# Services Committee - February 3, 2009 > Auto-transcribed civic record · February 3, 2009 - **Permalink**: https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/meeting/744 - **Source video**: https://lfucg.granicus.com/player/clip/744?view_id=14&redirect=true - **Date**: 2009-02-03 - **Last revised**: July 17, 2026 - **Length**: 3,968 words > ⚠️ **Auto-generated content.** Audio from the official Granicus video was auto-transcribed with OpenAI's open-source Whisper large-v3-turbo model, run locally by The Lexington Times. Structured facts were extracted with GPT-4o; the narrative summary was written by Anthropic Claude. Verbatim wording may contain errors. See [methodology](https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/about/methodology) or [report a correction](mailto:editor@lexingtonky.news). --- ## Meeting Overview The Services Committee met on February 3, 2009, at 1:00 P.M. in the 5th Floor Conference Room, with CM Ellinger presiding. The committee addressed three agenda items during the meeting: a Dog Tethering/Chaining Update, a Virtual Fake Speed Humps Update, and a Door-to-Door Peddlers Update. Two of the items—the Dog Tethering/Chaining Update and the Door-to-Door Peddlers Update—were deferred for further consideration, while the Virtual Fake Speed Humps Update was presented as informational. The committee took one motion and vote during the meeting and heard three public comments from members of the public. ## Attendance **Present:** Ellinger, Beard, Crosbie, McChord, Blevins, Henson, Lane, Stinnett, Feigl, Lawless **Absent:** Myers, Martin **Late:** None ## Votes and Decisions The Services Committee took one action during this meeting: **Motion to Adjourn** Beard moved to adjourn the Services Committee meeting. The motion passed by voice vote [timestamp: 0:25:13]. No roll call vote was conducted for this motion. ## Public Comment Three members of the public addressed the meeting with concerns on two separate topics. **Virtual Speed Humps** Ms. Feigl [timestamp: 0:12:07] suggested that virtual speed humps could serve as a low-cost reminder to slow down in neighborhoods with minimal through traffic. She acknowledged concerns about effectiveness once drivers realize the humps are not physical obstacles. Ms. Lawless [timestamp: 0:13:57] raised a related concern about the psychological effect of virtual speed humps. She suggested that people may actually speed through virtual humps faster after feeling tricked, as the illusion of a physical obstacle breaks down upon repeated exposure. **Contractors During Ice Storm** Mr. Beard [timestamp: 0:22:39] recalled the 2003 ice storm when out-of-town contractors flooded the area. He raised concerns about verifying the legitimacy, insurance, and bonding of these contractors despite existing licensing requirements. ## Appointments The following appointments were made during this meeting: * **Henson** was appointed to the Dog Tethering Subcommittee * **Lawless** was appointed to the Dog Tethering Subcommittee ## Contested Items **Enforcement of 'No Solicitation' Signs** A procedural dispute arose regarding the enforceability of neighborhood "No Solicitation" signs in preventing door-to-door peddlers. The disagreement centered on whether such signs alone are sufficient legal grounds to prohibit solicitation activities and whether violators could be cited under criminal trespass statutes. The group determined that a legal opinion would be needed to clarify the enforceability of these signs and to establish what citation authority, if any, could be applied to individuals who solicit despite posted warnings. This matter remained unresolved pending legal review. ## Dog Tethering/Chaining Update [timestamp: 00:00] Councilmember Beard provided an update on the subcommittee meeting held on January 22, 2009. The subcommittee unanimously decided to focus exclusively on anti-tethering legislation rather than expanding the scope to include kenneling rules. A new draft of the proposed legislation was received from Keith Horn. The subcommittee has scheduled a follow-up meeting for February 12 at 3:00 PM. This upcoming meeting will include expanded subcommittee membership. The outcome of this agenda item was deferred, with further discussion anticipated at the February 12 meeting. ## Virtual Fake Speed Humps Update Brad Frazier of Traffic Engineering presented findings from a test of virtual speed humps conducted in Philadelphia [timestamp: 0:05:00]. Virtual speed humps are painted illusions designed to appear as physical traffic calming devices. **Presentation Findings** The test results showed that virtual speed humps were ineffective at achieving traffic calming goals. Drivers initially responded to the painted illusions, but once they realized the humps were not physical obstacles, the traffic calming effect ceased entirely. The study demonstrated a zero success rate for this approach. **Recommendation** Based on these findings, Frazier recommended against using virtual speed humps independently as a traffic calming measure. The presentation concluded that this method should not be relied upon as a standalone solution for managing vehicle speeds. **Outcome** This agenda item was presented for informational purposes. ## Door-to-Door Peddlers Update [timestamp: 0:14:28] Lieutenant Curtsinger reported on door-to-door peddler enforcement activity for 2008. The department issued only 17 citations for peddler license violations during the year. Curtsinger noted that the majority of calls received were related to suspicious activity rather than actual sales violations. The