amend the proposed cul-de-sac requirements so that the maximum length of cul-de-sac should be no further than the length of the block a thousand feet amend the language in section b dash 8b striking the every quarter mile provision amend the language in section 6-8 d striking the open space and greenway terms from the provision and changing the language from other publicly accessible facility to other public facility. And the proposed amendments would not apply to any development plan that was approved prior to their enactment. On behalf of the committee, I so move. Is there a second? Council Member Ellinger, are you seconding? Yes, ma'am. Second. Okay. Now let's have discussion. Vice Mayor Kay. Thank you, Mayor. While there were a series of amendments that I found at least reasonable, it was the final one that I spoke against at the Planning and Public Safety Committee meeting. And I want to explain why for those who are not there and for the public. And I will make a motion to amend what is coming before us today in regard to that particular amendment that was proposed. So the amendment essentially says for this particular zone text, we are going to make an exception to our general rule that any development plan that has not, with no action has been taken in the intervening five years, must submit a new plan and be subject to the existing, the new, whatever regulations have been passed since it was originally proposed. And what's at issue here is projects where there's been some work done and being subject to new regulations would impose a burden. In those cases, a developer usually, typically, goes to the planning staff and says, we've been doing some work that would be compromised by the new regulations, and so we should be granted an extension under the old regulations. That's been the process for decades. And my understanding is that when a developer has made that request, it has been agreed to. So I am having difficulty with understanding why in this particular case, there ought to be an exception to this general rule. and I'm concerned that it would set a precedent. So if we can waive the usual rule for this particular zone text, why would we not be able to waive it for any other? And if we can do that, then what is to prevent a landowner from putting a development plan into the planning commission and then sitting on that plan essentially forever, knowing that they will not be subject to any new regulations. So I understand the concern of the particular developer who came forward, Mr. Murphy represented. But my understanding is that they have the option, as would any other developer, going to the planning commission, starting with planning staff and saying, we've been making progress on this development. And even though we haven't completed it within the five years, we asked for an extension. And it's been fairly pro forma for that extension to be granted. So while there is, on the one hand, a risk that a developer will be subject to new regulations when we might say, well, maybe they shouldn't be. The risk on the other side is much more significant because it essentially jeopardizes the existing five-year rule that all plans are subject to. That if they have not really done anything substantial, they need to be subject to the new regulations. And I've spoken to most of the people on council about this, people who are not at the meeting. It's a little bit complex, but the bottom line for me is very simple. We should not be making an exception for one particular zone text and essentially jeopardizing the entire way in which we've proceeded with all zone text amendments for decades. So having said that, I will make a motion that to amend the proposal that's on the table and to delete the last amendment that was proposed by Council Member Worley. See if I can bring it up. So it would be to delete the final motion to amend that was made in the Planning and Public Safety Commission. that reads to amend article six for street patterns and continuity so that proposed amendments would not apply to any development plan that was approved prior to their enactment. That's the amendment and I propose to remove that from the proposed new zone text regulation. So move. Second. All right, thank you, Council Member Lamb seconded that. Let's have some discussion about the motion to amend. Is there any? Council Member Kloiber. Thank you, Mayor. I just want to throw something out there. Obviously, this is a big change for people, and sticking with what it is that we've done in the past means a lot. but is there any way that maybe we could have an effective start date on this sometime down the line so that if this motion were to pass with the amendment changed people would have time to apply and shift what it is they're doing in the interim I think that would be I'm going to throw that out there as like a proposal I'm not making a motion on it I just think that if we had been discussing out of committee grandfathering this in if we're going to be discussing changing that maybe making an effective start date a little bit down the line towards the end of the year might help people to get behind that but that's just my thoughts on this um i'd like to hear the rest of the discussion on where people are at thank you uh council member warley thank you mayor and uh those of you in the committee heard the discussion and the and the my reasoning for having made that amendment but for those of you who are not and then for others just to hear i think what you heard mr murphy say is a very practical issue and a very practical concern that someone could have a development plan or preliminary subdivision plan in place that they are working towards uh they go to have that renewed at the end of their five years, which after the first five years, then it becomes annually. You have to get it renewed every year. And at the end of that year, their renewal is conditioned upon being subject to regulations for which they were not subject at the beginning and for which they have already developed part of their development. And so whereas they once had a certain feet block that could be their maximum length block, then the remainder of the subdivision cannot have that. Or for instance, if they go and they ask for approval to change and it's said, well, we'll allow you to continue to develop a plan, but now we want you to do this differently than you otherwise planned. That's not fair. We should proceed from new developments with new regulations. Ongoing developments should be