# Urban County Council - December 2, 2025 > Auto-transcribed civic record · Council · December 2, 2025 - **Permalink**: https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/meeting/6637 - **Source video**: https://lfucg.granicus.com/player/clip/6637?view_id=14&redirect=true - **Date**: 2025-12-02 - **Body**: Council - **Last revised**: February 4, 2026 - **Length**: 15,177 words - **Speakers**: Mayor > ⚠️ **Auto-generated content.** Audio from the official Granicus video was auto-transcribed by OpenAI Whisper-1, with speaker labels folded in from Granicus closed-captioning. Structured facts were extracted with GPT-4o; the narrative summary was written by Anthropic Claude Sonnet. Speaker labels and verbatim wording may contain errors. See [methodology](https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/about/methodology) or [report a correction](mailto:editor@lexingtonky.news). --- ## Meeting Overview The Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government Council met on December 2, 2025, at 5:00 PM in Council Chambers, Lexington, KY, with Mayor Gorton presiding. The meeting covered 12 agenda items spanning a range of routine and substantive business, including ordinances, resolutions, mayoral communications, and a fire/police discipline matter. Over the course of the meeting, 2 votes were taken, and the Council approved items including minutes from previous meetings, second-reading ordinances, mayoral appointments, donations, procurements, and a fire/police discipline item, while advancing first-reading ordinances and resolutions for future consideration. The meeting also included presentations for informational purposes and received 14 public comments from community members. ## Attendance All 16 members of the Council were present at the December 2, 2025 meeting. No members were absent or late. **Present:** - Mayor Gorton - Sevigny - Sheehan - Wu - Beasley - Boone - Brown - Curtis - Ellinger - Elliott Baxter - Hale - Higgins-Hord - LeGris - Lynch - Morton - Reynolds ## Votes and Decisions Two ordinances came to a roll call vote at the December 2, 2025 Council meeting. - **Ordinance 1129-25** — An ordinance amending certain budgets for municipal expenditures was moved by Mr. Ellinger and seconded by Mr. Sevigny. The measure passed unanimously, 15–0. [timestamp: 0:53:47] All members voted in favor: Sevigny, Sheehan, Wu, Beasley, Boone, Brown, Curtis, Ellinger, Elliott Baxter, Hale, Higgins-Hord, LeGris, Lynch, Morton, and Reynolds. - **Ordinance 1082-25** — An ordinance related to constructing and leasing to own a new Government Center was moved by Ms. Elliott Baxter and seconded by Ms. Higgins-Hord. The measure passed on a divided vote of 8–7. [timestamp: 1:10:31] - **Voting in favor (8):** Boone, Brown, Ellinger, Elliott Baxter, Hale, Higgins-Hord, LeGris, and Reynolds. - **Voting against (7):** Sevigny, Sheehan, Wu, Beasley, Curtis, Lynch, and Morton. ## Budget and Financial Actions The Council considered a wide range of financial actions at its December 2, 2025 meeting, spanning infrastructure, public safety, community services, and nonprofit support. **Infrastructure and Capital Projects** - Resolution 1113-25: A contract worth **$10,762,511** with Tribute Acquisition Co. for the Merrick Trunk Sewer Project. - Resolution 1097-25: A **$20,000,000** loan from the Kentucky Infrastructure Authority for the North Elkhorn Wet Weather Storage Tank Project. - Resolution 1084-25: A **$177,600** contract with Tetra Tech, Inc. for Haley Pike Landfill Leachate Treatment System Improvements. - Resolution 1134-25: A **$433,278.98** line extension agreement with Columbia Gas of Kentucky, Inc. for natural gas service. - Resolution 1127-25: A contract modification of **-$24,967.98** with L-M Asphalt Partners Ltd for the Salt Dome & Associated Improvements on Old Frankfort Pike. - Resolution 1123-25: A **$53,920** contract with Haire Construction, LLC for the Phoenix Park Reimagined Project. - Resolution 1105-25: A **$116,750** contract with Gresham Smith for the Main and Vine Streetscape plan. **Community and Nonprofit Grants** - Resolution 1116-25: **$380,969** in grants to multiple recipients under the Nonprofit Capital Grant Program for Facilities Improvements. - Resolution 1117-25: **$223,408** in grants to multiple recipients under the Nonprofit Capital Grant Program for Operational Investments. - Resolution 1135-25: Authorization to apply for a **$4,640,674** Continuum of Care Grant from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. - Resolution 1111-25: A **$95,305.99** housing stability services grant to Northern Kentucky Legal Aid Society, Inc. - Resolution 1141-25: **$8,000** in Neighborhood Development Funds to multiple recipients. - Resolution 1142-25: **$119,884.34** in Council Capital Project Expenditure Funds to multiple recipients. **Public Safety and Health** - Resolution 1106-25: A **$125,000** grant from the Kentucky Cabinet for Health and Family Services for the Community Paramedicine Crisis Response Program. - Resolution 1157-25: A **$77,221** State Crisis Intervention Program grant from the Kentucky Justice and Public Safety Cabinet. **Other Contracts** - Resolution 1080-25: A **$100,000** athletic trainer agreement with the University of Kentucky. - Resolution 1110-25: A **$60,000** contract with New Life Day Center, Inc. for litter pickup services under the Panhandler Participation Program. - Resolution 1064-25: A **$12,822.74** contract with Containerpros, LLC for dumpster bin refurbishment. - Resolution 1081-25: A **$15,000** contract with Downtown Lexington Corporation for a Downtown Development Strategic Analysis. - Resolution 1112-25: A **$65,625** contract with Blue Grass Community Foundation, Inc. for the Be The Change Scholarship fund. - Resolution 1124-25: A **$99,440** contract with Newgen Strategies & Solutions LLC for a Collection Efficiency Study. ## Public Comment Fourteen members of the public addressed the Council during the comment period, with all speakers focused on the proposed new government center. **In Support:** - **Alan McDaniel** [timestamp: 20:45] supported the proposal, pointing to the current building's limitations and arguing that the project represents a fiscally responsible solution. **In Opposition:** The remaining speakers raised a range of concerns about the proposal: - **Christian Torp** [timestamp: 19:09] opposed the project, citing concerns about cost and what he described as a lack of equity in the deal. - **Paul Gardner** [timestamp: 22:17] questioned the transparency and timing of the proposal. - **Deborah Winslow** [timestamp: 25:15] raised concerns about transparency and the involvement of unnamed web companies in the project. - **Patty Cooper** [timestamp: 28:29] expressed surprise at the suddenness of the proposal and questioned the financial outlay given other pressing community needs. - **Alaina Broderson** [timestamp: 30:42] argued that the funds would be better directed toward housing and food security. - **Walter Taylor** [timestamp: 32:51] drew on personal experiences with housing issues and urged the Council to prioritize housing over the new facility. - **Viroqua Moore** [timestamp: 35:29] advocated for redirecting funds toward housing and community programs. - **Adrienne Williams** [timestamp: 38:41] expressed concern about prioritizing the government center over housing and social services. - **Chuck Eddy** [timestamp: 41:22] urged the Council to delay the project due to financial uncertainties and called for investment in homeless housing instead. - **Elizabeth Browning** [timestamp: 42:59] emphasized the need for greater community involvement and called for funding to address basic needs before proceeding with a new city hall. - **Hart Hallos** [timestamp: 44:33] presented alternative budget allocations that he argued could better address community needs, including affordable housing. - **Emmett Conger** [timestamp: 46:38] highlighted the housing shortage and urged the Council to make housing its priority. - **Nikita Perumal** [timestamp: 48:54] argued against the center, emphasizing the need for affordable housing and expanded social services. The dominant themes across public comment were a call for greater transparency, concern over the proposal's timing, and a strong preference among speakers for directing public funds toward housing and social services rather than a new government facility. ## Appointments The Council approved appointments to several city boards and advisory bodies at the December 2, 2025 meeting. **Carnegie Center for Literacy Board of Directors** - Betsy Johnson — appointed - Ramla Osman — appointed **Charles Young Neighborhood Center Board** - Michelle Bond — appointed - Marshall Fields — appointed **Emergency Medical Advisory Board** - Phillip Jewell — appointed - Crystal Miller — appointed **Fire Pre-Disciplinary Review Board** - Trace Williams — appointed **Library Board of Advisors** - Laura Hatfield — appointed **Lyric Theatre and Cultural Arts Center Board of Directors** - Alexander Butler — appointed - Matthew Crutcher — appointed - Stephanie Fitch — appointed - Timothy Johnson — appointed - Obie Taylor — appointed **Parks and Recreation Advisory Board** - Shakira Syed — appointed **Water Quality Fees Board** - Michael Clay Johnson — appointed In total, the Council confirmed 15 appointments across 8 boards and advisory bodies. The Lyric Theatre and Cultural Arts Center Board of Directors received the largest number of new members, with five individuals appointed. ## Contested Items Two items generated significant disagreement during the December 2, 2025 Council meeting. - **New Government Center:** An ordinance to construct and lease a new government center passed by a narrow margin of 8–7, reflecting deep division among council members. The close vote indicates that nearly half of the council opposed the measure, and the item also drew public opposition. The ordinance ultimately passed despite the contested nature of the vote. - **Funding for Homelessness Task Force:** This item prompted heated discussion among council members over the timing of fund allocation. The central disagreement was whether to release funding immediately or to wait until the task force had completed its work and issued formal recommendations. The debate highlighted differing priorities among members regarding fiscal process versus urgency of action. No outcome or resolution for this item was provided in the available meeting record. ## Roll Call [timestamp: 00:34] The meeting opened with a roll call conducted by the Council Clerk to confirm the presence of council members in attendance. The roll call served as a standard procedural step to establish quorum and officially open the December 2, 2025 Council meeting. No additional discussion or concerns were raised during this agenda item. The roll call was informational in nature. ## Invocation [timestamp: 01:05] Richard Harless of Bethsaida Baptist Church delivered the invocation at the opening of the December 2, 2025 Council meeting. This was an informational item with no debate, vote, or action taken. ## Minutes of the Previous Meetings [timestamp: 03:14] Under Agenda Item III, the Council took up the minutes of the previous meeting for review and approval. The minutes presented for consideration were from the November 18, 2025, Council meeting. Ms. Elliott Baxter and Ms. Curtis were the key speakers during this portion of the meeting. No concerns or objections regarding the accuracy or content of the minutes are noted in the record. The minutes of the November 18, 2025, Council meeting were approved. ## Presentations [timestamp: 04:12] Mayor Gorton led the Presentations portion of the December 2, 2025 Council meeting, which covered three recognition items. - **Lexington–Jeju City Friendship City Recognition:** The Council recognized Lexington's Friendship City relationship with Jeju City, South Korea. No additional details regarding the nature or history of the partnership were provided in the meeting materials. - **Chelsey Gerardi Day Proclamation:** Mayor Gorton issued a proclamation declaring a Chelsey Gerardi Day in Lexington. Specific details about the occasion for the honor were not included in the available meeting data. - **Brian Peterson Day Proclamation:** Mayor Gorton also issued a proclamation declaring a Brian Peterson Day in Lexington. As with the Gerardi proclamation, further context about the basis for the recognition was not detailed in the available materials. All three items were informational in nature, with no votes or formal Council action required. ## Ordinances – Second Reading [timestamp: 1:10:31] The Council took up Agenda Item VI, the second reading of ordinances related to the construction and leasing of a new Government Center. Key speakers during this portion of the meeting were Mr. Morton and Mr. Sevigny. The ordinances presented for second reading addressed the construction and leasing arrangements for the new Government Center facility. As a second reading, this represented the final formal step in the ordinance adoption process before a vote. The Council approved the ordinances. *Note: Additional details regarding specific debate points, concerns raised, vote tallies, or further procedural discussion are not available in the source data for this agenda item.