committee discussed enforcement challenges related to "No Solicitation" signs. Members expressed uncertainty about the legal enforceability of these signs under the current ordinance. In response, the committee agreed to request a legal opinion on whether "No Solicitation" signs can be effectively used to prevent door-to-door solicitation. An important clarification emerged during the discussion: the committee confirmed that nonprofit groups, specifically citing Girl Scouts as an example, are not subject to the peddler license ordinance and therefore do not require licenses to conduct door-to-door activities. Key speakers in this discussion included Curtsinger, Stinnett, and Crosby. The agenda item was deferred, indicating that further action or discussion on this matter was postponed pending additional information or legal guidance. --- ## Decisions - **Motion** — passed: Motion to adjourn the Services Committee meeting --- ## Full transcript have a quorum so i would ask miss feigle since she's here if she go ahead and join to be part of the quorum since she's not part of the committee but we'll ask her to be part of it and also miss lawless too we'll have her be part of the quorum too to make it six just we recognize you to be part of the quorum so thank you for coming And so we can do our business. The first issue for the services of the dog tethering, chaining, update. And Council Member Beard, if you would, just give a summary of your meeting, and let's figure out where we're heading on that, if you would, please. Thank you, Chair. We had a meeting on January 22nd in the 5th Floor Conference Room. A pretty good crowd of folks, as many know, SOAR, Speak Out and Rescue, SOAR acronym, has been the one that's been pushing this tethering ordinance and had offered us a sample from Austin, Texas, which we gave to Keith Horn to see what he might be able to do as far as a tethering ordinance is concerned for us. Simultaneous to this, as we met, SOAR proposed that we expand the ordinance to include kenneling rules as far as size of kennels and fencing and things of that sort. And I somewhat cut them off, I guess, as far as muddying up the waters on the tethering. I preferred and Council Member Blues agreed that we need to go ahead and address this tethering as a sole issue. And then we can come back to this committee with the kindling rules and see what we might be able to do about that. But you get an omnibus ordinance as was proposed, and there can be an awful lot of holes and some issues that are so broad that actually nothing can get done. So that's pretty much what we did, and they accepted that, SOAR did. animal control also agreed that probably they were present and also agreed that we should probably deal with the tethering alone at this point and others involved the humane society we had the post office folks had sent a representative also and And so we turned it back for further revision. I just received today, right before this meeting, another draft copy from Keith Horn. And I've really not had a chance to review it yet. But we are having another meeting on February 12th. time to be determined and attempt to do get everybody on the same page and see if this this new ordinance is something we can live with and bring forward. So that will be at the next Services Committee meeting that we hopefully would have that done. Sounds great. Thank you. So the next meeting is going to be the 12th at 3 o'clock up in the fifth floor conference room. I attended that meeting and it was apparent that we probably need to add a couple more members to the subcommittee. If we're going to have a quorum, I had to be part of the quorum. I've asked Council Member Lawless and Council Member Henson if they both would be part of that. So it would make actually five would be on the subcommittee. So the next meeting for that will be the 12th at 3 o'clock. Thank you. The next issue on the agenda is the virtual speed humps. And I I think Mr. Frazier is here to give us an update on that, which on a day like this, you have the good and the bad, because if you have the speed humps, you can't do the snow plowing, but you can't see the virtual hump. So I'm not sure if it helps then. Absolutely correct. Brad Frazier, Traffic Engineering. About a year ago, we gave a presentation at the request of the administration and council to look at our neighborhood traffic management program for additional options that could be included in there for neighborhoods to help with cut-through traffic volumes and speeding controls. After we gave that presentation, there was an article in the Herald Leader and this type of product, the virtual speed humps came to light, and we were asked by Council to also evaluate this along with the other improvements to see if it could be part of the neighborhood traffic management program. Enough time has elapsed since these products were allowed to be a test case scenario in the city of Philadelphia, where they deployed 100 of them at different intersections. I had talked to my counterpart within that municipality, Mr. Kazim Ali, who was very kind to share some of the information about these. And just to give you some background information of what they are, as you can see from the depiction here, They are made of a thermoplast material, which, to give you a reference, is very similar to what you see as far as the turn arrows for lane designation. So they have a little bit of thickness to them. You heat them and then apply them. They come in a set of three, and you can see it produces, as you approach them, an illusion that something is in