subject to the regulations in which they were approved. I think that's a general principle of fundamental fairness. It is what the development community has spent their time and effort and money towards is operating under a certain set of rules. And you can't just change the rules then on them. These things happen. And you can't have condition of approval of a development plan or subdivision plan that would otherwise be a matter of course, condition on the subjective whim of a particular planning commission or planning staff. I think that this particular planning commission and staff has always always strives to be fair and equitable. But that doesn't mean that there's not an opportunity that someone would be subject to a new regulation that they were otherwise not subject when they began their development and started expending money. So that's why I believe that development plans that are approved now and are in operation when you come up to any sort of renewal should be subject to the regulations in place when they were originally approved. Thank you. Is there a way to do that? So maybe we would say if it goes beyond five years, then you have to update your plan. But if it's within the last five years or I don't know, is there someone who can? Glenda George is getting on. And Mayor Tracy Jones is also standing by to log in too since this is a planning issue. Thank you. As soon as I see her, I'll bring her in. Tracy. Yeah, as soon as I see Tracy, I'll pull her into the meeting. Okay, thank you. Stacy, are you saying Tracy's not there? She was not in the waiting room, but she's on standby and she's in here now. So I'm bringing her in. All right, thank you. Hi, Tracy. Did you hear my question? I said, Mayor, Tracy Jones is also standing by to log in, too, since this is a planning issue. I think we have a little technical issue. Okay, thank you. So, welcome, Tracy. Council Member Reynolds has a question for you. I think I heard most of that. And then were you also going to, was Tracy Wade also coming into this meeting? Tracy, are you saying Tracy's not there? She was not in the waiting room, but she's on standby and she's in here now. Tracy, I don't know if you can mute your meeting in the background. I don't see Tracy Wade in the waiting room. Tracy Jones is on. Yes. Tracy Jones. Okay. Okay, Tracy, did you hear my question? Yes, Tracy Jones is on standby. somebody needs to mute there we're getting the mute your computer if okay now tracy jones can you start us off and then if we get tracy wade we'll continue with her so if i understand the question from councilmember reynolds it was whether or not you can put up some kind of a, if they come back longer than a period of, say, five years, then you can apply that. I mean, I think we can try to word the ordinance in such a way to do that. It may be difficult to monitor in terms of planning, and they'd have to comment on that, you know, because they're measuring these plans from the time they're certified and what progress they're making all along, but I think there's a way to do that. I mean, traditionally, what the vice mayor described is what happens, so, but if you all feel like that's necessary, I think we, you know, there's a way to do that. We've also got Jim Duncan from planning director. Did you want to add anything? Did you hear the question? Yes, ma'am, I did. Thank you, mayor. I appreciate the effort to compromise on this, but we are very concerned about the application of these rules to a patchwork of plans that are in various stages of approval over the years, some that have dropped off altogether and may try to pop back. Five years is a time period that our plans ordinarily are expected to be developed, and they can come back in one-year increments, as Council Member Worley said. the property that Mr. Murphy spoke about earlier has already been extended twice without question. So I just want to reiterate that it is practically pro forma that the planning staff recommends and the planning commission approves the five-year re-approval and the one-year extensions without question. Okay, thank you for your answers. I appreciate it. Thank you. Okay. Council Member James Brown. Thank you, Mayor. And I appreciate the conversation around grandfathering and what has been the practices in the past and consistency moving forward. As Chair of Planning and Public Safety, I've been in contact and talked to Mr. Rochelle and his concerns in regards to his particular development. That was the only case that I heard that, you know, individually that had some real concern about this issue and what these changes could do to their development and how they have been phasing it. I know we probably don't want to make any exception for just one person or one individual, but I think this one may heed us to have more conversations about what this looks like going forward. um council member clover um i think he has a good point and that's one way that we can provide extended time to uh a development that is in progress and in its phase maybe we delay the implementation implementation date of what we're looking at today um but at the same time i think you know the motion had some um um bigger or greater impact than what we're talking about just in regards to grandfathering. And I know Tracy Wade and Jim Duncan had explained that to me. Is that something that y'all can share with the full council that this has other implications in regards to outside of what we're talking about, director? Well, Council Member Brown, the primary concern, as we've said, is the precedent that this sets. And if we were to do this kind of grandfathering, we believe it would open the door for the council to be asked to do that for any new regulation that comes along. The subdivision regulations are not frequently updated, particularly at this level. And so when they are, you see them coming from a mile away. And this one's been in the development for a long time with input from the community. and so there are opportunities to help develop these or these regulations as they come along and and and to say then that once that process is completed then we're not going to subject people in the past to these regulations is a fair statement through the process that already exists but for someone who is tying up land for decades and not developing and not doing anything on it They should be. They should be subject to the new regulations. I mean, that's that's the deal. You come in and tell us you're going to develop and then then you follow