* ## Ordinances – First Reading [timestamp: 1:11:06] The Council took up Agenda Item VII, covering the first reading of ordinances related to urban services district expansions and budget amendments. First readings are a procedural step in the legislative process, introducing ordinances to the Council before they advance to a second reading and potential vote at a future meeting. The Council Clerk presented the ordinances at this stage. The items addressed two subject areas: - **Urban services district expansions** — ordinances related to changes in the boundaries or scope of urban services districts - **Budget amendments** — ordinances proposing modifications to the existing budget No detailed debate or discussion is reflected in the available record for this agenda item. As is typical for first readings, the ordinances were introduced into the public record without a final vote on their adoption. The outcome of this agenda item was a **first reading**, meaning the ordinances will return before the Council at a subsequent meeting for further consideration and action. ## Resolutions – First Reading [timestamp: 1:21:19] The Council Clerk presented the Resolutions – First Reading portion of the meeting, which included various contracts and agreements for the Council's consideration. This agenda item, listed as Item VIII on the meeting agenda, represents the initial introduction of resolutions before they advance to a formal vote at a subsequent meeting. The resolutions were read into the record by the Council Clerk as part of the standard first reading process. No additional speakers or debate are reflected in the available data for this agenda item. The outcome of this agenda item was a first reading, meaning the resolutions were formally introduced but not yet acted upon with a final vote. They are expected to return for further consideration at a future Council meeting. ## Communications From The Mayor - Appointments [timestamp: 1:31:23] The Council took up Agenda Item IX, covering mayoral appointments to various boards and commissions. Ms. Reynolds and Ms. Curtis were the key speakers during this portion of the meeting. The item involved the approval of multiple appointments, though the specific boards, commissions, and individual appointees are not detailed in the available meeting record. The Council moved forward with consideration of the appointments as presented. No specific concerns, debate, or opposition are reflected in the available data for this agenda item. The Council approved the appointments. ## Communications From The Mayor - Donations [timestamp: 1:31:54] The Council took up Agenda Item X, covering the approval of donations for various City departments. Mr. Brown and Ms. Reynolds were the key speakers on this item. The item was presented for Council consideration and approval. No additional detail regarding the specific departments receiving donations, the donors, or the individual donation amounts is available in the meeting record. The Council approved the donations as presented. ## Communications From The Mayor - Procurements [timestamp: 1:32:25] The Council took up Agenda Item XI, covering Communications From The Mayor related to Procurements — specifically, the approval of bids and price contracts for various municipal departments. Ms. Elliott Baxter and Mr. Sevigny were the key speakers during this portion of the meeting. The item addressed procurement actions submitted by the Mayor's office for Council consideration and approval. The Council approved the procurements as presented. *Note: The available data for this agenda item is limited. For full details on the specific contracts, bid amounts, vendors, and departments involved, readers are encouraged to consult the official meeting minutes or view the relevant portion of the meeting video beginning at approximately 1:32:25.* ## Communications From The Mayor - For Information Only [timestamp: 1:32:55] The Council Clerk presented communications from the Mayor under this informational agenda item (Item XII). The communications covered probationary appointments and resignations. No debate or deliberation was required, as this item was designated for information only. No concerns were raised during this portion of the meeting, and no vote or formal action was taken. The matter was received by the Council as presented. ## Fire/Police Discipline [timestamp: 1:32:25] The Council took up Agenda Item XIII, a discussion of disciplinary action involving Officer John McFaull. Chief Lawrence Weathers served as the key presenter on this matter. Chief Weathers addressed the Council regarding the disciplinary action under consideration for Officer McFaull. Following the discussion, the Council approved the disciplinary action. *Note: The available record for this agenda item is limited. Specific details regarding the nature of the disciplinary action, the grounds for discipline, any debate among Council members, or concerns raised during the discussion are not reflected in the available structured data for this meeting.* --- ## Decisions - **1082-25** — passed (8-7): Ordinance related to constructing and leasing to own a new Government Center - **1129-25** — passed (15-0): Ordinance amending certain budgets for municipal expenditures --- ## Full transcript I believe there are some in the hall by state fire marshal. We can't have anyone standing, so we'll wait till everybody gets situated and then we'll go ahead. Thank you very much. Welcome. I'd like to go ahead and call to order the Lexington Fayette Urban County Council meeting December 2nd 2025 and the first item is the roll call. Council Member Savigny here. Council Member Sheehan here. Vice Mayor Wu here. Council Member Beazley Yes ma'am. Council Member Boone yes ma'am. Council Member Brown here. Council Member Curtis yes ma'am. Council Member Ellinger yes ma'am. Council Member Elliot Baxter yes ma'am. Council Member Hale yes ma'am. Council Member Higgins-Hord yes ma'am. Council Member Legree here. Council Member Lynch present. Council Member Morton yes ma'am. And Council Member Reynolds here. Thank you. Thank you very much. We have a quorum. At this time I would like to welcome Richard Harless who is from Bethsaida Baptist Church and he will issue our invocation. Welcome. Let us pray. Lord, we come before you with gratitude for this season, a time of reflection, generosity and renewed hope. As our mayor, city council members and community leaders gather today, we ask for your presence to guide this meeting with wisdom, humility and unity. Lord bless our mayor, each council member and every public servant who carries the responsibility of shaping the future of our city. Grant them clarity of mind, fairness of judgment and strength to make decisions that promote justice, safety and the well-being of every resident. As we near the close of the year, we pause to thank you for the progress made, the challenges endured and the resilience of our community. In a season where our thoughts turn toward peace and goodwill, help us to seek understanding over division, collaboration over conflict and compassion over indifference. We pray for those in our city who are struggling, families facing hardship, seniors who are isolated, children who need support and those experiencing illness, grief or uncertainty. May they feel the warmth of care and the hope of better days ahead. Guide this meeting today. Let the discussions be constructive, the decisions to be wise and the outcomes to be for the good of all who call this city home. As we enter a new year, may you continue to bless our city with safety, opportunity and unity. In Christ's name, amen. Thank you so very much. Council, at this time we have the November 18, 2025 Council Meeting minutes to approve. Council Member Baxter, seconded by Council Member Curtis. Are there any questions, corrections, additions? All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Is anyone opposed? All right. That motion passes. Thank you very much. At this time, we'll have our presentations. All right. At this time, we have a very special presentation and so I would like to invite Kay Sargent to join me at the podium and Council Member LaGrie, would you like to join us? Council Member LaGrie is on the Sister Cities Commission. So this evening, we welcome several special guests from Jeju City, South Korea. Last year, Lexington signed a friendship agreement with Jeju City. This was the first step toward becoming a sister city and we have a lot in common. Lexington and its four sisters are all international centers of the equine industry. We are bound by our love of the horse. Horse breeding remains one of Jeju's key industries as well. Known for its native ponies, the island is also home to most of South Korea's thoroughbred stallions. Through our award-winning Sister Cities program, Lexington has benefited from economic and cultural exchanges. We have given people, especially our young people, many learning opportunities as they visited different countries and cultures and I want to, at this moment, give great recognition to Kay Sargent, the director of our Sister Cities program. It is internationally recognized as one of the finest in the world. So tonight, I'm presenting our guests with lapel pins and they are keys to our city and we hope our visitors come often. As I read your name, will you please come forward? Song Song Hyup, who is the director of the Livestock Division. Will you come? Ko Ji Hoon, head of the Horse Industry Development Team. Kim Ahn Joo, coordinator, Cultural and Arts Division. And Ko Ron Young, officer for Culture and Arts Division. I want to thank each of you, kamsahamnida, for being here and I have a presentation which may be, Hannah, would you like to help me with these? We have this key to the city lapel pin. Thank you so much, you're welcome. So now, we'd like to get a picture with the council and we are hoping for a visit from Mayor Kim in the near future. So we'll get a photo, okay? One, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40. All right, at this time, I'd like to welcome and ask to join me Chelsea Gerardi and Council Member Jennifer Reynolds. I want to thank Chelsea for being here. This evening, we are recognizing Chelsea for an exciting achievement. Chelsea competes with the Firefighter Challenge League and she was recently named a World Champion and a U.S. National Title Holder. There you are. Chelsea, I'm told that your dad, John, is the Fire Captain with Lexington Fire Department and he is a wonderful example to follow. And we thank you, your dad, your entire family for your service to our city. At this time, I'm very happy to present you with a proclamation declaring it Chelsea Gerardi Day and here's how it goes. Whereas Chelsea Gerardi began competing with the Firefighter Challenge League at age 17 and whereas she was the first junior firefighter ever to complete the course with a record time leading her to be a world record holder and whereas in August, Chelsea became a Fire Challenge World Champion in the Junior Division and whereas then in September, Chelsea became a U.S. National Title Holder in the Lions Den Combat Challenge and whereas Chelsea's father is John Gerardi, a Lexington Fire Department Captain who also competes with the Firefighter Challenge League, do you fight each other? A little bit. A little bit. And whereas Chelsea will soon begin Lexington's EMT program and whereas we congratulate Chelsea on her many achievements, now therefore, I, Linda Gorton, Mayor of Lexington, do hereby declare December 2nd, 2025, Chelsea Gerardi Day in Lexington. Thank you and congratulations. Thank you. Very good. Do you want to say a few words? No, I'm good. No? Okay. All right. Then we'll ask Council Member Reynolds to say a few words. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Chelsea. I just really wanted to say how impressive this is and your passion for firefighting and for the sport. You are an inspiration to young women and no woman or little girl is going to be able to say that they are weak. They know that they are able to be very strong and be an athlete, so I just want to congratulate you. This is a big accomplishment, several different awards, and I know that your future here in Lexington is going to be bright in whatever you do, so congratulations. So we'll get a picture with the Council and I would like to invite Chelsea's family to Finally tonight, I'd like to invite Police Chief Lawrence Weathers and Commander Brian Peterson to join me at the podium. This is a bit of a surprise. Commander Peterson is hesitating. He does not know about this, but I do want to thank you for being here. I guess the Chief told you you had to come. Is that right? Come on up. Don't be shy. And Chief, thank you very much for joining us. So today we are recognizing Commander Peterson for more than 23 years of service to our Lexington Police Department. He will be retiring in January, and we want to take a moment to express our deep gratitude. Policing is not an easy job, and I want to thank you from the bottom of my heart for answering the call to serve our community of Lexington. And if you ever want to come back as a retired officer, you know we do accept retired officers, right Chief? At this time, I'm very happy to present you with a proclamation declaring today Brian Peterson Day in Lexington, and here is how it goes. Whereas Brian Peterson joined the Lexington Police Department in June of 2002, and whereas after more than 23 years of dedicated service to our force, Brian is retiring, and whereas Brian currently serves as the East Sector Commander, and whereas throughout his career Brian has demonstrated strong leadership, mentored countless officers, and built lasting relationships within our community, and whereas he has served the department with integrity and commitment to the residents of Lexington, and whereas we extend our thanks to Brian for his many years of service to the Lexington Police Department and to our city, and offer our best wishes as you start the next chapter of your life. Now therefore, I, Linda Gorton, Mayor of Lexington, do hereby declare December 2nd, 2025, Brian Peterson Day in Lexington. Thank you for everything. Thank you. Thank you. Do you want to say anything? Okay. Do you want to say anything? You better do. It's an honor to be here. Thank you. Thank you very much. We will do the photo with the council. All right, now we'll do the photo with the council. Thank you. 3, 2, 1 I do want everyone who's been part of the first part of the meeting to know that we would love you for the next two hours, but you don't have to stay. Thank you. All right. Next on our agenda is public comment for issues on the agenda, and we have quite a number of people here to speak. So the way this works is when I call your name, and I'll call two or three at a time and ask you all to line up. It goes a little quicker. And you'll come to the podium, and you'll need to restate your name and also state your council district. And you'll have three minutes, and when the three minutes is over, the little buzzer goes off to let you know your time is up. So first we have Christian Torp, followed by Alan McDaniel, followed by Paul Gardner. So if you can kind of queue up, we'll get you all started. Welcome. Thank you, Mayor. May it please the council. I'd like to speak about the proposed new government center. This building is a beautiful building, but it is less than ideal. It's not accessible. This is a ballroom, not a council chamber. There's no denying that. So this has been worked on for years, and this deal seems to have just been dropped in the night as a done deal, which makes me wonder. And then the prices of it. A $30 million purchase, which might be reasonable, but then we lease it back from ourselves, so then we'll spend another $122.5 million leasing it back from ourselves. The money we put in that building, if it was invested, after 35 years, it would be $26, just about $27 million. That could do a lot of good for our city as opposed to running. And this building, are we going to have any equity, or are we just running it? I mean, it just doesn't seem to make any sense why we need to go all that far and spend all that money when we have a housing crisis and everything else for a building, when this building might not be wonderful, but it is absolutely serviceable. Thank you. Thank you. Next is Alan McDaniel, followed by Paul Gardner. Paul, you're here. Yeah. Welcome. Thank you. I'll be brief. I'm Alan McDaniel with Downtown Lexington Partnership. Our offices are in Council Member Legree's District Number 3, and I'm a personal home resident of District 11, Jennifer Reynolds. Downtown Lexington Partnership recognizes the challenges faced by the City of Lexington in the current government center. Limited community space, poor accessibility options for those with mobility challenges, and significant deferred maintenance are among their primary concerns. We support the efforts of the Mayor's Office and City Council to maintain the presence of City Hall in the downtown with a fiscally responsible solution. The new space will better accommodate all members of our community, and we believe alleviate ongoing financial burdens related to this current facility. Thank you all. Thank you. Next is Paul Gardner. He will be followed by Debra Winslow. Debra, are you here? Okay. And after Debra will be Patty Cooper. So, Paul, it's your turn. If you'll state your name and Council District. Yes. I don't think this is working. Is it? Okay. Good afternoon. Paul Gardner, 1st District. I think they're going to turn it up. Can you all hear it? Okay. Okay, I got it. I'll hold it. There you go. Okay. I'm here to speak on behalf of the audience that we're discussing. And authorizing the mayor and her designees on behalf of the Urban County Government. I wish that also in there, just after that designee authorizing you, Mayor Gordon, it would also say for the people and by the people to execute the following documents. It seems like that you're kind of putting the cart before the horse with this audience. But I see farther down the line here it talks about with the final closing and for notice to proceed with the project contingent upon the approval of the Kentucky Local Government Public-Private Partnership Board. So it seems like we still as a community or as a people have another opportunity to be against this audience. Speaking of the building itself, I would only say that if the money that's being spent for this project, if it was also some monies that were set aside to take care of the community, also we deserve full clarity and full honesty of what this audience entails. But as fast as it's been going, it's hard to try to keep up. So I wish, looking over some of the things I looked over, Mayor Gordon, I haven't had a lot of time to look over it, but it seems like you've got some pretty big shoes to fill on this. Thank you. Thank you. Next is Deborah Winslow, who will be followed by Patty Cooper, and then we'll have Elena Brodersen. Welcome. My name is Deborah Winslow, and I live in Council District 3. I'm here to oppose this current plan for a new City Hall. As I see it, there are two problems with this proposal. Number one, the Mayor's team didn't appear to be transparent about some issues. Number two, the proposed deal for the new building includes the web companies, which has a checkered history. In the Council meeting work session on November 18th, the public had a chance to hear about this plan that had been discussed in closed meetings for months. The public was assured by Commissioner Ford there were, quote, no immediate safety concerns for our staff or visitors to be concerned about regarding the current City Hall we're standing in. This was a strange response, since there's now an email from a Council person to a constituent circulating that State City Hall is falling apart, employees complain of being sick and having all kinds of issues working in it, a lot of the attached garage is condemned, hundreds of horseflies buzzing with the source being dead pigeons rotting in the ceiling, flooding in the ceiling. In addition, the public was told by Commissioner Ford that it was his understanding that the Capital Reserve Fund would need to be allocated for capital projects. I've been told by two different sources that the $40 million fund isn't limited to capital projects or major assets, it's just set aside for the intent of capital improvements. I heard it live, and I watched it again on your website, just to make sure I heard it right. Why didn't the Mayor correct the record regarding either of these issues? Furthermore, the web companies don't have a great track record. Remember Centerpoint, also known as Centerpit? It seems Ronald Trichner is still a central figure with the web companies, according to their website. He tried to bully the city in 2015 when they were delaying construction on that project, Source Herald Leader. Unfortunately, web deceptions run deep. The State Insurance Commissioner filed suit in 1994 against the webs to collect $108 million in loans that they had received from Kentucky's Central Life Insurance Company. The issue churned through the courts for years before out-of-state settlements were reached in 2005, with Donald Webb settling for $2.85 million and Dudley Webb settling for $4 million. Source Herald Leader, can you imagine if we get stuck with a sick building and another web debacle that takes 11 years to settle? Instead of a new City Hall, I suggest funds be spent on hybrid rental spaces and pivoting to telecommuting, which the pandemic shows is a viable and attractive-to-employees option. Employees need a safe working option now. Thank you. Next is Patty Cooper, followed by Alaina Broderson, and after Alaina will be Walter Taylor. Welcome. Thank you. My name is Patty Cooper, and I'm in the 11th District. I have only a few comments. In my community activities and membership in BUILD, I have heard so many stories from people who don't have housing, from people that programs that we could still do better with on providing food for people in our community. So I moved here in 1993, and I have heard about getting a new building really since I moved here. So I can understand that. I guess what surprised me was that it seemed so sudden, even though for people involved, for the rest of us, it felt sudden. And it seems as though the times we are in may be less certain than in the past. And so I'm wondering if this kind of financial outlay, and I'm not well-versed, but $350 million is a down payment. Is that correct? Yeah. It just seems like a lot when we could be doing more to help our neighbors. Thank you. Thank you. Next is Elena Brodersen, followed by Walter Taylor, and after Walter will be Viroqua Moore. Is Viroqua here? All right. Thank you. Welcome. Hi. Thank you all so much. My name is Elena Brodersen. I'm in District 4, and I'm here to oppose this ordinance and here to encourage you all to reject this budget allocation put forth by the mayor. I believe that this is a flagrant misuse of funds at a time when so many individuals and organizations are struggling to get by. The $30 million towards a new building is not a need. It's a want. It is not a decision that's guided by care. There are folks in this community that really, genuinely need things, food in their fridges and pantries, bills paid, school and child care taken care of, safe, affordable housing, transportation. The list goes on and on, and these are needs that you all, the city council, can address. I know that you all love your community. I see the wonderful things that you do and the way that you want to make the city better. But ask yourself, really, who is this new city building really helping? Because a new building isn't for me. It's not for us. It's not helping folks that don't have enough groceries this week. It's not helping folks that are living on the street. It's not for organizations who have funding slashed. It's a superficial desire that feeds ego over community, and that's something that I will always advocate against. We need to make due with what we have and fund programs that help people now, that feed people now, that house people now, and that support people now, not later sometime in the future. You all just relieved people of their medical debt, which was incredible. So continue that role. Do more things like that. Cancel student debt, overdue rent, fund struggling nonprofits, pay electric bills. Any kind of direct action and aid will always be more impactful than an unnecessary new building. Unless the city is willing to commit to turn this perfectly fine building into permanent, affordable housing that's rent-controlled for its community once you're done with it, I see no reason to support this budgetary allocation. And I hope you will join me in rejecting this proposal and redirecting funds to endeavors that actually benefit Lexingtonians. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Next is Walter Taylor, who will be followed by Viroqua Moore, and then Donald Adkins. Are you here, Donald? Okay. Welcome. Hi. Put the mic up. Oh. Hello. Hi. This is my first time. I'm a little nervous. It's very scary. My name is Walter Taylor, and I live in District 12. I understand that you all want to renovate your house or buy a new one up the street. I can understand why. This place is old. Things probably leak, and the occasional mold probably creeps in, and it does kind of smell a little bit. So I get it. And I also think many people in this room and the entirety of Lexington feel the same way about their own homes. Townhouses, one-bedroom apartments that cost $1,200 a month now. They are often also old, have leaks, and the occasional mold creeps in, too. I say that as someone who had to vacate an old, leaky, mold-ridden apartment with doors that had gaps and winter temperatures that sometimes didn't break 60 degrees in February, and that was with my $400 electric bill. I could usually see my own breath when I woke up, and for months my roommate and I would just cough and cough. I just thought we had long COVID, but nope, it was just mold. But where you all, the city, are different than us, the city, is that we can't use $30-plus million of taxpayer money to just move down the street to our dream houses. But if we could, it would be amazing. I know I built a place where folks who didn't have anywhere to take refuge during the winter or any season could stay, of which there are many folks who don't have refuge currently in the city. I built a place that was both affordable and well-maintained, of which there aren't many places like that currently in the city. Or maybe selfishly, my own one-bedroom apartment without mold. I'd love to get out of my parents' basement. I even know a great location down the street. You all did the research. That's what I would do. And I just kind of realized this isn't even your actual home. This is where you work. You don't have to spend the night here, raise a family inside here, or cook your inflated-priced groceries in here. So, please, can we focus on the city's actual homes first? And then you all can build your dream home or your dream workplace after everyone has some kind of roof over their heads. Thank you. Thank you. Next is Viroqua Moore, followed by Donald Adkins. Are you here, Donald? And after Donald will be Adrienne Williams. Welcome. Hello. My name is Viroqua Moore. You can put it down. My name is Viroqua Moore, and I'm from District 2. And the reason I'm opposing this bill today is because I see on a daily basis what goes on, like, in my neighborhood and other places around the city that would need some money, such as children going hungry because there's no free lunch program. People going without shoes, socks, and not having a place to live. Other things I see on a daily basis is that the elderly sometimes live in infested, roach-infested buildings or rat-infested buildings and don't have no other place to go. There are people out there that do not have the things that they need, and I do not see why we would need a bigger building for someone to sit in and make decisions when there's a comfortable place here. So what I think you all should do, this is Giving Tuesday. This is Giving Tuesday, right? Is give people an opportunity to have better housing, to have money in their pockets for food, to have things to go on in the community for children, to stop gun violence by supplying things to help stop the gun violence, such as more people in the area to help, maybe not police, but advocates to help the children. In my neighborhood directly, there are children that are living without fathers. All of us are mothers in my neighborhood, and nobody has a father in the home. Put some mentor programs out there so that these children can have mentors that are fathers, men in their life. Do some different things like help people to get food. I see lines all the way down Georgetown Street sometimes up at the Sheriff's Center of people needing food, and sometimes there's not enough food to feed them at the Sheriff's Center, so they get turned away. Why can't we put a little more money into food? Why can't we put a little more money into helping them have something to do other than stand on the corners? Sometimes people don't want to go to Douglas Park. I don't want to go to Douglas Park, or sometimes there's a lot of crime in Douglas Park. Why can't we build something around there? Why can't we take that building on the corner of Ash Street that used to be a home for children that didn't have no home, a foster home more or less, and turn that into something, a community center, something that it used to be. I heard it had barbershops in it, and people down our way could use a couple of barbershops and maybe have a little discount because a lot of people don't have money where I live at to do, so they go to a barbershop that costs $40 to get their hair cut. We could use a little bit of time and money to help with food so that people can have decent food in their house, not just what somebody gives them. They want some meat to eat, too. Everybody, I'm sure, on the council eats meat sometimes, and the people of our neighborhood would like to ask for meat, but sometimes they don't have the money to. And I thank you today for this. Thank you very much. Next is Donald Adkins. Is Donald here? Okay. Following Donald is Adrienne Williams. Are you here? And then after Adrienne will be Chuck Eddy. And then Elizabeth Browning. Elizabeth, are you here? Okay. Welcome. Good evening. Hi. I'm Adrienne Williams, and I live in the Fifth District. I'm here today because I have a concern about the way this urban county government prioritizes your people. Not more than three weeks ago, the mayor put forward a proposal for a new government center that would cost us taxpayers at least $87 million. Voting no against the proposal will apparently cost us over $50 million just to start. It's a weighty decision to make, especially at a time when federal funding for social services is drying up and becoming less available across the state. I wish there had been a real opportunity for the public to learn about this and to collaborate with our government on a solution that got you all a place that you could work in comfortably while making sure our needs were met as well. As it stands, we have thousands of homes less than we have people who need them. We have kids who don't have rooms of their own. The other day I was observing eviction court, and a mom was there with her 4-year-old daughter. Like many, she had gotten behind on her rent, and housing assistance was tapped out. She had no resources. They got evicted, and the mom put on a brave, smiling face so that her daughter would not know how bad things were. When I talked with her after, her eyes were full of tears that she refused to let fall. If there had been adequate, actually affordable housing, I can't help but believe she and her daughter would never have had to endure what they are going through right now. That's what my sister and I went through when we were kids. It's the responsibility of our government to ask us what we need most and follow through on delivering it. I'm sorry that you have a place to work in that's as shitty as a place that some of us have to live in. You all have rotten animals in your ceiling. I had a dead rat rotting in the wall behind my oven that my landlord refused to remove. So I get it. That's where my tax dollars go to getting folks housed, fed, and educated. I would rather this capital funding specifically go toward addressing our emergency and permanent supportive housing gap. Everyone in this city, in this county, deserves a permanently affordable, comfortable place to call home if they want it. And it's a disservice that our government is not more focused on that. I ask that instead of a new government center, these capital funds this year on meeting our shelter and permanent supportive housing gap. Thank you. Thank you. Next is Chuck Eddy, followed by Elizabeth Browning, and then Hart Hallos. Welcome. Thank you. Every time I hear Elizabeth's name, I think of Elizabeth Barrett Browning, and I'm looking forward to some great poetry. I'm Chuck Eddy, District 4, Mayor Gorton, Vice Mayor Wu, and the council members. It's an honor to speak to you again. As I said on November 20th, I want to talk about the plans for the new city hall. This project and all the services that this council supports are paid for by our tax dollars. There are still many current local needs in our community that aren't being met. Affordable housing, reducing gun violence, reducing hunger. So I have two major concerns about this plan. Number one, with the uncertainty created by the steep, steep federal government cuts and the very likely coming steep Kentucky state cuts, I'm deeply concerned that now is not the time to move forward with this project. We do not know where else there will be cuts resulting in gaps that we here in Lexington will need to fill. I think we need to carefully evaluate the timing on this investment. So I want you to delay the project. Also, secondly, when we do move forward with this capital investment, let's address some of the needs. I believe we need to do this in tandem with capital investment in badly needed homeless housing. Thank you very much for your time. Appreciate what you all do. Thank you. Next is Elizabeth Browning, followed by Hart Hallos, followed by Emmett Conger. Is Emmett here? All right. Thank you. Welcome. Hi. Hello, Council. My name is Elizabeth Browning, and I'm from the 1st District, and I'm here to speak about the ordinance for New City Hall. I think, firstly, thorough community involvement and feedback are really needed forms of communication and respect, especially because this is such an expensive project on the taxpayers' dime, and that has not happened. $30 million up front and upwards of $85 million is a huge amount to dedicate to something that is not nearly as urgent as the basic needs of Lexingtonians, who many of you, who many of, as you all know, are experiencing particularly unexpected hardships right now. I understand the lack of a new building costs the city a lot in maintaining this one, but a lack of any building with beds or affordable rooms to rent is costing Lexingtonians everything. That's an estimated 500 Lexingtonians who are unhoused. It is really cold outside right now. Fifteen percent food insecure. Lack of access to all of these things, food, housing, health care, are issues that have long disproportionately hurt Kentuckians, and many of us are feeling it now worse than ever. Funding the Affordable Housing Trust, funding more beds, and feeding the community is needed right now. Thank you all. Thank you. Next is Hart Hallos, followed by Emmett Conger, and then Nikita Paramal. Is Nikita here? Okay. Thank you. Welcome. Hi. My name is Hart Hallos. I rent in District 3, and I'm here with KY Tenants to voice my concerns about the new proposal for a city hall building. As you've heard, $30 million for the down payment and then a projected cost of over $86 million. I just want to offer some alternative numbers. These are based on the fiscal year 2026 mayor's proposed budget. For example, environmental services is only allocated just over $8 million currently. Housing advocacy is allocated just over $9 million. Traffic engineering is allocated over $15 million. Streets and roads are allocated over $18 million. Imagine what some of these areas and departments could do with the addition of $1 or $2 million that could come from this proposed $30 million. I also was looking at the 2024 Affordable Housing Needs Analysis Report and the work that the Affordable Housing Fund in Lexington does. With an average investment per unit that includes purchasing new units and restoring existing units to maintain them for affordable housing, the average investment per unit is $13,556. With some quick math there, $30 million devoted exclusively to that fund would allow for the construction or the maintenance of over 2,000 units of affordable housing for Lexingtonians. I know that our needs are in the tens of thousands, but that's a start. I also just want to say that I live in the Woodland Park area, and I work at Gatton Park. I walk to work currently, and I walk by the new public transportation center since the current one is under renovation. I've worked there since the summer, so I've seen the way that people have to sit for hours waiting for buses there. I've seen the way that the heat drags them down into the ground. I've seen the tiredness in their faces. I've seen the way that they try to find shade. Now I'm going to work there in the winter, and I'm going to watch the ways in which they try to huddle together closely for warmth or try to keep themselves warm against the freezing cold. I think $30 million is a really excessive amount of money when we have such direct needs that could be met for members in our community. Thank you. Thank you. Next is Emmett Conger, followed by Nikita Paramal. Welcome. Hello. I'm Emmett. I'm part of District 6. Now I understand why funding is important, obviously, for the city hall, and there were a lot of amazing points on this, but the amount of people that live here that can't simply afford to live on their own. I mean, I lived with roommates for five-plus years mainly because I couldn't even really afford to live on my own outside of going back to my parents, and now that I do live on my own, it is very difficult. And I have, like, a job that pays fairly well, but I can't simply imagine that if I'm struggling, how many people that aren't really having the best jobs or the best opportunities right now, how they're living. And I think that it's a little foolish to be prioritizing that over, honestly, humanity. Like, housing is incredibly important, and every person in this city and in Kentucky should have a home. It doesn't matter if it's them on their own or with family or whatever, but I think that it is incredibly important, obviously. And the fact, too, that there are at least 31,000 homes that we are short for Kentuckians in this city, and I think that most of all that should be something that we should be prioritizing, but not just that. I mean, obviously, I think public transportation should be looked at. Helping the north side, one of the rougher areas of this city, are extremely important things. And obviously, of course, like many of us have said, that feeding and giving everyone food and making sure everyone is fed and is able to live their lives here as