I'm sorry. Thank you. Planning committee meeting. First item on our agenda is committee summary from the March 7th meeting. Entertain a motion to approve. Move to approve. Motion to second. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Thank you. Our next item is Council Member Plowman's item, a review of conditional use permits and relating zoning ordinance text amendments in the rural services area. Council Member Plumman, would you like to lead us in please? Certainly, thank you Chair. And I'd like to start off by thanking our planning staff for pulling this initial data together for us. What really brought us to this point to bringing this forward is you remember, gosh, probably six to eight months ago, there was a lot of talk about conditional uses and ZOTOs. And I think there was even the mention of a moratorium. So what we thought would be helpful today is just to bring forward the conditional uses that have occurred over the last five years, just so you all can take a look at them. And one thing that I did want to mention is sometimes that when there is a conditional use in the rural, it does impact more than that particular situation. And towards the end, I will say a few more things. But right now, let's go ahead and share our presentation on conditional uses in the rural and the AR zone. Thank you. Good afternoon. I'm Autumn Godrowis with the Division of Planning. So I am here to talk to you about conditional uses zoning ordinance text amendments in the ar zone so we'll start off with conditional uses and kind of go over what exactly a conditional use is before we get into the ones that have been approved in the ar zone so these are uses that are specifically named in the zoning ordinance in each zone that may be suitable only in specific locations within that zone if there are certain conditions that are met in order for them to not have an adverse influence on the existing or future development of the property or its surroundings so these have to go to the board of adjustment occasionally conditional uses will be heard by the Planning Commission if they're requested at the same time as a zone change but more typically they're going to go to the Board of Adjustment. They do require notice to nearby property owners and then they're subject to an annual inspection by zoning enforcement to ensure that any conditions that were placed on them at the time of approval are still being met and that they're still operating in accordance with their conditional use. So there are 33 conditional uses listed specifically within the AR zone. So our data is from 2018 to 2023 and this includes a case that we heard at the Board of Adjustment yesterday. So you'll see that there were 115 conditional use applications outside of the AR zone and 23 in the AR zone over the last five years. so that's 17 percent of conditional use applications in the ar so these two pie charts show the approval ratings for conditional uses so you'll see the the total here 113 conditional uses were approved overall 19 were approved in the ar zone so that's about an 80 percent approval rating of all conditional uses and in the ar zone it's pretty consistent for that zone as compared to the total. So between 2018 and today we've had five places of religious assembly approved as conditional uses in the AR zone, three plant nurseries, two Keeneland owned properties, two farm gift shops, that number is actually three that's what we had approved yesterday at the Board of Adjustment was another farm gift shop, two youth soccer fields, one rehabilitation home, a small farm micro distillery with special events associated with a small farm winery, one private school, one private club, and one parking lot and that's a little bit unusual because that property actually was a split zoned lot where a portion of the lot had B1 zoning and a portion had AR so the parking lot is only on the B1 portion it would not be allowed in the AR zone. So eight of the 19 approved applications were for expansions or modifications of existing conditional uses so particularly with the places of religious assembly and the Keeneland ones these were things that had been approved as a conditional use historically and were coming in to maybe expand parking or do an addition or add a new component of some kind to their existing operations so that's about 50 percent we'll move on to the zoning ordinance text amendments so you hear us refer to those as sodas those are broad policy changes within the zoning ordinance they're not tied to one particular property they they apply throughout the zoning ordinance so however that's written as a change to the actual zoning ordinance rather than a change to a piece of property. ZOTAs can originate with any person or governmental body. So you all can initiate a ZOTA. The Planning Commission can initiate a ZOTA or a citizen can initiate a ZOTA. So the way that a ZOTA process looks like, the ZOTA is reviewed by the Planning Commission. They make a recommendation to the council. and then you all decide the final decision as to whether or not to update the zoning ordinance with that text. And this requires notification to registered neighborhood associations when it's at the Planning Commission level. So in the past five years, we have had 37 total ZOTAs. Five of those only impacted the AR zone. And that's total application. Then here again we've got pie charts of the approval rates for all of the ZOTAs and then for the AR. Again fairly consistent, a 75% approval rating for all of the ZOTAs and an 80% approval rating for ZOTAs in the AR, so four of the five were approved. What those ZOTAs looked like, we had four approved