through on that. And the deal that we cut with you is you get to develop under the rules and regulations at that time. But if you come in and say, I want to develop and then come back eight, 10 years later and say, I want to pick up where I left off. But by the way, I didn't do anything. Well, that's not fair. That's giving people an advantage. and moreover we're not furthering the best practice regulations for the community the health and safety the whole point of the existence of our regulations and so that's what council member brown we are concerned about is the precedent that this sets if we were to do this because we believe that others would come back and ask it to apply to other regulations as well okay okay all right thank you uh thank you thank you thank you for that director and thank you Mayor. I may chime back in. Thank you. On the amendment, Council Member LaCree. Thank you, Mayor. Council Member James Brown asked a question that was on my mind, and that had to do with kind of the procedure and the precedent that would be set if we were to move forward with the proposed amendment. You know, I guess my question has to do with the process for hardship or relief plans. Mr. Duncan, is there anything additional that you'd like to share about any kind of barriers to developers being granted relief plans? If someone were to come to you all and say, you know, we have a hardship scenario, we'd like an extension. I mean, how unlikely would it be for them to actually be granted that extension? Council Member Legree, the word you're using, hardship, specifically applies for the waiver request. So if someone is subject to contemporary existing rules, but they feel that their development plan, their development would be better if they didn't have to meet those rules, or, as you say, there's an exceptional hardship, then they can make that case, along with several other reasons that exist, to ask for relief from that requirement through the waiver process, again, with the Planning Commission. and it is not hyperbole for me to say those are routinely approved without a lot of digging into what the issue is the developer comes to us and says i've got a hardship or i'm working on an on an innovative design or i'm in the infill area or something to that effect one of these things that's in the regulations it says if you cite one of these examples then you can request a waiver The staff recommends approval. The Planning Commission routinely grants it. So it sounds as though that a relief valve and an option for developers already exists, and it exists through our Planning Commission. Our Planning Commission are people that we approve, that we put on that commission. So, you know, that was just my question, in addition to the precedent and the procedural aspects. Thank you for clarifying, Director Duncan. Vice Mayor Kaye. Oh, Vice Mayor Kaye. Thank you, Mayor. I was just going to wrap it up, but Council Member Wally may have another word or two. Although this is a fairly complex question, I think what it comes down to is this amendment, which looks like it only applies to this particular ZODA, opens up the door for it to apply to all zone text amendments. And as a result, it opens the door to exactly what Director Duncan said, a developer understanding that they can always develop under the previous rules so long as they file a plan, is going to file a plan. And then they can sit on that land and that plan essentially as long as they want. And the five-year rule is meant specifically to prevent that scenario. It's meant to say to a developer, we approve it, you've got five years to get this done. And if you don't get it done within five years and you've begun and you have a reason that the new rules would be a hardship, we're going to grant you a waiver, but you can't just sit on the land. So on the one hand, what we have is a speculative potential harm to one or more developers, a harm that's never occurred. There's never, so far as I understand it from planning, no developer has come forward and they've actually done work on a plan. It's been denied an extension. That's what we have on the one hand. On the other hand, we have opening up the door to a major change in our entire zone text regulation. So I would urge my colleagues to approve this amendment and delete it from the rest of the regulation being going forward. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you. Let's see. Council Member Lamb, have you spoken yet? Council Member Worley, I think you spoke once. Can we go to Council Member Lamb, please? Thank you, Mayor. And I'm not going to repeat everything that has been said in favor of this motion. I just want to know, to state for the record that I'm in support of the Vice Mayor's motion and I do hope that my colleagues will give this strong consideration. and because I really do believe that the unintended consequences here is much greater than the intended. So I'm hoping that my colleagues will support this motion. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you. Council Member Worley. Thank you, Mayor. And I appreciate Director Duncan's concerns and the concerns raised that he and I have had a discussion, and I explained to him then and I explained to you now, open to compromise language, but not simply taking the language out. For the reasons that I've said, and some I'll reiterate, but I will just first point out, this is not opening the door to grandfathering in our zoning ordinance, Texas amendment process. We put grandfathering into the ADU changes. And when we see a sweeping large change, we oftentimes will say that should not apply to things as they are now because this is so grand and sweeping. And to Director Duncan's point, he said the regulations are not frequently updated, particularly at this level. This is some of the largest changes to these regulations that we've seen in some time. That is why I believe it's necessary to build in language for those who are acting now to act under the current regulation. And yes, Director Duncan is correct, and I've seen it many times. Development plans are continued or approved for continuation routinely. But without this grandfathering language, there is the opportunity that even with that routine re-approval, that there is a condition that you must now act according to the new regulations. That would be within the purview of the Planning Commission to do that just as easy as it would be, actually much easier than it would be for them to waive new regulations. Because the