the road. That's why they're shaped the way they are. the one that is symmetrical in the center and the other two on the ends that have the respective inclines. They cost about $50 per set of three, and the City of Philadelphia tried to use four of them consecutively within intersections and roadways. Long and short of it is enough time has gone through to where they're able to collect data, And what they found is that the use of these by themselves with no other controls, in other words, maybe an actual asphalt speed hump, they were extremely effective instantaneously. And then it evaporated away. Once the commuters, especially the familiar commuters, learned quickly that it's just simply a thermoplast or paint. It's not an actual vertical change in the roadway. They simply ignored them and went on. So as they've communicated to us, they consider it not to work out as far as a good cost-effective tool to be used by themselves. And I totally agree with that. That is my opinion and recommendation based on that conversation and how they function and the familiarity of how some of our cut-through traffic scenarios happen within our various neighborhoods. Thank you, Mr. Frazier. Yes, sir. The presentation you gave, and there were some new issues that you looked at for neighborhoods, and we have some new council members. It might behoove the council again either to maybe come back and give that or at least send us that presentation on some of the new techniques that you're using for all of us, but especially for the new council members. I can do either one. I'd be more than happy to do that. Even with the new council members, I'd be more than happy to even set up appointments and maybe get to know them one-on-one so they can even come over to the TMC or Traffic Management Center and see what we do and maybe answer some questions that they have about some of the services and some of the things that we can do for them. I think that would be very helpful. Are there any questions for Mr. Frazier? Mr. Beard? Yes, Brad. As you will probably remember, we had an issue on Lansdowne Drive. Yes, sir. And we did some painting, not bulb outs exactly, but we did some painting of crosshatching, striping and such. and the people in the Lansdowne Neighborhood Association seem to think that was pretty effective. Yes, sir. As far as that's concerned, I guess, and I do understand people, once they have, I'm not up there anymore, but once they've had that and slammed their brakes on, thinking their transmission is going to be torn out, probably go right ahead and speed right on through. But that has not been the case. It seems on Lansdowne Drive. Yes, sir. That's correct. Cross-hatching. Yes, sir. So there are some non-obtrusive types of things that can be done other than those items that you just showed us anyway. Yes, sir. And as a reminder, it's probably time to repaint. they're getting faded which is kind of interesting because I've seen people try to dodge them so I don't know how they're getting they're getting faded but at the same time they are The paint that we're required to use is mandated by the EPA it's a water based paint many years ago we used to use the oil based paints which would last a lot longer. But the water-based paints, just due to weathering, quickly fade. And so we do have to go out there regularly and increase our frequency as far as doing the restriping and the refreshing of our markings. We try to go through at least once a year or twice a year, try to hit all the markings that we have and make sure that they are up to date and that they are fresh. And as you said, it's very important to make sure that it is fresh out there so that people do recognize it and see the markings and understand how they're supposed to function. Just hopefully before, especially the Signature Club reopens for their swimming sessions, and I assume that's middle of May to June 1st, we would have time to have gotten out there and taken a look at those. Yes, sir. Thank you. That's all I had. Any other questions? Ms. Feigl? Yes, can I ask a question, please? Mr. Frazier, I'm actually not surprised that people began to get accustomed to these virtual speed humps. But, you know, it might be that in some cases people just need a little reminder to slow down. And if these are at a reasonable cost, it might be a way that we could put them in neighborhoods where they're really not getting a lot of through traffic, but just reminding people to slow down. Because that seems to be what the constituent, when they call me about people speeding through the neighborhood, you know, I think many times it's the people who live in that neighborhood. So do you think it's a reasonable way to serve as a reminder, or are you just not recommending these at all? At this point, I'm not recommending them at all, because if the feedback I got from the city of Philadelphia, if they were able to say that we had a percentage of success, then I think we could probably do it on the pilot scenario. And I'm currently not – I wouldn't object to trying them on the pilot scenario. The city of Philadelphia had to go through the Federal Highway Administration to get special permission to put these out there. So we would also have to do the same thing, write and request the reason, what the project would be. But he said he came back with zero success rate of achieving their goals. And his quote to me was, they are not worth the money by themselves, is what he said. I think it's a good valid point, but apparently once they realize that these are what they thought they were at first, they