ZOTAs that impacted only the AR. One of those was a new use for the AR zone, that was the small farm micro distillery. The other three all modified regulations for uses that already existed in the AR zone. Tenant homes, that was a modification that renamed what was historically called the Farm Employee Dwelling Unit, so that's sort of a secondary residence for employees or family members of a farm that are in association with the operation of the farming activity. Another ZODA modified the size of accessory structures for places of religious assembly. And then another ZODA modified accessory uses related to the agricultural market. The only agricultural market we have is the stockyards. So you're probably aware that there are a number of accessory uses that occur with that stockyard operation. So they did a ZOTA to add a couple more accessory uses. I want to touch on three other ZOTAs that were approved that impact all zones that allow for single family residential uses, just because we do have single family residences in the AR zone as well. So two of those were related to home-based businesses and one for in-home child care. And then one additional ZOTA that would be of interest perhaps is the most recent ZOTA to the AB zone that modified conditional uses in that zone. So in your packet you do have a spreadsheet, one with conditional uses and one with ZOTAs that has the case numbers and the applicants and the sort of a summary of what those applications were for and whether they were approved or disapproved or indefinitely postponed. So I'm happy to answer any questions you have about what you've just seen or anything that's in that packet. Thank you very much. Council members, are there any questions? Vice Chair Plumman. Thank you, Chair. And if there are no other questions, I was just going to, again, thank Planning for bringing this forward. one thing that I would ask is these show those that are in the AR, agricultural rural, and I think we need to get a bigger picture so it would be the rural service area because there are those that are in the agriculture boundary, not boundary, the buffer, and agriculture natural and the AU and so I'd like to see if we could bring that back and address that that bigger picture and then also during council report I'll be making a motion and that will be to look at the Rural Land Management Board in a bigger picture of how they could be involved in signing off on some of this but I'll bring that back during our council reports this evening so if there are no other questions that was my final comment and back to you chair thank you thank you councilmember Reynolds thank you chair and thank you Kathy for putting this together I'm sorry councilmember Pullman I I just had a question so when whenever the Commission is looking at conditional use permits whether it be in any zone area how did how do they decide specifically if they're going to permit something or not because we're looking at different things moving forward how are permits going to get passed or not and I've known when And sometimes neighborhoods have shown up and said, please don't give this conditional use permit. It's still been permitted. So I was just curious, you know, how is it? It seems very subjective. I'm not sure. It is by nature. The conditional uses, going back to sort of how they're defined in the zoning ordinance, there are uses that may be appropriate in a zone in a certain location. So the board is really looking at that particular application every time. It's the use on that piece of property and how that applicant is proposing to operate it. So they have to make a finding that there will not be adverse impacts on the surroundings, and that is very subjective, and it really depends on the case-by-case. So they receive a staff report from planning staff. Then they do hear from the applicant, and then there's a public comment portion. So they do hear from neighbors, and they take all of that into account when they make their decisions, and it truly is an individual case-by-case basis. Okay. Yeah, I'm just curious to dive into this a little more. I've had some constituents that have been concerned about some decisions that were made around conditional use permits, so I just didn't know about that. But thank you very much. Thank you, Chair. Thank you. Council Member James Brown. Thank you, Chair, and thank you, Council Member Plowman, for bringing this presentation to us. and Autumn, thank you for your work on this as well. Out of the conditional uses, the conditional use application, how many of these were staff initiated and how many were outside initiated? The ZOTAs or conditional uses are always applied for by an applicant for a particular piece of property. But the ZOTAs, so the changes to the zoning ordinance, You'll see in your spreadsheet that we had one, two, three, four of those were planning commission initiated. One was initiated by the Urban Council, I believe, on behalf of the Rural Land Management Board. Or no, one of those planning commissions was on behalf of the Rural Land Management Board. And then there were four that were initiated by applicants outside of government. Okay, okay. all right so that answer to that question also answered my other question so thank you thank you chair thank you council member are there any others i've just a few uh sort of kind of follow up i think on the on the process so that folks are are aware so going to council member reynolds question about um conditional use permits that case by case kind of intentional subjectivity is found in state law, correct? Yes. While we, in our ordinance, kind of mirror KRS-100, the Board of