waiver is set by law, which you can argue to be a justification for a waiver. And you can't have created that situation for yourself. So, again, we have grandfathered. We particularly grandfather when there are large changes. This is a large change. I think that Council Member Reynolds maybe had a great compromise that it should be development plans that have been approved or amended within the past five years and that have active work continuing on. That prohibits the worry of some sit for 10 years development plan. Also, you've got to come forward every five years, then every single year. So some of the worries that are being concerned here, they are outliers. And some of you may think some of my concerns are outliers too, but the reality is we have grandfathered. We grandfather when we make sweeping change. This is as big a change in the zoning regulations as subdivision regulations as we have made in quite some time. So it's appropriate to allow those operating under current regulations to continue to do so. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member James Brown. Thank you, Mayor. And I find myself in a position that I often find myself in, and that's agreeing with two points of an argument. I agree and I am sympathetic to the folks that are currently developing under rules and regulations from when they had their plans approved. But then I also do agree and do plan to support Vice Mayor Kay's amendment just because of the sake of wholesaling grandfathering in this way. I do have some concerns, but I do think that we can try to find a way to compromise, at least to address the development that has been presented to me, that this may have, they may have some challenges with these new rules and regulations going forward. They, you know, they shared with me some of the challenges with the public facility space and compromises that they've had to make, as well as trail regulations, shared use trail regulations that they had to comply with, as well as green space. So, you know, we ask these developers to do these do these things, jump through these hoops and then to change the rules on them midstream, which, you know, I think we need to do and we need to update it. But at the same time, I don't want us to penalize a developer that is in the process of developing. So I'm going to support the motion, but would encourage and willing to work with our planning department to still try to come up with some language that we can implement to address the concerns that I have shared. So thank you, Mayor. Thank you. Council Member Reynolds. Yes, thank you, Mayor. Can I make an amendment at this time? Yes. Okay, I would like to make the amendment to... You would be amending the amendment. The amendment, yes. to limit it to five years to grandfather everyone in that has been within the past five years. And if I don't have the correct language, please help me. Is there a second? Second. Council Member Ellinger seconds. Now we'll discuss the amendment to the amendment. if there's any discussion. Councilmember Lamb. Thank you. And while I appreciate the initiative to find a compromise, I am very perplexed as to, and I see Director Duncan on here, how you, five years from when? Five years from the date it passes? Five years from today? I mean, and are there parameters as to how that's implemented? I mean, I would ask Dr. Excuse me, Director Duncan, not Dr. Duncan, if you would, maybe if you wanted to provide your comments on the amendment, please. Thank you, Council Member Lamb. As I understand, if we're looking back five years, let's just say that it's 2022 to January of 2017. I believe we would have to say that would include all plans that had been renewed or re-approved during that time as well, because they essentially, that's a new plan as well. So not just the plans that were seen for the first time between January 2017 and January 2022, but all the plans that had been been re-approved during that time. So that's the way I understand that, Council Member Lamb. If that's not Council Member Reynolds' intention, then we'd have to look differently. But I think if we were saying current plans that have approved within the past five years, that would pick up those plans as well. I appreciate that. I should say, you know, we bandied around the words development plan, but we're really talking about subdivision plans, preliminary subdivision plans, not so much development plans. Okay, I appreciate that. Again, no offense to Council Member Reynolds, but I just can't support setting up this. I just think it's going to be a tracking nightmare. So I'm hoping that my colleagues will think broadly on this. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you. Council Member Kloiber. Thank you, Mayor. Director Duncan, it's my understanding that these development plans, if people have taken substantive action towards development, as defined by the Planning Commission and you guys, they are not subject to this renewal process because they've already taken large actions towards the plan. Is that correct? A little bit, Councilmember Florida. First of all, substantive, I think, would be in the eye of the beholder. If somebody has done just about anything moving towards development, the staff would certainly and the planning commission would consider that an active plan. And so, therefore, if they've done that within the five years of building out the plan as specified in the regulations, then the planning commission would routinely reapprove that for another year. And they could come back year after year as long as they were making some progress and perhaps explaining why they were being delayed, but nevertheless making progress. And substantial isn't really the word we're looking for. We're just looking to see it as an active plan. And so this amendment would continue to say anyone who had applied for or had been given a development plan for a subdivision within the last five years would be able to be grandfathered into the previous rules so long as they continue to show progress, or is this in lieu of progress as well? Right. Any any any subdivision plan that was approved through through today or through prior to passage of this ordinance would have a five year window. Really, it's six because they've got a year to get their plan certified and then an additional five years to to start working on their plan. And within that five years, if they've made just a little bit of progress, if they're continuing to move on that, then they can come back and ask for