just simply just went right over and went back to the speeding in those areas. Yes, ma'am. Any other questions? Ms. Lawless? I wonder if part of the reason it didn't serve as a reminder is people felt tricked. And from a psychological point of view, I know that just a sign saying children playing triggers something for people, but if they fell for it once or twice and got tricked, I can see why they might speed over them faster. That's just my two cents. Yes, ma'am. Thank you, Mr. Frazier. Thank you, counsel. Any other questions? Oh, Mr. Beard. maybe we could start an urban legend that we have some real ones out there somewhere and we're moving them around and they're the same color and we're just not gonna tell you and see if that doesn't and that they won't like their their virtual transmissions being thank you the third issue is the door door peddlers update I think mr. Stinnett I think you'd brought this forward. And I think we had somebody from the police department here speak on it. How are you doing? Thomas Kurtzner, Lexington Police Department. Division of Police, as far as RCO 15-7 goes, the peddler's license, we don't spend a lot of time responding to calls for those. It does happen. But more and more we find out it's typically we get them in a suspicious person type calls, somebody's in the neighborhood walking around, they feel they're looking for houses to break into. Typically, we don't get that many where it's just the person's irritated with the fact that somebody's knocking on the door trying to sell them something. And hardly ever do we get it where it's nonprofit. It's usually somebody trying to sell a service. In other words, we're not getting calls that I could tell of Grille Scout. Somebody coming to the door to sell Grille Scout cookies or to raise money for their high schools. It's typically businesses out there that don't have a license. Our record, it's kind of hard for us to indicate and look back and say, how many calls did you get for someone failing without a license in the last year? Just the way our data entry is put in and the way we're able to get it back out, it's hard for us to tell exactly the numbers. But I was able to research and find out that as of last year, 2008, We only cited 17 people for the violation of that ordinance. So as you can see, it's fairly infrequent that we get those calls, and it's even more infrequent that we actually end up citing them for it. Typically it might be a warning notice, I suspect, on some of those situations. But it doesn't seem to be that it's an issue that we receive a high volume of calls. Mr. Stinnett. Thank you for coming and kind of clarifying some of that. I guess where this came from was in some of the neighborhoods in my district, there's a no solicitation sign posted at the entrance. Yes, sir. How do they go about enforcing it, or how do we go about helping them enforce it? If the neighborhood is requested as a whole, are people still allowed to go in there? And if they do, what should the neighborhood do? We would probably have to get a legal opinion from the city's law department on that. But in general, the signs are a great warning to solicitors. But as far as it's taking enforcement action, just on that sign at the entrance of the subdivision alone, we would still cite under 15-7. The possibility would be there. If it's no soliciting, we could look at the possibility of citing for criminal trespassing. But, again, I think we would probably have to get a legal opinion on that before we proceeded with citing for criminal trespass. But 15-7 is always there for us to use. And I see that would be the same as an individual household, having those stickers on their front doors that say no solicitation, someone still knocks. Same concept. I believe the same concept would apply. Well, I'm sure we can request, you know, get that legal opinion, maybe readdress it once we get that opinion on how we can and cannot enforce it. And I guess the other issue is if you don't have that type of signage in your neighborhood or door and someone does knock on your door, what should a resident ask them to see? A peddler's license or can I see your license? What's the protocol? There should be an actual document, a license that they pay a fee. They'll get an actual document that they should be able to provide the homeowner that says they're certified and have paid the fee to the city and that they're certified and that they're legitimate out there selling their goods or services. Okay. I know we've caught people in my district sharing that license. I know it's very hard for a homeowner to catch that. They don't know that face goes with that license. but they know what we do to clam down on some of that because I'm sure a group will buy, you know, three or four of these licenses on one name and 20 people will use them. Right. And an ordinance does require that it's not an issue. There can't be, in my understanding, it can't be a blanket voucher saying this organization is paid. It has to be per individual is my understanding, my interpretation of the ordinance. So I guess it's safe to say that everyone who's knocking door to door needs to have that type of license if they're selling a good or service? That's my understanding, yes, sir. And what about our charities, like our Girl Scout cookies you're going out right now, things like that? I couldn't find anywhere in the ordinance that says specifically that nonprofit organizations don't apply to that. But our interpretation of that has always been that they don't apply since they're not a functioning business, I