Adjustments authority and what guides their decision is based on KRS-100, is that correct? That's correct. And that basically is there just to look at what the property owner is asking to use their property if it falls within the prescribed set of conditional uses and make sure that it will not have a negative effect on the surrounding area. Correct. and then all of those conditional uses though are set forth in the ordinance and would have been recommended by the planning commission and established by this council correct so you can't just come and ask for it to do just anything with the property it has to be in the ordinance already and then with the text amendments while we oftentimes you will see an applicant make a an application to change the the text because that's beneficial to the use of their property a text amendment though changes the ordinance for that zoning in the entire county correct correct and so that's why that process is a little bit more involved in the board of adjustment and whether it starts with us with an applicant or with the planning commission it has to come there's a recommendation from the planning commission to this council and then we routinely then put that in those in this committee has kind of been our our policy is i'm putting words in your mouth but i know that's how we've generally done it and i want people to know that these things are done with some intentionality sure yes all right absolutely and then the last thing i have about some of the conditional uses in the in the ag zone kind of a limiting factor more than you see conditional uses in other zones there's an acreage requirement to a good majority of those in the ag in the ag zone isn't it that like for instance the agriculture market and the only reason we all probably only have one is a 40 acre requirement is that right so that's um that is a requirement for the agricultural market. The majority of the 33 conditional uses listed in the zone do not have a particular acreage requirement, but that one does, and there may be another one or two that do. Sure, but most of what we would consider more commercial uses, in order to get that in the agriculture zone, that's generally housed in that agriculture market, is that correct? That one does allow for the most commercial uses, I would say, like banking operations and that sort of thing, our accessory uses in that within that conditional use it's a little bit of a that one's kind of its own i gave you kind of an over generalized question i'm sorry but i i just kind of wanted to point to the fact that when we see more things that we would consider to be those true urban commercial uses right those are typically found in that ag market conditional use i would say that that use does allow for a lot more commercial uses than are typically allowed in the AR zone, yes. Sure, all right, thank you. I don't have anything else. Is there anyone else that... All right, thank you very much. Our next item is a presentation and proposed ordinance on the Crown Act and I'd like to ask Council Member Lynch, please, to introduce the action. Thank you, Chair. I'm pleased and honored and humbled to be able to bring our Chief Equity and Implementation Officer Tiffany Brown to the podium to present on the Crown Act. Something that I'm very excited about that, that I've been working with my colleagues, Council Member Gray and Council Member Fogle, and I'm excited for this presentation. Good afternoon. I'm Tiffany Brown, Equity and Implementation Officer here for the City of Lexington. And I want to introduce this presentation around the Crown Act. CROWN standing for creating a respectful and open world for natural hair. We are born in this world with so many doors closed already. There's one thing for us to say what beauty looks like. There's another thing to make sure our beauty is welcome in all places, all institutions. There's a systemic institutionalized bias and discrimination that exists against us because of our hair. People have discriminated against me because of my hair. Where is the justice when black men and women are denied access to economic advancement because of their natural appearance? Moments ago, we passed off of the California State Senate floor the Crown Act that says all of us who wear our hair in its natural form won't be discriminated against in school or the workplace. I'm glad to be associated with the Crown Coalition to make it clear that racial discrimination based on natural hair and hairstyles is prohibited in New York State. I want to thank everyone that it took to make the progress that we have and the progress I know to come. There's so many people to thank. So what you just watched there was a presentation that was put on by the Dove organization and the Crown Coalition, kind of detailing some of the experiences that people of color have with natural hair in different industries. And so California was one of the first places that passed legislation banning race-based hair discrimination. So what is the Crown Act? It is legislation that protects against discrimination based on natural hair texture and protective styles. Currently, it is perfectly legal to discriminate based off of natural hairstyles. To date, the Crown Act, or legislation inspired by it, has been signed into law in 21 states. First introduced in California, as you all saw, and most recently passed in Massachusetts, 44 municipalities have passed legislation against hair discrimination. In 2014, the United States Army has explicitly banned locks, calling them unkempt or matted. In 2017, the Army has since rolled back that language in their policies and have allowed for