enjoyable and comfortable as they can is incredibly important. So while I do think renovating or helping to rebuild this structure is important, I don't think that it is really the priority right now. So yes, it can come, but it should wait. Thank you. Thank you. Next is Nikita Perumal. Welcome. Hello. My name is Nikita Perumal. I'm a Lexington resident of District 3. I've lived in Lexington for eight years, and the entirety of that time I've been a community organizer, which means that I have had hundreds, if not thousands, of conversations across both the state and Lexington about the things that matter to everyday people. And over that time, I have just met so many people, incredible, hardworking Kentuckians with a lot of heart and grit and really beautiful dreams, who are just struggling day to day to make it. I've met folks who have a hard time keeping a roof over their head or the heat on. I've met a lot of folks, amazing people who depend on staff benefits to feed their family or Medicaid to cover their health costs. I myself have been on Medicaid, and I'm very deeply aware that these are two programs currently on the chopping block by our federal government right now. And I think what I'm arguing today is that these are just particularly challenging times for all of the United States and especially Kentucky and especially Lexington. I know that things are about to get a lot worse for our people, not better. And I simply do not believe that now is a good time, that a new government center is what this moment is calling for us to be spending city funds on, especially not with just a few weeks notice for the public to weigh in. I have not heard anyone at the doors ever ask for a new government center, and I do acknowledge that a refreshed place to work is important, but I'm just asking you to consider, is this the right time? What I have heard again and again at the doors is people asking for a way to stay afloat in a time of massive inflation, stagnant wages, and already insufficient social safety net that is eroding. So with this in mind, I urge city council to vote no tonight on spending millions on a new government center, and instead urge you to spend that money on deeply affordable housing for the city's shortage of over 30,000 homes and 500 shelter beds, and just to help our people survive in these really precarious times. Thank you. Thank you very much. I want to thank all of you who came to speak tonight during public comment. Appreciate it. Next is a second reading of ordinances. I'm sorry. I'm so sorry. All right. Council Member Morton. So I'm going to make a motion to separate the second reading of ordinances just so that we can have discussion about this before we vote on it. So moved. Separate item one under second reading. Is there a second? I'll second. Council Member Svigny seconds. Any comments? All right. The motion is to separate the item one from item two for votes. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Is anyone opposed? All right. So yes. Evan, does separating out the ordinance create an opportunity for comment at second reading? I'm not sure what you're asking. Can you restate your question? Sure. I believe Council Member Morton's intention with separating it out is to allow discussion on this particular item. So I'm separating to split it from the two so that, one, we can have this by itself, and then I'm going to ask the mayor, before we go into reading, like we do normally, if there's any questions, if there's any discussion about the item, I would like to do so now before reading and taking the vote. Basically, I would like to get my stance before the vote and not after the vote, is what I'm saying. And I feel that we do this, there's a precedent of doing this. So that's my answer. So it's two separate questions. My question is answered. Thank you. All right. Shall we do number two first? All right. If you will read number two, please. Item two, an ordinance amending certain of the budgets of the Lexington Fair Urban County Government to apply current requirements for municipal expenditures and appropriating and repurposing funds, fiscal year 2026, schedule number 18. Is there a motion? Motion approved. Thank you. Council Member Ellinger, Vice Mayor Wu seconds. And when you're ready, if you'll take a roll call vote, please. Council Member Sebigne? Yes. Council Member Sheehan? Yes. Vice Mayor Wu? Yes. Council Member Beazley? Yes, ma'am. Council Member Boone? Yes. Council Member Brown? Yes. Council Member Curtis? Yes, ma'am. Council Member Ellinger? Yes, ma'am. Council Member Eliot-Baxter? Yes, ma'am. Council Member Hale? Yes, ma'am. Council Member Higgins-Horde? Yes, ma'am. Council Member Legree? Yes, ma'am. Council Member Lynch? Yes. Council Member Morton? Yes. And Council Member Reynolds? Yes. Thank you. All right, thank you. That one passes. And then if you'll go ahead and was your request to have discussion first? Yes, ma'am. Okay. I presume that suits everybody. It's a little unusual, but I think it's happened before. Any one opposed to that? All right. Is there discussion about number one, which is for second reading? Council Member Savigny? Thank you, Mayor. I just want to take a moment before we vote on City Hall to publicly recognize all the work that's been done by the Mayor's Office, Administration, fellow Council Members, and community partners to get this viable proposal that we have today in front of us. I think having a safe, professional, and comfortable workspace is one of the key components in attracting and maintaining great talent, which I'm a really strong proponent of. I'm disappointed that during these deliberations over the last three years I've been on Council, a P3 project wasn't presented like one at the historic courthouse, complete with historic tax credits to transform this grand old building we are in today to a special, unique community building which provides a safe, professional, beautiful, supportive workspace that is truly iconic and welcomes our entire community to share its history. That said, I won't be supporting the move for a new City Hall. Frankly, I don't find that aspirational, not because I think it's a bad idea or that it's not needed, just that I think there are alternatives that are better, provide less risk, more reward, as well as additional priorities for uses of funds that I think are at least equally important. Thank you. Thank you. Council Member Morton? Thank you. Also, at our last meeting I made a commitment to take this proposal directly to my advisory board and to the people I represent. The response I received was overwhelming and clear. Now is not the time to move forward with this project. Families, seniors, small business owners, faith leaders all share deep concerns about what this moment demands of us. The time is not now. Right now people are struggling with rising costs, unstable employment, housing, insecurity, and uncertain about what tomorrow will bring. At the federal level, we are seeing financial uncertainty that is already beginning to trickle down and impact local governments. In moments like these, our responsibility is to protect people and make people the main priority. The time is not now. When so many of our neighborhoods still need basic investments, safer streets, more affordable housing, with an emphasis on home ownership, youth programming, support for our most vulnerable residents, our focus must remain on the everyday challenges of our community and the struggles that they are going through right now. The time is not now. To move forward with a process that is fully transparent, truly accessible to the public, our residents deserve clear information, honest dialogue, and a meaningful seat at the table before decisions of this magnitude are made. The time is not now. In solidarity with the overwhelming majority of my district and the very real concerns that have been brought forward, I will be voting no on this item. My vote reflects not just a policy position, but a commitment to stand with our community, my district, in this moment. So to me, the time is not now, and our people must come first. Thank you. Thank you. Council Member Curtis. Thank you, Mayor. Colleagues, I am going to be opposing the ordinance for the new city hall tonight, and I wanted to explain why I'm going to be doing so. When I came into this office, I had a long list of things that I wanted to accomplish, and I know many of us do. And the thing that I've realized over the past year has been that I came into office at an extraordinary time where we're not dealing with the certainty that we've historically dealt with in terms of the resources that we are allocated from the federal government, the collaboration we've historically been afforded from the federal government in order to meet the needs of our community. And with recent moves by the Trump administration and by Congress to slash funding for many of the projects that I believe are what makes our government here work so well for our people, I'm not comfortable committing this amount of money right now without having tangible commitments to filling those gaps. And like I said, when I came in, I had a long list of things that I wanted to accomplish through collaboration, but collaboration has to go both ways. And right now, we don't have the support that we need from the federal government, and more importantly, our residents don't have the support that they need from the federal government that they've historically received from the federal government. And in those moments, I do believe that it is our obligation at the local level to step in and fill those gaps where we can. And I certainly didn't think that one of the items I would hear the most from my constituents about would be the proposal for a new city hall, but it has become one of the items that I have heard most directly from my constituents about. And for those reasons, I cannot support this item tonight. Thank you. Thank you. Does anyone else wish to speak? Council Member Baxter. Thank you, Mayor. In 1982, when my grandfather was a council member, we moved into this building as a temporary home. Five mayoral administrations have worked diligently to identify a new location, and we're closer now than we've ever been. To get us to this historic vote tonight, we've considered multiple buildings in the downtown core, investigated renovating our current building, completed space studies to ensure we were using our space appropriately, released multiple RFPs, and had numerous presentations and workshops during our 43 years in this building, all while spending millions of dollars keeping this building functional enough to keep the doors open. We work really hard and pride ourselves in being accessible to the public. But when our council chamber is too small to seat those who wish to participate in local government, or when individuals with mobility challenges are immediately met with a staircase or a loud lift to even access our lobby, or when our employees are met with a deteriorating workspace every day, we are not serving our community well. Just two years ago, we had to spend over $2 million to rebuild our obsolete elevators so we could stay open for business. In my opinion, that's not a good use of taxpayer dollars. There will never be a good time to make a hard decision like this. But we were elected to make hard decisions and to be good fiscal agents of taxpayer dollars. And I cannot continue to approve budgets that keep putting a Band-Aid on this building and keep funding repairs that compete with services that we could provide to our community when we have been presented with a feasible solution. We have planned and saved for this day, and I'm confident that we are making the right decision to move forward. I just wish my grandfather was here to celebrate the day we finally make the decision to move from our temporary home. Thank you. Thank you. Council Member James Brown. Thank you, Mayor. I'm going to support the ordinance tonight for New City Hall, and it's partly because, well, there's several reasons. And I think Council Member Baxter said a lot of really good comments. There's never really going to be a good and a right time to do this. I think what is different from the times that this has been proposed before is that the administration has really included the council in the process. We've done the studies. We've saved the money. We've looked at and have explored other options, even staying in this building. And I've been here long enough to experience budgets where we've taken out preventative maintenance calls for this building to put money back into the community, which I think is a good thing in what we decided to do. I don't see that changing. I see opportunities where we continue to make those decisions while the folks that come and speak and engage with us have to come to an inferior setting, a lot of times degrading setting, to engage with us. When you have to sit outside, when folks come down here to talk to us and they have to sit outside and hear the conversation in a seven-second delay is not the best situation. Where the folks who do the work that implement these programs that folks have talked about tonight and that this council and other councils have continued to support and enhance to provide services to our community, to do that work in a building that is not the most conducive for them to work in, but they show up every day and do the work. So this project and this ordinance is an investment in this community. It's an investment to the people that elected us. It's an investment to the folks that are hired to provide services to this community. And it's an investment in our future. City government is not going anywhere. We're going to be here and we're going to be doing the work. And I think it would just be progressible of us to do it in a space that is conducive for folks to come and engage with us and for folks to come and do the work. So I think we've planned, I think we've studied it, and I think now is the time to move forward with it. So I'm going to support the ordinance tonight. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you. Council Member Reynolds. Thank you, Mayor. A lot of you already know what I think. But I did want to mention that the reason why I'm supporting this is because I don't believe that staying in this building and continuing to either, A, put off maintenance to the tune of over $55 million, as Council Member Baxter said, we approve these budgets that put off maintenance or just put Band-Aids on the building. I do not believe that's a good way to use your money. And I believe that this proposal is more sound than pouring an additional, with a garage and everything else, maybe over $80 million into something that's not in good shape. And I hope you all understand, if this doesn't pass, we have to decide what to do with this building, and it might mean throwing $80 million into it. So it's not like we can just throw $30 million into all of these programs right away. This is about being fiscally sound and doing the right thing with the money that we have now so that we're being good stewards of taxpayer money. We have to have a government center. We have a lot of employees that do telework now that didn't used to. We've, you know, minimized our footprint. We are maybe even able to go into a smaller footprint. But we still have to have a government center. And I know you all and my constituents want a place that they can come, that they can speak to us, that they can meet with us. And so we have to have that, good or bad. We are not, in my opinion, at all saying we want a fancy new house. That is not what this is. This is we need a new house. What is the new house going to look like? How are we going to finance it? Otherwise, we're going to be staying in a house that is falling down around us, and that is not a good way to do business. So, in my opinion, this has nothing to do with wanting something new and shiny and fancy or mismanaging money. I believe this is a good way to spend money, and that I also believe that this city will continue to prioritize its residents and that we want to look for ways to help solve the housing crisis and everything else. This is not a one or the other or instead of. There's never a good time to do something like this, period. We thought there was a good time before COVID. We talked about it then. The council before that thought it was a good time, and we could say maybe in five years it will be a good time, but there's really never a good time. We have to make a decision. Thank you. Thank you. Does anyone else wish to speak? All right. I'll ask for a motion to approve. Council Member Baxter, is there a second? Mayor. Oh, I'm so sorry. You need to read it first. Yes, please. Thank you. We'll get to that in a minute. Okay. Item one, an ordinance related to the construction and leasing to own a new government center number 51-2024 Government Center Development and Lease Proposal to be located at 200 West Vine Street and 260 West Vine Street, Suite 400, and authorizing the Mayor or her designee on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute the following documents and any additional necessary documents related to this project with LOF Development, LLC, and or the Lexington Opportunity Fund, LLC, or their affiliates, and or a to-be-formed Kentucky Nonprofit Corporation or limited liability company. One, development agreement. Two, real estate purchase and sale agreement. And three, ground lease. And four, facilities lease with an initial payment of $30 million towards the purchase of the properties and the construction of the project in the terms of the ground lease and facilities lease not to exceed 35 years from the issuance of the lease obligations and or an estimated annual payment of $3.5 million per year, authorizing the taking of any additional necessary actions related to this matter and appropriating funds pursuant to Schedule Number 17 with the final closing and full notice to proceed with the project contingent upon the approval of the Kentucky Local Government Public-Private Partnership Board pursuant to KRS 65.028 parenthetical 12 if applicable. Thank you. Thank you. Now it's time for a motion to approve. Council Member Baxter, is there a second? Council Member Higgins-Horde. And when you're ready, if you'll take a roll call vote, please. Council Member Savigny? No. Council Member Sheehan? No. Vice Mayor Wu? No. Council Member Beasley? No, ma'am. Council Member Boone? Yes, ma'am. Council Member Brown? Yes. Council Member Curtis? No, ma'am. Council Member Ullinger? Yes, ma'am. Council Member Elliot Baxter? Yes, ma'am. Council Member Hale? Yes, ma'am. Council Member Higgins-Horde? Yes, ma'am. Council Member LeGrier? Yes. Council Member Lynch? No. Council Member Morton? No. And Council Member Reynolds? Yes. Thank you. All right. That motion passes eight to seven. Thank you very much. Now it is time for first reading of ordinances. Okay. Item three. In order of spending and extending the full urban service district number one to the urban county government for the provision of street lighting, street cleaning, and garbage and refuse collection to include the area defined as certain properties on the following streets. Bellhurst Way, Belleville Park, Blackford Parkway, Blue Sky Parkway, Buttermilk Road, Carnation Drive, Cravat Pass, Denton Trail, Geneva Place, Halford Place, Meadowlark Road, Ontario Place, Polo Club Boulevard, Rabbit Warren Flat, Seneca Lake Road, Shady Cove, Ward Drive, Berry Ridge Circle, and Lamont Drive. Item four. In order of spending and extending partial urban service district number three for the urban county government for the provision of garbage and refuse collection to include area defined as certain properties on the following streets, Bourbon Walk, Branham Park, and Weston Park. Item five. In ordinance expanding and extending partial urban service district number four to the urban county government for the provision of street lighting to include the area defined as certain properties on Stedman Drive. Item six. In ordinance expanding and extending partial urban service district number five for the urban county government for the provision of street lighting and garbage and refuse collection to include the area defined as certain properties on Redberry Circle. Item seven. In ordinance expanding and extending some of the budget, the license of urban county government to reflect current requirements for municipal expenditures and appropriating funds. FY 2026. Schedule number 20. And item eight. In ordinance amending the authorized strength by abolishing 12 classified positions of Park Maintenance Supervisor Grade 5-17 and incorporating 12 classified positions of Park Maintenance Supervisor Grade 5-18 and transferring the incumbent all in the Division of Parks and Recreation effective the first pay period following the passage of Council. Thank you. All right. Are there any walk-ons? Council Member Baxter. Thank you, Mayor. As you all know, I said something earlier in work session. Thank you, Mayor. As you all know, I said something earlier in work session about my intended motion for this evening. So I move to place on the docket for tonight's Council meeting under ordinances first reading an ordinance amending certain of the budgets to reflect certain requirements for municipal expenditures and appropriating and reappropriating funds. Schedule number 19 to provide $2,823,147 towards future expenditures recommended by the Mayor's Task Force on Homelessness and approved by the Urban County Council utilizing unallocated general fund balance. So moved. Is there a second? Council Member LaGrie. Seconds. Is there any discussion? Council Member Sheehan. I'm going to support this motion, but I want to be clear that this doesn't erase or ease the concerns raised by the public about what we should be prioritizing right now. The unassigned fund balance is $2.8 million, and the vote that we just took was for $152 million to City Hall. That is 54 times this amount. If we are saying that housing and homelessness is the top priority, but then spending dramatically more on something else indicates what the true priority is. If we look at the capital fund alone, we had $42 million in our capital fund, and City Hall would take $30 million of that money, and that is 70% of that fund. That also indicates what a priority is. The study we did on the emergency shelter and transitional housing estimated that we would need $27 million in capital funding. So $2.8 million is not showing that we are prioritizing decreasing homelessness. It is underfunding the estimated solution, when we heard even just earlier today that we are expected to lose federal funding amounting to 100 beds in our response to homelessness. So I'm going to vote yes on this funding towards the task force, but I think we should be giving the task force time to come up with its recommendations, fully funding those, before we're spending money on City Hall. Thank you. Council Member Brown. Thank you, Mayor. I'd like to make a motion to amend that motion to postpone that decision until after the task force has completed their work and comes back with their recommendations. So moved. Is there a second? I'll second. Council Member Morton seconds. Is there discussion of the motion to postpone the motion until the task force makes recommendations? Council Member Brown. Thank you, Mayor. The rationale for that is somewhat to the point that Council Member Sheehan made. If the recommendations are going to move us forward, give us a different focus in regards to addressing homelessness, then we should fund it appropriately. And if it's a facility that comes out as a recommendation, we have capital money, let's put capital money towards the facility. If it's program changes, let's put money towards program changes. I'd rather know what it is that we're going to do going forward to address homelessness and fund those initiatives appropriately. So that's my rationale for the motion. Thank you. Is there other discussion? Council Member Reynolds. Council Member Brown, where do you suggest this money go then or sit until then? It may be a legal question, but I think this money remains unassigned. So if a need arises that we can access this money to address the need. Okay, thank you. All right. Just going to agree with that. Yeah, I was just going to agree with that. Thank you. Are there others who wish to speak to the motion? Council Member Sheehan. I'm going to vote no on postponing. We've been talking a lot today about how we saved money and put money aside, and that is how we're affording City Hall. So if we want to afford our solution to homelessness, then we have to start saving. So I'm going to vote no on postponement so that we start putting money specifically aside to address the recommendations from the task force. Vice Mayor Wu. Council Member Sheehan said exactly that. Okay. Does anyone else wish to speak to the motion? Council Members, do any of you want to speak? It looks like the Commissioner wants to come speak. Would you all like to hear from the Commissioner about the motion? The motion on the floor is to postpone this motion. That's what we're discussing. I just wanted to provide clarity that if you don't assign it elsewhere, it remains unassigned fund balance and can be assigned at any time. It doesn't have to be assigned anywhere, and it will remain unassigned until which point you assign it. Okay. Thank you for that. Vice Mayor Wu. Thank you, Mayor. I want a point of legal clarity. When we say postponement, does it have to be to a date certain? And if Council Member Brown's intention is to not set a date on it, are we taking it off the table or putting it on the table as it were? The way I would interpret it is that the date certain is the date after the task force would have made its determination. Okay. Thank you. All right. Council Member Morton to the motion. Yes, ma'am. I just have one question for Commissioner Hensley. This is the original motion the money is put into towards the task force. Just through our regular processes, if there was dollars needed, we can budget them in to get those dollars if needed, right? Correct? So the proposal, not as amended to postpone, but the original was to assign it. It would, as suggested, be assigned to Commissioner Lanter's office for whatever projects come out of the task force. That assignment is in general fund and it would remain in general fund until the end of the year. If there's no determination made by that task force by the end of the year, it would drop to fund balance unless there's a different decision that's made. At that point, it would either go to capital, it would go to a project that was determined by the task force, or you all would make a different determination as to what to do with it. Indeed. And so if anything came up between tomorrow and the end of the budget, the end of the physical year, being that that money would be assigned to Commissioner Lanter's shop if needed, if we need access to those dollars, we can budget them in to get access to those dollars, correct? Yes. You would reassign it out of there if you wanted to use it for something else. Thank you. So with that, I plan to, I'm not going to support the postpone and I'll support the original motion. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Does anyone else wish to speak to the motion to amend? No? All right. All those in favor of the motion to postpone the motion on the floor, please say aye. Aye. All those opposed? No. I think that fails. All right. Now the motion on the floor. Will you restate your motion, Council Member, with you have the amount, correct? I can say it correctly this time. Okay. I move to place on the docket for tonight's council meeting under ordinances first reading, an ordinance amending certain of the budgets to reflect current requirements for municipal expenditures and appropriating and reappropriating funds schedule number 19 to provide $2,823,147 towards future expenditures recommended by the Mayor's Task Force on Homelessness and approved by the Urban County Council utilizing unallocated general fund fund balance. Thank you. All those, is there any discussion? All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Is anyone opposed? All right. That motion passes. Thank you. And so that will be number nine on our first readings. Okay. So if you will give that first reading. Item nine, an ordinance amending certain of the budgets of the Lexington Fair Urban County Government to provide funds towards future expenditures recommended by the Mayor's Task Force on Homelessness and appropriating and reappropriating funds at schedule number 19. Thank you. All right. Are there any other walk-ons? Are there any motions to suspend the rules and give second reading? All right. Seeing none, that brings us to first reading of resolutions. Item one, a resolution accepting the bid of Tribute Acquisition Company in the amount of $10,762,511 for the Merrick Trunk Zero Project for the Division of Water Quality and authorizing the Mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute an agreement with Tribute Acquisition Company related to the bid. Item two, a resolution ratifying the permanent classified civil service appointment of Jeremiah Asbury, Administrative Specialist, Grade 516 and 24.435 hourly in the Division of Police effective November 5, 2025 and ratifying the permanent sworn appointment of Ryan Wells, Police Sergeant, Grade 315 and 42.126 hourly in the Division of Police effective October 28, 2025. Item three, a resolution authorizing the Mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute an agreement with Container Pros, LLC for dumpster bin refurbishment at a cost not to exceed $12,822.74. Item four, a resolution authorizing the Mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute an agreement with the University of Kentucky for an athletic trainer at a cost not to exceed $100,000. Item five, a resolution authorizing the Mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute a purchase of service agreement with the Downtown Lexington Corporation, DBA, Downtown Lexington Partnership to provide funding to conduct a downtown development strategic analysis and overview for the Lexington Fair Urban County Government at an additional cost not to exceed $15,000 in FY2026. Item six, an ordinance authorizing the Mayor on behalf of the Lexington Fair Urban County Government to execute change number one to the agreement with Tetra Tech Incorporated for the Haley Pike Landfill Leachate Treatment System Improvement Project for the Division of Environmental Services increasing the contract price by the sum of $177,600 from $743,050 to $920,600. Item seven, a resolution authorizing the Mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute and submit a revised application to the Kentucky Infrastructure Authority, KIA, and to provide any additional information requests in connection with this application for a low interest rate state revolving fund loan in the amount of $20 million in order to provide funding for the North Elkhorn Wet Weather Storage Tank Consent Decree Remedial Measure Project. Item eight, a resolution authorizing the Mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute an agreement with Gresham Smith for Main and Vine Streetscape Plan at a cost not to exceed $116,750. Item nine, a resolution authorizing the Mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to accept a grant from the Kentucky Cabinet of Health and Family Services, Kentucky Department of Medicaid Services in the amount of $125,000 under the Kentucky Community Crisis Co-Response Grant Program to expand the Community Paramedicine Crisis Response Program, the acceptance of which obligates the Urban County Government to the expenditure of $12,500 as a local match and authorizing the Mayor to transfer adequate funds from the grant budget. Item 10, a resolution authorizing the Mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute an addendum to the Evaluation Services Agreement with the University of Kentucky Research Foundation for evaluator for the Community Paramedicine Program. Item 11, a resolution authorizing the Mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute a second amendment to the agreement with New Life Day Center, Incorporated, for the operation of the Litter Pickup Services with Pain Handle Participation Program, increasing the contract price by the sum of $60,000 from $150,000 to $210,000 annually. Item 12, a resolution authorizing the Mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute a third amendment to the sub-recipient agreement with Northern Kentucky Legal Aid Society, Incorporated, DBA, Legal Aid of the Bluegrass, Legal Aid, reallocating an additional $95,305.99 in federal funds to Legal Aid for Housing Stability Services. Item 13, a resolution authorizing the Mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute a professional services agreement with the Bluegrass Community Foundation, Incorporated, for the Be the Change Scholarship Fund for fiscal year 2026 that costs $65,625. Item 14, a resolution authorizing the Mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute a naming rights agreement with Fifth Third Bank N.A., providing the naming rights of the pavilion at Henry A. Tandy Centennial Park at New Cross for the Urban County Government. Item 15, a resolution authorizing the Mayor on behalf of the Urban County Government to execute six community project agreements, RFP number 28-2025, to be paid with grant funds awarded under the non-profit capital grant program facility improvement with Bluegrass Council of the Blind, 36,320 Bluegrass Care Navigators, House of Bluegrass, 70,000, Greenhouse 17, 68,463, Lexington Children's Theatre, 70,000, and Nathaniel Mission, $66,186. From the Urban League of Lexington-Fayette County, $70,000. The total cost marked at $380,960. And authorizing the Mayor or her designee to execute any other necessary amendments, addenda, and other documents with these entities related to these funds. Item 16, a resolution authorizing and directing the Mayor on behalf of Urban County Government to execute eight community project agreements, RFP number 29-2025, to be paid with grant funds awarded under the non-profit capital grant program operational investments with Bluegrass Care Navigators, Hospice of the Bluegrass, 30,000, Children's Advocacy of the Bluegrass, 21,684, Grass Pantry Food Bank, 30,000, Independent Space, 29,201, Lexington Habitat for Humanity, 29,523, Moveable Fees, 29,000, New Beginnings Bluegrass, 30,000, and the Nest, $24,000. And the total cost, Dr. C, $223,408. And authorizing the Mayor or her designee to execute any other necessary amendments, addenda, and other documents with these entities related to these funds. Item 17, a resolution authorizing and directing the Mayor on behalf of Urban County Government to execute an amendment to the agreement with Drug Enforcement Administration to increase the assigned officers from one to two on the task force. Item 18, a resolution authorizing and directing the Mayor on behalf of Urban County Government to execute change order number eight to the agreement with Hare Construction, LLC, for the Phoenix Park Reimagined Project, increasing the contract price by $53,920 and raising the total contract price to $3,440,966.91. Item 19, a resolution authorizing and directing the Mayor on behalf of Urban County Government to execute an agreement with New Gen Strategies and Solutions, LLC, for a collection efficiency study at a cost noticed to $99,440. Item 20, a resolution authorizing and directing the Mayor on behalf of Urban County Government to execute amendments to the existing loan documentation for multiple projects that have been awarded federal funds pursuant to the Multi-Year Consolidated Plan and or Annual Action Plan Home Investment Partnership Program in order to adopt the annual utility allowance established by the Lexington Fiat Housing Authority where the final form of the amendment shall materially comply with these attached exemplar agreements subject to the approval of the Department of Law and the Division of Grants and Special Programs and further authorizing the Mayor to execute all other necessary documents related to these amendments. Item 21, a resolution authorizing the Mayor on behalf of Urban County Government to execute tender No. 2 to the contract with LM Asphalt Partner Ltd. DBA ATS Construction for the Salt Dome and Associated Improvements Old Frankfort Pike contract No. 58-2024 decreasing the contract price by the sum of $24,967.98 from $4,887,177.60 to $4,862,209.62. Item 22, a resolution authorizing and directing the Mayor on behalf of Urban County Government to execute a memorandum of understanding with the United States Postal Inspection Services for a part-time task force officer. Item 23, a resolution authorizing the Mayor on behalf of Urban County Government to execute a declaration of covenants and restrictions providing for the proper use, development and maintenance of each parcel within the Legacy Business Park, the final form of which shall be subject to the approval of the Industrial Authority Board and the Department of Law. Item 24, a resolution authorizing and directing the Mayor on behalf of Urban County Government to execute a submitted grant application to the National PAL Mentoring Grant Program to provide an additional information request in connection with this grant application to accept this grant if awarded, which grant funds are in the amount of $30,000 in federal funds to support the operation of the youth programming expenses and authorizing the Mayor to transfer any funds within the grant budget. Item 25, a resolution authorizing the Mayor on behalf of Urban County Government to execute the line extension agreement with Columbia Gas of Kentucky Incorporated for the installation of natural gas service for the Legacy Business Park at a cost of $433,278.98 to be used as a refundable deposit pursuant to the terms of the line extension agreement. Item 26, a resolution authorizing the Mayor on behalf of Urban County Government as a collaborative applicant to execute and submit the 2025 Continuum of Care grant application to the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development to provide any additional information request in connection with this grant application which seeks up to $4,640,674 in federal funds for the operation of programs by community non-profit organizations to reduce homelessness in Lexington County and to accept an amount up to $161,074 of grant funds if the application is approved for project planning expenses related to the monitoring programs funded by the grant, the acceptance of which obligates the Urban County Government to the expenditure of an amount up to $40,269 as a local match and authorizing the Mayor to transfer unaccounted funds within the grant budget. Item 27, a resolution authorizing the Mayor on behalf of Urban County Government to execute an agreement with the Baptist Health of Lexington for paramedic students to gain practical experience. Item 28, a resolution authorizing the Mayor on behalf of Urban County Government to execute an agreement related to neighborhood development funds with Volunteers of America Mid-States Incorporated 500, LFUCG Partners for Youth 800, The Salvation Army 1000, Louisiana Avenue Neighborhoods Association Incorporated 500, Blue Grass Families First Incorporated 1100, Sisters and Supporters Working Against Gun Violence Incorporated 2000, Kentucky Society Sons of the American