guess is how we term it. They're not a business entity for profit selling goods and services. In other words, churches going out, handing out literature door-to-door or asking them to come to their service, Girl Scout cookies, high school bands selling candy bars, our interpretation of that is that we're not enforcing that aspect. We don't see where that applies to it. Okay. Very good. Thank you, Chair. Thank you. Ms. Crosby? I just wanted to clarify. Did you say if they have the permit and there is no soliciting sign on, say, a neighborhood, that they can, that the no soliciting sign, or that the permit would trump the no soliciting sign, or that we'd have to get a legal opinion on that? I believe we'd have to get a legal opinion on that, whether or not that one sign, at the interest of the neighborhood, is sufficient posting for them not to come into that neighborhood to solicit. That's my understanding. I think we would have to get a further legal opinion on that. Okay. And you all don't receive many calls on this? Typically not. Only when it comes to the point where somebody's suspicious that they're there for other reasons or they're fraudulently there pretending to sell some sort of item. I've called twice. Besides you. Besides me. No, I mean, I just find we've had, I find in my neighborhood, just like Kevin, we've had where maybe they have one permit and they might come in in a van full for magazine sales or spray cleaner sometimes. And, I mean, they can be very forceful sometimes with some of the people in the neighborhood. So I find that that's most of the calls that we have to make is regarding the forcefulness of the actual salesperson. Right, and it seems that we see it in spurts, especially during the summer. There will be typically a group of magazine salesmen from out of state that come in, And, you know, it'll be typically young kids out of high school or of high school age. They'll set up at a hotel. We found that they'll base out of a hotel somewhere, and they'll hit the town fairly hard. You know, within a week, they'll hit neighborhood to neighborhood until finally we get some calls and complaints, issued a few citations, and then they're gone. But it seems to be more of a group of people. Well, that's when we, I guess, see the most attention to is when a group of people like that come into town and start that soliciting like that, that we get the most attention. But again, as far as having the signage on the neighborhoods, I would need probably some more legal guidance to find out if that is enough to qualify a neighborhood for protection against that. Should we make a, Kevin, should we make a formal motion to get that from legal or can we just, yeah. Okay. Will you please take, will Chair, will you please? We can ask them. We'll have Mr. Schonegger on behalf of the service committee ask for that. With spring coming, it's hard to believe on a day like today, but spring will be around the corner, and I believe that probably if we could go ahead and get that sooner, that would be great. I hope you're right. Me too. Mr. Beard. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. In 2003, February of 2003, when we had what I call the big ice storm, we were inundated with contractors as far away as 400 miles radius around Lexington. And that ice storm was pretty localized. It decided it was going to pick us and not the rest of the state anyway or most of the state. But to qualify some of these people was a challenge to say the least. They got licenses, but the questions about whether they have adequate insurance and some of the other things that they might have because they were going to go up into trees and take down limbs and things of that sort, which their work people themselves, I would assume if they didn't have the insurance, the property owner would be liable. And have we seen any of this go around as far as contractors from elsewhere, and how do we validate that they're for real? I'm not certain if it's going on now. I would assume that somewhere out there that's going on right now. In 03, we did get consumed with people coming in town doing the same thing, whether it be roofing, gutter repair, or tree removal. My understanding of it is, and again, I have checked back with ordinance 13- 13-13 where they file for the application for the peddler's license. I believe there's a part of 13-13 that requires them to be bonded. I'm not sure if bonded and insured, but I believe it requires them to be at least bonded or show proof of bondage to the city before they can get a license like we're talking about on the peddler's license to get it issue. But as far as legitimacy, I'm not sure. There were some games being played six years ago, I promise you. And I've not seen a lot of strange trucks in my district anyway, but maybe some other areas have seen it and they can be a problem. Because generally it's one person and then they pick up casual labor here and they're untrained. You know, agricultural workers that aren't obviously doing agricultural work this time of year is a good target for them. So anyway, I was just curious about that and I think I'll talk to Bill O'Mara and see what he has to say about their process now. I think that's where that licensing takes place, I believe, over in revenue. Thank you, anyway. Any other questions for Lieutenant Kurt Singer? Thank you. I appreciate it. Is there any other issues before the service committee? I will entertain a motion to adjourn. So moved. Second. We have a second. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. All those opposed. We are adjourned.