certain natural hairstyles. In 2018, a six-year-old was allegedly forced to give up a scholarship at a private school because the school would not permit him to wear locks. And so some of those styles include mohawks, design, unnatural color, or unnatural designs. So a crown or creating a respectful, open world for natural hair did some research by the Joy Collective for Dove and the Crown Coalition in 2019. They surveyed 2,000 women aged 25 to 64, 1,000 black women and 1,000 white women, employed full-time working in an office or field setting and having worked for a corporate office for six months. According to the study, black women's hair is 3.4 times more likely to be perceived as unprofessional. Black women are 80% more likely to agree with the statement that they feel they have to change their hair from its natural state to fitting in an office. Black women are also 30% more likely to be made aware of formal workplace appearance policies. And black women are also 1.5 times more likely to be sent home from work because of their hair and 83% more likely to report being judged more harshly on their looks than other women. So the Crown Act, in this research study, it rated hairstyles of black women that were consistently lower or less ready for job performance. And so you see different hairstyles, different hair colors and textures here listed. And so the first one is with braids, they felt like they were 31% lower or ready for a job performance. You see here a style of bantu knots, an afro, and then you can see when the hair texture starts to begin to change and become more straightened, that they felt like they were more ready in their job performance. And so this is Councilmember Shayla Lynch who is going to present at this time. Thank you for allowing me this chance to just give my brief testimony. In that picture, I was excited to be witnessing the signing of a proclamation by our then-Governor Fletcher. And I was not too far out of law school and excitedly wearing my afro and expressing my identity and being proud of my identity. Shortly after that picture, I was approached and told that in order to be able to excel in my profession, that I needed to straighten my hair, that my hair in its natural state and my afro was not professional. And that if I was going to be successful, that I needed to change my hairstyle. And that was very impactful on my life, very impactful on how I felt about my appearance in the workplace. And I've never forgotten that day. forgotten that day. And so I just want to share my testimony briefly here so you can see how my hair was. Thank you. And so the Crown Research Study conducted by the Joy Collective also surveyed students. 1,000 school-aged girls from 5 to 18, 500 black and 500 white. And so it was a mix of girls who attended predominantly black schools, diverse schools, and predominantly white schools. So 47% of black mothers reportedly having experienced hair discrimination. 53% of those black mothers said their daughters have experienced racial discrimination based on hairstyles as early as five years old. It increased to 100% by the age of 10. 100% of all of the black children who were surveyed had experienced race based hair discrimination in predominantly white schools. 66% of black children in majority white schools have faced race based hair discrimination, and 81% of children in majority white schools say they sometimes wish their hair was straight. And so the Crown Act has had an interesting history in Kentucky. It was introduced into the state legislature in 2021 and then again in 2022 through House Bill 31, House Bill 205 in 2023 and Senate Bill 63. Kentucky cities that have passed Crown Act ordinances are Covington being the first one, Louisville in 2021, and most recently in Frankfort in 2023. There's been a lot of advocacy around getting the Crown Act passed in the state and in different municipalities. Representative Attica Scott was a sponsor of House Bill 31. The Lynx Incorporated organization, they're a national advocate for the passage of the Crown Act in all 50 states. The ACLU of Kentucky. There was a crown mural hanged in Julieta Market in February of this year. And then there's also education and grassroots advocacy among various groups. And so why now? Why Lexington, right? We want to be proactive in our approach to making Lexington a more inclusive city. It is passed in Covington and in Louisville and in Frankfort. And it's Lexington's time to do so as well. Thank you. Any questions? Thank you, Ms. Brown, very much for the presentation. Council Member Lynch for bringing this forward. I know you had a lot of help there, and I'm sure a lot of folks would be wanting to talk about that. Council Member Reynolds, please. Thank you, Chair, and thank you so much, Council Member Lynch, and thank you so much, Tiffany. I really appreciate you all working on this. And I think for those of us who haven't faced this type of discrimination, I can only imagine what it would be like. So I just had a few questions. So once this were to pass, who would first enforce it? The Human Rights Commission would be the enforcement body or be the place where individuals would file complaints. So, yeah, if someone felt like they had been discriminated against, then they would file with the Human Rights Commission. That's correct. And they would do the investigation. And so if someone were attending a private school or a university, could they also complain to the Human Rights Commission? They could, but those are the jurisdiction. We don't really have jurisdiction in that area. In the ordinance, I believe, there is some language that discusses the support