Revolution Incorporated 950, and Black Church Coalition of the Blue Grass Incorporated $2,150 for the office of the Urban County Council and across North D.C. the sum stated. Item 29, a resolution authorizing the Mayor on behalf of Urban County Government to execute an agreement related to council capital projects expenditure funds with LFUCG Division of Parks and Recreation 70,500, Lexington Children's Theatre Incorporated $11,384.34, Chrysalis House Incorporated 10,000, Lexington Children's Theatre Incorporated 11,000, Radcliffe Marlborough Neighborhood Association Incorporated 2000, and LFUCG Division of Streets and Roads $15,000 for the office of the Urban County Council and across North D.C. the sum stated. And item 30, a resolution authorizing the Mayor on behalf of Urban County Government to accept a grant in the amount of $77,221 from the Kentucky Justice and Public Safety Cabinet for the State Crisis Intervention Program to further provide any information requested in connection with this grant application and to execute any document necessary for the acceptance of this grant and authorizing the Mayor to transfer any funds from the grant budget. Thank you. Thank you. Do we have any walk-ons? Do we have any suspensions? All right. Thank you. Next up is communications from the Mayor appointments. I'll need a motion, please. We have a motion and a second. Any discussion? All those in favor, please say aye. Any opposed? That motion passes. Next up is communications from the Mayor donations. I'll need a motion. We have a motion and a second. Any discussion on this motion? All those in favor, please say aye. Any opposed? That motion passes. Next up is communications from the Mayor procurements. We have a motion and a second. Any discussion on this item? All those in favor, please say aye. Any opposed? That motion passes. Next up is communications from the Mayor for your information only, which moves us on to fire and police discipline. And we do have a discipline from Chief Weathers. Good evening, everybody. This is kind of unusual for me. I'm going to reintroduce a discipline I read earlier. The allegation has been made that Officer John McFaul has committed the offense of violating any rules of the department, which constitutes misconduct under provisions of KRS 95450 or KRS 15520. General Order 1973-02L, disciplinary procedures of sworn officers, Appendix B, Operational Rule 1.35, violating any rules of the department. And that on July 13, 2025, he allegedly, on this date, Officer John McFaul accused or accessed evidence.com and reviewed body-worn camera footage taken by multiple officers at an officer-involved shooting scene. Officer McFaul was not working this day. He was not assigned to investigate the incident, nor had he gained permission to do so. Officer McFaul explained, as a newer officer, he was trying to understand and learn the tactics that officers would use in a high-risk scene, which would assist him in his growth as an officer and ultimately keep him safer if he was to encounter a similar situation in the future. By accessing and viewing these videos, Officer McFaul did not adhere to and violated department policies specifically related to General Order 2015-15C, body-worn cameras. Officer McFaul was recommended a three-day suspension without pay. Thank you, Chief. Before I open up to questions from counsel, can you remind us, Chief, is this disciplinary item came before us already, is that correct? Yes, sir, it has. Okay. Can you remind me of that date that it was before us last time, or if anybody else remembers? I believe it was sometime in October. I'm not sure of the original date. Okay. And is this recommendation the same as the previous recommendation? It is. Okay. Thank you. Council members, sign in for questions for Chief. I'm sorry. Thank you. We have a motion and a second. Council members, sign in for questions for Chief, please. Council Member Morton. Thank you. And I'm just going to ask just similar questions to the last disciplinary one, this same one, last in October. So, I guess, what are the system-level controls or firewalls currently in place or being considered that would technically prevent an officer from accessing footage they have no operational need to see? Well, for firewalls, that's for people outside. Our policy is what we use, and what happened was when it was accessed, we caught it. So, the system we had in place caught it. Currently, well, we use an Axon body camera, and that will be coming up for renewal. So, we're going to be asking them if there's anything more that we can do. Okay. Okay. And, I guess, could you talk about formal procedures requiring a supervisor's sign-off or documented permission before an officer can access this type of information and how that's enforced and tracked? Say that again. Can you just talk about the formal procedure requiring a supervisor's sign-off or documented permission before an officer can access this type of information? How is that enforced and tracked? Well, if an officer wants to access it, he's trained to contact a supervisor, and then that supervisor will probably ask one of the investigating officers or the investigating unit if it's okay if the officer sees this video. Typically, all the videos we get will at some time be able to be reviewed or be viewed not just by the officer, but by the public in general, because even for the incident the officer was involved in watching the videos, we immediately started receiving open records requests for those videos. So, it's not like they're never going to get to see it. It's just like there has to be time, and like a lot of information we get, we have to wait and see whether or not it's needed for investigative purposes, and then we have to determine who is allowed to see it. And so, we can't just all the videos lock them down, because then we have to have somebody present to say, okay, you and you and you and you. So, you know, we have to put trust in our officers, just like other people have trust in their employees and their jobs as well, and we put policies in place. And just like everything else, if that, and especially for us, we look at the policies like this. They violate a policy, and so this officer said they watched the video for training purposes, that's not for them to decide. But we also look at if it damages the case or if it damages or does something to damage the public. We look at that too. We didn't have any of those incidents happen here, so it was just a simple policy violation. However, we take it seriously. A three-day suspension for one of our officers, this officer is probably going to be about $900 cost to them, plus any vacation days, holiday time associated with it that they would lose. So, you're looking at probably an $1,800 plus fine for doing this. And I think that's a pretty strong incentive to keep other officers from doing that. Okay. And then just for, and this is just for public transparency, Commissioner Barber, can you just talk about, since this is the same exact recommendation and the same discipline, just for public transparency, can you please talk about what authorities this council does have when it comes to discipline in general? Good evening. So, the statutes don't necessarily line up on this, but our position has always been that you all are supposed to approve the discipline. One of the issues that's come up over the last several years is the union involvement in this as well. So, in a situation like this, the hearing is always, if you had a hearing on this stuff, that's always the employee's decision to make whether they want to have a hearing or not. In this case, the employee was not willing to withdraw their original plea on this, so to speak. So, we're kind of in a box on it. For instance, if you all voted it down at this point, I suspect what would happen is he wouldn't get disciplined at all eventually. Sorry. So, limited authority. Yes. Yes, sir. Thank you. And with that, while I understand we are limited in what we can do as a body, when it comes to changing discipline or even seeking more accountability, ultimately we have avenues such as legislative discretion, policy items that can be implemented to not allow for invasion of privacy. We also have future technology acts that is being asked to be funded by the council in the near future, and I think accountability tools can be used within that. So, I think that while we may be limited when it comes to this right now, in the future there is different methods and different tools we can use to emphasizing that privacy is important. And I'll leave it at that. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Any other questions for Chief? All right. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? All right. That motion passes. Thank you, Chief. Next up is council announcements. Colleagues, please sign in. Council Member Lynch. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I have a few announcements here. My first one is that the League of Women Voters is partnering with our history museum to offer Stand With Her Story. This is a new initiative to honor extraordinary women in our community. So, this is not just an award. It's basically placing this unsung woman, this unsung shero, in the lessons in history books. And so, our history museum and the League of Women Voters are accepting nominations now, now through January 31st, and they want you to honor the women that are doing the work behind the scenes, that's improving our community in ways that we feel the impact, but we don't always see her. So, please submit her nomination to the League of Women Voters or the history museum by January 31st, and their story will be placed in the history museum. They're going to have a digital display in the history museum with all of the stories of the folks that are nominated and selected. So, please nominate these unsung women, these unsung sheroes in our community for this awesome exhibit in the history museum that will be there for decades to come. My second announcement is that there's going to be a 250 Lex event held at the STEAM Academy in the 2nd District. Leaders in Lexington are invited to witness research-driven exhibits that focus on the future of our city. Exhibits will cover civic and social leadership, environmental responsibility, health and vitality, and the important roles art and history play in our city's collective experience. And these exhibits have been put together by the students of the STEAM Academy. So, there are over eight exhibits that involve over 200 students, and there will be over 400 chicken sandwiches they will be providing dinner. So, please come out on December the 9th from 5.30 p.m. to 7.30 p.m. to see how our students envision Lexington in the future. They're asking all community, civic, and community leaders to come out to this event next Tuesday, and it should be really, really dynamic. I'm sure that students have a lot to share with us. And then lastly, I want to give a huge shout-out and congratulations to the African American Ballet Troupe. They performed the Ebony Nutcracker this past weekend at the Lyric Theater and did a phenomenal job. This is their fourth year putting on the ballet, and it was amazing. It involved 90 individuals, which is the largest cast that they've had to date. I was honored and privileged to be part of that cast. I was on stage for about five minutes. But they did a phenomenal job in presenting the Ebony Nutcracker to our city. So, congratulations to them on another year of success for their ballet troupe. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Thank you. Council Member Sheehan. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I'm happy to share that tomorrow there will be a groundbreaking in the 5th District for the Rail Yard. This mixed-use development will transform an underutilized lot into affordable housing and commercial space. Rising rents and availability of housing are real concerns in our community, and this project is one way we can support the people who call Lexington home. This event will be held tomorrow at 11 a.m. at 1000 Delaware Avenue. And then I would like to give an update for the community on our ADA transition plan that we have been working on. The city is requesting feedback from community members on the accessibility of city parks and public facilities for people with disabilities. You can attend an event tomorrow at the Life Lane Senior Center at 6 p.m. to learn more about the transition plan updates and provide feedback on your experiences. You can also share your input online at surveymonkey.com slash R slash L-F-U-C-G-A-D-A. Thank you. Thank you. I just want to thank everybody who came out and spoke today. We heard a lot about housing, and we heard a lot about, and I think all of us understand this, like how we spend our money, how we spend the taxpayers' money is a reflection of our values as a government and as decision makers. So I appreciate everybody coming out and talking about it and kind of reminding us to align words with actions. Next up is public comment for issues on the agenda. We don't have anybody signed up, so we have reached the end of our agenda, and we are adjourned. Thank you. Good night.