the year extensions at that point. Okay. And this amendment differs from the previous unamended ordinance put before us in which crucial way? Because anyone that had been approved in the last five years, it would have come to term by now. So does this, basically my question is, is this amendment different substantively from the unamended previous ordinance? Well, it's different, Councilmember Coyver, in the respect that the unamended ordinance, the way it came out of committee, could potentially pick up any plan that had ever been approved, regardless of its current status, from years and years and years ago, plans that had never sought re-approval. So this plan, this amendment, sounds like it would go back. It would not pick up as many. But going back to the response to Council Member Land's question, we don't know how many from 2017 to 2022, how many of those approvals are also extensions and re-approvals and that sort of thing. So not just brand new plans from the past five years, but any plan that had been re-approved or extended during that five-year period would be subject to it. One last question while I have you. Can a plan seek for re-approval before their five-year window is up? They probably can, Council Member Thorberg, if they're anticipating that for some reason they would not be available to do that, but that doesn't happen. No, they all get they all come back for approval before they expire, before they expire that we don't want them to get that close. So they start that process before the five years is up and then they and then they get re-approved. Okay. So to speak to this amendment to the amendment, I think that it might be a little convoluted in the reporting that we have for all of this. If there is a process to seek approval beforehand, I think I would go back to my original proposal to state, you know, if we extend a period of time that allows for anyone with an active development plan to reapply, and we give enough time for that to happen, we might be able to get all of these bounds cases that council member James Brown was discussing to allow them to come in and go with the rules still in place for a year or so before the new rules come out there, which gives them that five-year window to try and comply with everything without opening the door. So I don't know that I'm on board with this amendments amendment. I think it does make some convoluted issues as far as reporting and figuring that out, but maybe making a date certain in the future that gives enough time for these developers to, if they want to, preemptively apply, might work out without grandfathering people in. Those are my thoughts. Thank you. Vice Mayor Kaye to this amendment. Yes. I don't think the amendment really improves from either side what I am proposing, which is to eliminate the amendment that's a part of the proposal. The original proposal has come to us today. And we're talking as if, in some sense, we're talking as if there is a large potential harm that would come from taking out this particular part of the amended proposal. When all the evidence is that there is, there has not been any, and it's unlikely that there will be any. What it does is it says, yes, there's a burden on a developer. If they reach the end of the five years or before they do, they need to come to the planning staff and the planning commission and explain why they should get an extension. And then they get an extension. that's all that the amendment that i'm proposing to eliminate relieves them of a burden which they haven't had to shoulder um it's a part of why i'm kind of perplexed by some of the the conversation it's it's it's a damage that we have no evidence has been inflicted um we have every reason to believe that it won't be inflicted and yet we would we would open the door to other similar amendments that would change the basically the nature of the way in which we think about the planning and development process so i will vote against the amendment thank you mayor thank you is there anyone else who wishes to speak to the current amendment if not we'll go ahead then and take a vote on council member Reynolds Amendment. All those in and if you'll hold your hands up for a minute. All those in favor, please raise your hand. I'm counting six. Those opposed, keep your hand up, please. Mayor Gordon I counted seven yeses. I'm sorry. I counted seven. That might have been my fault. I voted wrong. Twice. Did you vote twice? So my vote is no. Let's do the vote again. Just to be sure. Let's see. Okay. All those in favor of this current amendment, please raise your hand and keep it up. Okay. Is everybody up? Seven. All those opposed. Why am I getting seven? To leave the meeting. Oh, OK. We only have 14. So that motion fails. All right. Now we have another amendment on the table. Um, so is there any final discussion? If not, we'll go ahead and vote on the vice mayor's amendment. Councilmember Plowman. Thank you, Mayor. You know, I've been kind of like James, like Councilmember Brown, kind of listening, and that sounds good. Listen to this, that sounds good. But in my mind, where we're headed with this is for those folks that have purchased land and submitted a plan and have not done anything with it for over five years, that's what we're trying to make not happen. I mean, in other words, they should not be allowed to sit, I'm using that word just because I can't think of another one, on property that they've had and they're still sitting on it for eight to 10 years. And I don't think that's right. I mean, we've got such demand for our land. And if they're going to continue with a plan that they may or may not be required to ever act on, then I don't think that's right. kind of for the greater good of the land that we have here in Lexington. So I will support Vice Mayor's amendment. Thank you. Is there anything else to this amendment? All right. All those in favor of the amendment, please hold your hand up and leave it up for a minute. I'm counting nine. Stacy, all those opposed? I'm counting five. Is that the count you got? Yes, ma'am. Okay. So that motion passes. So the motion on the floor is the original motion from the committee and seconded as amended. Is there any discussion about this motion? Council Member James Brown. Thank you, Mayor. I'd like to make an amendment to delay the implementation of these new rules and regulations until a year from now, February of 2023. And part of the reason being is because some of, you know, I still think that there's an opportunity