for school organizations to have their own enforcement body. So just help me understand this. So if we were to pass an ordinance of any kind, usually it applies to everyone in the city. So why wouldn't it apply to, for instance, a UK student? Well, it would apply, but there's also some jurisdictional issues regarding how it is enforced with the university or the Bay County Public Schools even. Yeah, I think I would just like some more clarification on this from the law department or something. For instance, because I'm on board with this, I just would like to know how this plays out. For instance, if a student at one of our local universities felt like they had been discriminated against at school. Obviously, if someone feels they've been discriminated against at work, they could report to the Human Rights Commission, but why wouldn't it apply to them at school? I think in the case of Fayette County Public Schools, for example, there are state laws and state regs that basically allow them to create their own disciplinary codes and codes of conduct. And so generally, since state law and state regs vest them with the authority to make those rules, we don't really have as the local government the same ability to legislate the conduct and the standards that they adopt pursuant to state law. So if it's public school, a parent couldn't take a complaint to the Human Rights Commission? I'm not saying you couldn't, but it would then be upon the Human Rights Commission to determine whether or not they felt they had jurisdiction to pursue that. And so I feel like university is a little bit different than public schools. It may be, but I think bear in mind that, for example, if it's a public university like UK, that's technically a state entity. And so, again, we would have to default to the state laws and the state regs that would apply to student conduct. So this more has to do with enforcement than anything else? Because if we have an ordinance about, you know, putting trash out at the curb, it doesn't matter if someone's, you know, on UK's campus or not. They're not supposed to violate that ordinance. There's nothing, again, I would go back to the ordinance that we're talking about would not prohibit someone who believes that they have experienced discrimination on this basis from filing a complaint with the Human Rights Commission. The question for the Human Rights Commission would be, do they have jurisdiction to address the issue? Okay. Okay, that answers my question. Thank you very much. I appreciate it. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Council Member. Council Member Sheehan? Thank you, Chair. Council Member Lynch, I do want to say thank you for sharing your story with us. I appreciate that, and thank you for your work on bringing this forward. Did you work with any other council members on this as well? Yes, Council Member Gray and Council Member Fogle were very vital parts of bringing this forward. So thank you, Council Member Lynch. Thank you, Council Member Gray and Council Member Fogle for bringing this forward. Not only for allowing us to move forward with protections for people in our community, but to also demonstrate our values as a community. So I appreciate the work that you have put into this. I have one question, and I'm not sure if it will be for you or for our legal team, but I wanted to know when I'm looking through like our Municode and it lists out our ordinance, this in this wording that we are reviewing today it looks like a new section with 2-3 1.1 right and so does this replace the language that is currently there or does it add language below what's currently there because it lists out like the state statutes and and things so I just wanted a little bit of clarity on that on how it will be written into that space answer but you get no no no go ahead um well and fill in when you would like um where the section is adding is to where we are adopting state law state law already finds discrimination based in race national origin and religion to be discriminatory so we placed it underneath where the the adoption was, we don't actually define those things in our code. And the state statute actually doesn't define race or national origin, they do define religion, which is why we've added for purposes of reasonable accommodations unless there's undue hardship. So it made the most sense to place it there because those race, National origin and religion are already deemed to be that you can't discriminate based on that. We, through the Crown Act ordinance that has been drafted, we are making explicit what are implicit characteristics of those three things. So we're not creating a new section or class with regard to, for example, what was done with the section on sexual orientation and gender identity, because those are actually not provided for in state law okay thank you um and then can i just kind of build on a little bit of what of some of the questions that council member reynolds has on the public accommodations piece so some of what um i have seen in the news not necessarily in lexington but we've seen some of these videos where someone is at like a wrestling match or or some sporting event and they're having to like cut their hair in that moment to compete. Is that another example of where they have their own regulating bodies where this might where the Human Rights Commission might actually have to make a ruling of whether they can oversee those that kind of a situation? Correct if it's within those other areas like fake county public schools or the university then we would the Human Rights Commission would have to to make that determination. Because some of the sporting events aren't associated with the school. Sometimes they're out there with other associations. Like we have some sporting associations that practice in our parks that aren't associated with the school. So where would that fall? It would still fall under the Human Rights Commission. Okay, thank you. Thank you, Chair. Thank you. Council Member James Brown. Thank you, Chair, and thank you, Ms. Brown, for the presentation. And thank you, Councilmember Lynch, Kogel, and Gray for your work on this issue. We've seen a lot of advocacy for this at the state level and did not move. I know you all have been advocates here on a local level. And for us to have the opportunity to do something here to be an example to other municipalities, other jurisdictions to address this issue, I think is exactly what we need to do. I know the challenges that I face as a black man in this world, in this community. I can't even imagine the challenges that a lot of the challenges that black women and other folks face for a variety of issues. But hair and discrimination taking place because of someone's hair is real. I have a daughter, I have sisters, I have a mother, and I've heard stories about and know how it's affected my daughter's confidence in just her appearance. And then in the workplace, I mean, it's real. So the fact that you have done the research, you have a policy before us that we can put in place to not only encourage but to protect and to give folks the opportunity to reach their full potential, I'm more than proud to support this going forward. So thank you all for your work on this, and we'll keep pushing. So thank you. Thank you, Chair. Thank you. Vice Mayor Wu. Thank you, Chair. I'm also very proud to support this ordinance, and I'm very grateful to my colleagues, Council Members Lynch, Gray, and Fogle, for putting this forward. I know as legislators, part of our job is to make sure we craft good legislation, and I think that's where the questions about enforcement comes from. But I want to speak to kind of a bigger piece of what it is that we do. I think something like this, not only will it legally protect people from discrimination, I think it puts forth who we are as a city and what our priorities are and what our values are, and it makes a statement, and it hopefully will be an example to other municipalities and states, hopefully even our own, to move this kind of stuff forward. So I'm very excited about this. Thank you all. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Council Member LeGree. Thank you, Chair. Thank you so much, Ms. Brown, for your presentation. And thank you, Councilmember Lynch, for your leadership, as well as yours, Councilmember Gray, and yours, Councilmember Fogle. I wanted to ask, just so, you know, in case people are watching and they're wondering, as we move forward with this piece of legislation, with this ordinance, if they're experiencing discrimination of this type. And they want to document it and they want to move forward with a complaint with the Human Rights Commission. Is there any information we can provide them with now about what steps they should take or what next steps they should expect if they were to file this complaint? Should it fall under the jurisdiction of this ordinance? Well, I think they can already file complaints with the Human Rights Commission if they believe they are being discriminated against, right? With this ordinance, it goes a step further in identifying natural characteristics that are ethnically, I would, that are ethnic identifiers. So right now there is no protection against hair discrimination as an ethnic identifier. This legislation would go to make that discrimination. That makes sense and I understand that. I'm just thinking about people's, sometimes when people want to come forward to file a complaint, they might feel intimidated. They might feel like they'll be put on the spot. And I'm just wondering if there's anyone from the HRC or any insight into that process that we can provide people so that they feel comfortable filing a complaint if they've had a discriminatory experience. Is there anyone here from HRC who can speak to that? I can speak generally to kind of how the process works. Generally, the Human Rights Commission can receive a charge of discrimination from somebody who comes in and says, I want to file a complaint because I think I've experienced discrimination either in employment, in housing, in public accommodations. It involves them basically filling out a charge that says, I think on this date I experienced discrimination in that I encountered this conduct. Once they file that charge with the HRC, the HRC would then investigate that. And they would gather evidence both from the person who files the charge and anyone else that they engage with on that charge. And they would ultimately make some determination about whether there's opportunities to work with the employer or the entity that's alleged to discriminate to work through that. If they basically investigate and determine they're unable to substantiate the charge, then they issue what's called a right to sue letter. And that would then give the complainant the opportunity to file a lawsuit and follow up on their claims to the courts. Okay, excellent, that's really helpful. And I wanted to offer just one brief clarification on the HRC jurisdiction question that Councilman Reynolds asked. Bear in mind that a lot would depend on the circumstances of the discrimination alleged. Our ordinance speaks to discrimination in employment, in public accommodations, and in housing. I think my earlier answer I just wanted to clarify was if the