to come up with a way to maybe grandfather some of the folks that are moving forward with development plans that this would impact. So, but if we can't come up or if we do not come up with language to that effect, that I think delaying the implementation of these new rules will give folks that are in the midst of starting development or in the progress or process an opportunity to recognize the changes are coming and to do what they need to do. So I move to delay the implementation of this new amendment to revise standards of street patterns and continuity. So move. Second. I'm sorry, who seconded? Council Member Lamb seconded. All right. Is there discussion of this amendment to delay implementation to February 2023? Vice Mayor Kay. Thank you, Mayor. I have a question for Director Duncan. All right. Director? Yes, ma'am. Thank you. And that is, I frankly don't have a sense of what impact this might have, positive, negative, or neutral. and I know you don't like to give opinion as opposed to rules and regulations but can you speak to the question of what impact this might have one way or the other if we delay the implementation for a year? Vice Mayor I see this as a key civics lesson that what we've gone through is the discussion and how we get to compromise and I fully support that so the way I see this is that this amendment from council member James Brown keeps the motion coming out of committee intact without the grandfathering and that we believe is a good compromise because a year from now you know a lot of things may happen between now and then or maybe nothing will happen but a year from now we'll have a clean set of regulations that we can start applying and we believe that is a good compromise and we would support that. Thank you for that. And since I always follow whatever Director Duncan suggests, I will be in favor of the motion. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you. Council Member Baxter. Thank you, Mayor. I plan to support this amendment solely because I think it will give our current developers the opportunity to make any changes that they need to, have the foresight to do so. And I think it is a good compromise between everything we've discussed today. So thank you. Thank you. Is there any other discussion about the amendment? Seeing none, all those in favor of the amendment to delay implementation to February 2023, please raise your hand. Okay, is anyone opposed? All right, that motion passes. Now, we have a motion on the table, which has been amended to delay the implementation and to strike the Article VI amendment in the last paragraph as reported. Is there any final discussion of the motion? All those in favor of the motion as amended, please raise your hand. Is anyone opposed? All right, that motion passes. Thank you, Director Duncan. Thank you, Tracy. Appreciate your help. All right, Mayor, you ready for me to finish? I am. Are you? Yes, ma'am. Next, we had Samantha Castro with Long Range Planning provided a presentation on the expanded hearing notification ZODA. She explained the need for expanded notification as many residents in Lexington are renters who otherwise might not know of land use changes. The proposed changes would ensure that all interested members of the community, including renters, business owners, and employees, have the ability to be involved in the development process. Due to time constraints, we had to continue our discussion on this item until our next committee meeting. No comment or action was taken on this item. We adjourned at 2.58 p.m. And that concludes my report out. Thank you very much. I would ask if anyone has more questions for you, but they may have been vetted. Thank you. All right, council reports. If you'll log in, council members. Council member Reynolds. I know you don't want to hear from me again, but I have some announcements. um tomorrow the city is hosting a food access community input meeting at um the centro de san juan diego uh which is on the corner of devonport and alexandria drive that will be from 5 30 to 7 p.m and the city is looking for um input about the possibility of um having a mobile food uh kind of van or other things that would be helpful in parts of town that don't have access to food or that are lower income. And then on Saturday at Valley Park from 10 a.m. to 12 p.m., there's going to be a public safety meeting for the Neighborhood Watch for Cardinal Valley. And people that are on the committee for the safety like outreach group are going to meet and anyone is welcome that wants to participate. So I hope people will show up there and if it's not absolutely freezing, we can even be outside. So thank you very much. Thank you. And thank you for bringing up the community input for the food that is moving toward one of the commission on racial justice recommendations. So appreciate you bringing that up. Councilmember Plowman. Thank you, Mayor. I just wanted to share, I thought some good stats. I serve on the Raven Run Advisory Board, and I have since I've come into office, and we had a meeting last week, and that was interesting, and I thought you all and our public might be interested, but this past month in December, there were 3,823 three visitors to the park, which was a 3% increase over last December, which was an increase. So it's just amazing. And for the year 21, there were 65,636 visitors to the park. So I think one good thing that's come out of COVID is that our citizens have gone out and enjoyed and discovered and have enhanced our parks. And so I think that's the good news. I also wanted to mention that I know we couldn't be there physically yesterday with a Martin Luther King celebration, but was able to watch it on WLEX at 11 o'clock live. And kudos to everybody involved, Alpha Phi, Alpha Fraternity. The singers were great. The program was great. And I probably shouldn't single out anybody, but there was this gentleman by the name of Michael Priesley that I was just like, oh my gosh, this guy's an unbelievable singer. I've never heard anything like that. So I just wanted to tell everybody involved, you did a super job. And again, not being in person, but I felt like I was as good as it was. And then as we face perhaps another snowfall tomorrow, thank you so much to all of our employees that through thick and thin and less than, well, what, 10 days? No, not even 10 days, we're able to pull it all together again. And, you know, we just take it for granted that our streets are always going to be plowed and things are going to be