alleged discrimination is Fayette County Public Schools is discriminating against my child. That's where you get into the state law, state regs issue where we'd have to evaluate whether or not that would be covered under, or the HRC would have to evaluate whether under the local law or under the state law they would have the jurisdiction to enforce that. So a lot's going to depend on, lawyers don't like always never answers, so this is my opportunity to give a kind of it depends qualification. It really depends on what is the discrimination alleged and who is allegedly discriminating, that sort of thing. So it's just going to depend in terms of jurisdiction on what is the substance of the discrimination alleged and who is it alleged against. So I just wanted to clarify that just so there wasn't a misunderstanding that I was giving an always or never answer. Thank you. Thank you to you both. That's helpful in terms of the process. And thank you for your leadership bringing this legislation forward. I am very supportive and I'm proud. So thank you. Thank you, Council Member. Council Member Gray. Thank you, Chair, for allowing me to speak, even though I'm not on this committee. And I just wanted to answer a little bit more about the affiliation with Fayette County Public Schools. Fayette County Public Schools has its own DEI section. where an individual can file with their complaint with the Human Rights Commission, but also there's another protection for those with Fayette County Public Schools to also reach out to the school system in order to do it there as well. Does that make sense? And I just want to say that I'm honored to work on this piece of legislation with Council Member Lynch and Council Member Fogle. This is something that has been of deep concern to me. As a reformed educator in Fayette County Public Schools, I have seen students who were discriminated, who were called nappy-headed by educators, who were told that they were less than because of the hair that grows out of their head. I've seen employees of LFECG who has quietly told me that they don't feel comfortable with their natural hair being worn at work, that they've had supervisors who have approached them about their natural hair. So this is an opportunity for us to give protection for all, all residents of Lexington, to know that we have a city council, we have leaders who care about them, that they can be themselves, and they're perfectly fine, that they don't have to straighten their hair to fit into a certain kind of mode. And because it hurts to see young people not see worth in themselves. It hurts to see adults who are our employees who don't feel comfortable being themselves because of reprimand. It hurts, and I'm glad that we are doing something about it. we are doing something about it and I'm honored to serve along you all. And this is just a great step. That is all. Thank you, Chair. Thank you. Thank you. And just a few comments on my end. First, to my colleagues that have shared their questions about enforcement and making sure that this ordinance is doing all that we intend it to do. I think that, one, particularly when it comes to athletics within our parks programs, I think just like most grants, leases, things like that involving the government, we require those participants to follow our laws. And to the extent that we are not doing that as much as we can, we need to blend that into how we interact with those outside of our government. And I think this will be an opportunity to do that. And then I hope that by setting an example that the other jurisdictions that may not be going as far as we think that they ought to, that they'll see that we are leading, particularly the fact that our General Assembly has not yet led completely on this issue, despite efforts by some of our legislators. So I think that Lexington has in many opportunities throughout our history been a leader in equality and I think this is another opportunity that we should be proud to take and support and I hope that it will, Lexington will be an example then to other municipalities and the Commonwealth. So, Ms. Brown, thank you very much for the presentation and Councilmember Lynch for bringing this forward. And so to that, the chair would ask Councilmember Lynch if you would like to make a motion regarding the ordinance. Thank you, Chair. I move to approve the Crown Act ordinance as contained in today's General Government and Planning Committee's agenda packet dated May 9, 2023. Thank you. Have a motion. Is there a second? Second. Thank you. Have a motion and a second. Is there any discussion on the motion? Hearing none, all those in favor please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Thank you. The ayes have it. That motion carries. Council members, we do not meet this committee again until August. We have our budget season and then a break to the extent we would like to make sure that this ordinance is in fact the law of the merged government sooner rather than later. Do I have a motion to report this out today? I have a motion and a second. All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Thank you. We'll report this out today. Thank you all for all your hard work on this. Our final items are items referred to committee. I don't think we need to go through line by line. We've done some good work on that. If anyone has anything that they'd like to remove, please let me know by way of a motion now. Otherwise, I and the council staff will be in touch with everybody with items on the committee to make sure we're getting those reported out as we can. Anything else? Thank you, folks. We stand adjourned. Thank you. you