perfect. And they gave it their all. And I just wanted to give my appreciation and thank them. And hopefully if it does snow tomorrow, it'll be calm. So thanks to all. That's all I have, Mayor. Thank you. Council Member Lamb. Thank you, Mayor. And I have a couple of different things. First, I wanted to send my condolences to both Mr. Dick Perry and to Mr. Willie Fogel's family members. They both have had some affiliation with the 4th District in the history of Lexington, Fayetteville, and county government. And I actually knew both of them, and I am so sorry for the family's loss. And I know that, you know, it's just been such a trying time to lose a family member, especially during this pandemic right now. But I just want them to know that I'm thinking about them during this time of transition and that, you know, that their their legacies as council members and council aides, council aid will be carried on and remembered and valued very much. So the other thing I wanted to say is I wanted to thank the environmental services, Ms. Jennifer Carey and Heather Wilson and the other employees that they planted some new trees out on Tate's Creek Road. And after the first snow episode and the high winds, some of the trees ended up becoming uprooted and they quickly went out there and and tied them up and put them back down in the ground before it started freezing again. And I just want to thank them so much for their quick action to take care of the trees that they've newly planted out there. And also, I wanted to give a shout out to all of the employees and administration for the good work on taking care of our streets and being for the safety. And I know I was out during both events. And, you know, it's always so good when you see such an amazing public safety and all of the streets and roads and everybody else that has been helping with the plowing and getting the salt out there. And, you know, it's just it's a it's a big time collaborative effort. And I just applaud each and every one of them for their hard, hard work and long, long hours that they spend to make sure that our city streets are safe. So thank you very much. Thank you. Councilmember James Brown. Thank you, Mayor. I just wanted to thank everyone for their understanding yesterday for the cancellation of the Freedom March. That program has been going on for 49 years, and that was only the second time that the march has been canceled. The previous time was for icy conditions as well. So, you know, a whole lot of thought went into making that decision. We waited as long as we could to make it and try to make it at a time that we thought would give people a heads up to make their plans for that day and not put anybody in an unsafe situation. So I'd just like to thank the commissioner, Commissioner Albright and Chief Weathers. I consulted with them before taking that information to the committee. And I think we made a good decision because it was it was pretty bad out there on our sidewalks and streets. And then along the same vein, I just like to thank all of you all and everybody for sharing the information about the virtual program, commemorative program. I'd like to thank Chester Grundy and all the other members of the committee. I don't want to start naming names, but Chester has been instrumental with putting that program together for years. And I think yesterday he, you know, he really, really outdid himself. That program was something pretty special. And the senator for being our keynote speaker, especially in the role that he's in now and what he represents on a national level. So I'd like to thank everybody that was involved with the MLK celebrations throughout the city. The other thing I want to ask, Mayor, and this might be a question for Commissioner Armstrong, and it's in regards to what I've been seeing on social media and what I've been seeing on TV in regards to recruitment for our fire department. I know we probably had some conversations before about putting money towards hiring an agency, but I've really seen a lot of commercials promoting our fire department and then a lot of social media ads. And I think they're right on point. And I think that's the kind of thing that we need to do across all of our public safety departments. Fire. I mean, police corrections is is are we doing something different? Is that why I'm seeing more commercials and more of an aggressive marketing campaign, Commissioner? Commissioner? Well, thank you very much for the question. I would say this, especially over the last year or so, you've probably seen a little bit of a difference because, speaking frankly, some of the airways, air time, whatever time you want to say is a little bit less expensive than it may have been in the past. So we're taking advantage of that. We're working with the detention center on doing a more vibrant, both traditional media and social media as well. But the fire department has really geared it up recently. If you're not aware, they're going to be having a class start around March 14th of about 40. And they're actually recruiting for it in the fall or the beginning of next year right now. I know that sounds a little strange to most citizens, but we recruit eight to 10 months, almost a year sometimes in advance. So you probably have seen more of that now than you normally have. And we're allocating more resources, both police, fire and corrections for recruiting right now. OK, I appreciate that. I have noticed a noticeable difference and just wanted to see if that was the case and share my thoughts about how we can expand that on to our other public safety divisions, especially police and corrections, because it's it's pretty something. And I mean, it's pretty aggressive. Well, if I can indulge, if you'll indulge me for one minute, I know the mayor knows about this. Beginning in February, we've actually, we're going to be contracting, actually be coming in front of the council here soon with Fayette Mall at an extremely discounted rate for the visitor's desk out there. That will essentially be a public safety recruiting location. It won't be just police. It won't be fire. It won't be just corrections. It'll be E911 as well. And we're going to be staffing that as much as possible with the different divisions. But for instance, if police is staffing it that day, we'll still have material there for corrections and fire and E911. We're really trying to do more of a brother and sister joint effort in this recruiting. And what you'll be seeing hopefully in Fayette Mall at the beginning of February will be a huge example of that. Okay. Now that's good news. And thanks for bringing up E911. I know a lot of times we forget to mention them. So thank you for that. Thanks, Commissioner. Thanks, Mayor. Thank you. And I'll just say Commissioner Armstrong, you know, we've had a lot of these discussions this past year. They've been working really hard to look at creative ways to recruit throughout public safety. So that's what you're seeing with some of these new actions. So we're very hopeful about them. Commissioner Maloney. oh god commissioner those bring back the good days oh council member i had commissioner armstrong on my mind it brings back memories speaking of commissioners i've got a question about the contract that we have with the folk to do main war are they going to be ready for tomorrow is that true those parts been in for that truck and if not have we started to look at a backup plan because uh man award is a big impact and we have to take our guys off to do that on top of what other streets that they're missing out on so are you are you talking about our red river ranch contractor yeah yes ma'am they were working in this past snow and they'll be working again in the next snow okay it was just the first one that they couldn't get their parts in time. But yes, they were working for us on the one Sunday, and they'll be working again tomorrow if we, you know, if we, if it does snow. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Back to some of our colleagues that had passed over the weekend. I knew Mr. Perry was a great guy. He came on. I came on right when he went off, But he was a big help for me, and he will be missed. And I want to thank all my colleagues and especially the people out there who have given me a lot of sympathy, support from my best friend, as you all know, Coach Joe Hall. And Willie Fogle. Willie and I go all the way back. He helped me in my first campaign. Willie and I went to college together. We grew up. And I'll tell you what, he was a good service. He really cared about his job. He did a good job as a council member, and he was helping Susan Beard out. I do have a couple of good funny stories to say about both of them. One of them is Coach Hall, and it was in Susan Lamb's district. Susan Lamb called me up to get Joe B. Hall to come and dedicate the new basketball court out there. So we're out there playing around, and Joe's sitting in the chair next to me, and I'm sitting there mid-court, and I said, Joe, I'm going to show you something here. He's going to have to watch. I said, you aren't going to hit anything. I said, man, come on, Joe. Don't be acting like this. The wind blowing. I put my finger up and all that. And I throw the ball up in the air and joke it. And I look, Joe. What? That ball went in. And boy, he was the last person he wanted to see me do was hit that shot. Because I bugged the living heck out of him for the next two months on that shot. Saying, buddy, I told you I could hit it. And then for Willie and Joe, we were real close. We went to Florida. Me and Joe and Willie. Joe got to know Willie. We had a lot of good stories to say down there. And it's amazing that they both died on the same day. And it's sad, but they're not suffering anymore. I love them both. And my heart goes out for Joe's family, to Kathy and Judy and Steve. And those are the tough times that they're going through. and Willie with Stephanie and Lisa and Kendra. And Willie, one a little bit younger, just became a grandfather. And it's tough on all of us, but they will be missed. But I want to thank all of you all who did send me some great messages for Karen. But thank you all again. Thanks. Thank you. Council Member Baxter. Thank you, Mayor. I also just wanted to send my condolences to Willie Fogel's family. He was a 9th District resident and actually ran a campaign against me this last election circle, election term. So I just wanted to give my condolences to his family and thank them for the support that they gave him throughout his whole career with the city. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you. Are there any other council reports? There is no official mayor's report, although I did want to say a couple things. Councilmember James Brown has been modest, and I believe you were the co-chair, one of the co-chairs of the Martin Luther King Jr. events. You and Chester and Anne Grundy, you did a fabulous job. And I thought the program was terrific. And Michael Priestley, he was one of the All Tech scholarship winners a few years ago. He's a fantastic singer and very talented, and it's nice to know he's now working at the UK program with Dr. McCorvey. I wanted you all to know as far as this past storm, we used, I believe, about 2,200 tons more of salt, and we've decided again to fill up the salt barns. So each storm event, we're going back and refilling the salt. So we'll start this next event with two full salt barns again. And then finally, I did want to express my sympathies to Dick Perry's family. And of course, Joe B. Hall. Joe and Catherine were neighbors of ours for a long time. And my story, which I've told publicly, is that we were both Black Labrador owners and their big lab, Max, would escape the backyard frequently and he'd come down to our house. So we would put him in the backyard and I would call down there and say, is Max in the yard? And they'd say, oh, yes. And I'd ask him to go look for him and they'd say, no, he's not in the yard. So he would get taken back down the road, down the street a while, and they were wonderful people. Willie and I actually sat next to each other down around where Councilmember Bledsoe and Councilmember Lamb sit when I was very first on the council. And for about the first month, I would say to Willie, what is going on? What is going on? And he'd lean over and he'd say, don't worry about it. You'll all know everything about it in no time at all. He was a great guy, a wonderful council member. And Council Member Maloney, I know you were very close to him and to Joby. And our community will miss all those folks very much. So my sympathies go to their families. And with that, we have public comment for issues not on the agenda. and I don't believe anyone is signed up for that and so it is now time for a motion to adjourn so moved thank you very much Council Member Baxter and Council Member Ellinger all those in favor please raise your hand all right that's unanimous we are adjourned thanks to everyone stay safe Thank you. Thank you.