The, uh, first item on our agenda is public comment on issues that are on the agenda. I know we have several people here who wish to speak, uh, about the lyric, but if there's no objection, I thought we might just hold off on that until we get to new business and take it all up then. All right. I think so. We'll handle that in that fashion. Uh, anyone else wish to address a matter that is on the agenda today? Very well. We'll roll on down the pike a little bit. We don't have a docket to approve, but we do have a summary. Is there a motion to approve it? Move approval. Move approval. Do I hear a second? Second. Have a motion by Council Member Gordon and a second by Council Member Ellinger to approve the February 10th docket. Any discussion? All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Oppose, no? Motion carries. Uh, we don't have any budget amendments today, but we do have several items of new business. Um- Move approval. ... have a motion to approve by Council Member Beard- Second. ... and a second by Council Member Gordon. Let me, uh, uh, first ask, uh, Commissioner Tim Bennett if he would, uh, come to the podium. He has a little bit of an update on item F, and then I know there are several people who wish to address item G. Thank you, Mayor. You have on your agenda today, uh, under new item, new business items E and F. Uh, the first actions that we need you to take, uh, toward issuing the, uh, first series of bonds, which you approved as part of the FY09 budget to begin retiring the unfunded liability in the Policemen's and Firefighters Retirement Fund. Uh, the approximate amount will be $70 million that will be deposited directly into the fund upon the closing of the bond issue. Uh, so that begins us down the path of being able to, uh, to work toward retiring the unfunded liability. Also, I wanted to put a little bit, in a little bit of context, uh, the work that's been going on the past several months, uh, by the, uh, retirement fund task force. Hopefully, each of you received, at the first of last week, um, what was termed a supplemental report, essentially the final report of the task force. Uh, it recommended, in large part, some changes in, in the benefit structure for new hires. Uh, primarily the adoption pretty much in total of the CERS level of benefits for new hires with one major exception, and that's an additional calculation in determining the amount of the disability retirement. Um, the report goes on to lay out two potential paths, uh, that the government could choose to go down toward, uh, achieving that end. One is to go ahead during this session of the General Assembly and ask the General Assembly to consider and, uh, hopefully adopt those changes in the benefit structure for new hires. The other path, um, and, and let me back up just a step. The recommendation of the task force was not unanimous. Uh, it was a seven to three vote, uh, with two of the three votes no votes, uh, being from the bargaining units, the police and fire bargaining units. Uh, back to the task force's recommendation, the second was not to, to, uh, pursue the changes through the General Assembly session this year, but instead to continue to work with all the affected parties, uh, in the anticipation of reaching some kind of an acceptable resolution during the interim and then potentially, uh, pursuing those, um, changes in the 2010 General Assembly session. Our recommendation is the latter. Uh, we feel it's better to continue to work with all the affected parties and attempt to reach a mutually acceptable resolution. Uh, that's the path that we recommend we go down, uh, during the interim. Members of, some members of the task force have continued, or have, uh, indicated a, a continuing willingness to work on the topic. I think the bargaining units, at this point, are willing to, to have further discussions, and we feel that's the best, uh, the best course to take. So wanted to put that in a little bit of context while we were talking about the funding side of the equation, uh, to also talk a little bit about the benefits side of the equation, so. Any questions concerning items E or F while Commissioner Bennett's at the podium? All right. Uh, I see none, so, um, thank you very much. Thank you, Mayor. And then with regard to number, uh, item, uh, G, Commissioner Coe, I know you circulated a memo earlier today, and if you would come forward and expound on that just a little bit. Expand on that a little bit. Um, thank you, Mayor. Um, as we, um ... I, I apologize, first of all, for circulating the email late in the day. Um, when I was asked to put the, um, reimbursement resolution on the agenda, I hadn't had the opportunity to have a conversation about the actual construction date nor had I seen any of the information that had come out of the business plan. Um, as we sat down and went through that this morning, we realized that this project will not be completed until, um, FY 2010, so we will not need debt service on this $6 million worth of bonds until FY 2011. Um, I, I think most of the other 2009 projects and all the reimbursement resolutions we've done for the tw- other 2009 projects to this point, uh, will move forward, and we will need the debt service on those in 2010, but this one will be a deferral to 2011 because we would, we would not borrow the money until we actually need the money. Thank you. Any questions from- ... uh, Council Member Stennet. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Commissioner. Just a quick question, going back to FNG. We're starting to issue several bonds, very big bonds. Yes. Do we have an overall bond picture on where we're at in terms of, uh, what we've already have issued, when it's retiring, and then updated with the 6 million for this project, the 70 million for police, and then the '09 fiscal year, which is what we're currently in, that, those bonds, so we can understand where we're at percentage-wise on our debt payments? Because, again, the payments are what affects our general fund and what we're able to do each year. Um, actually, what, what I, um, will give you this afternoon is tentative. I will follow up with an email. Um, tracking our bond payments and our debt service was the responsibility of, of Scott Browns, and as you all know, um, Scott passed away last week, and we haven't really had time in, in the Department of Finance to, to regroup and reassign responsibilities. Mary, um, Pfister has access to his email, but she was out ill this morning, so I couldn't get that access from her. So I tried to pull some things to- together without the benefit of Scott's files, but, um, I, I think where we will be at 2010, if we assume that there will be no new revenue in 2010, which is the approach that I think we intend to take, we're, I don't think we've agreed on a number yet. I'm kind of waiting for February revenue to, to, uh, come in before we do that. But it looks like we're gonna end up at about 12 and a half or 13% in 2010, um, and, and that includes, um, the $70 million pension bonds that, that are on the docket for today, as well as the bond issues for the 2007, 2008 that we just sold and we had held up on those a bit, and all of 2009 except the Lyric, and we will not... Also, we will not have sold bonds yet on the EOC. Okay. And then for the Lyric specific, what, what will, what will be the bond payment? Well- And for how long? I know, I didn't see it in here. I saw it on F in here. I didn't see it on G. Um, it, it depends, of course, on when we sell the bonds, what kind of interest rate we get. But the projections that we're using right now would put the debt service at about $470,000 a year for 20 years. Okay, and then I believe our, going forward, our policy is to stay around the 12%? Well, I, I think that, that's a policy that we kind of bounced around when we were all talking together about the capital improvement planning process. I don't know that we ever really came to an agreement, and we do need to come back around to that CIP and kind of wrap that whole discussion up. Uh, we kind of got sidetracked with the holidays and all the other things, but, um, I think some of the things that we were looking at during that time period put us in about the 12 to 13%, but again, I, I, I caution use of that number, because at the time, we were still projecting that we would have increased revenue over the next few years. Um, we're gonna have to revise that as we make new revenue estimates for 2010 and 2011. But we do have the cash flow, going through FY 2010, to fund this project? We do have the cash flow, yes, sir. And just to be clear so everyone's on the same page, there are z- there is $0, zero general fund impact if we begin this project today for FY 2010, which is, which will begin July 1 of this year? That assumes that the project is not completed until, that we actually don't open and have operating expenses in 2010. And I would have to let Shay speak to that, because I'm not, I'm not familiar when, with when we intend to actually begin operating, so... That would dep- Tena's correct. That would depend on when we actually complete the construction and open the facility. But given the best estimates of Susan Hill, the architect, um, who's in the audience today, it'll take approximately a year to complete the construction, which would put us towards the end of FY 2010. So, I can't stand here today and say $0 will be needed in FY10 as it relates to operating or maintenance of the building, but significantly less than those, um, stated in the AMS report would be needed in FY10, because we just will not be using the buil- the building until mid-calendar year 2010. So, we would not a- actually issue the bonds till we're finished with the project? So that's when the 470,000 a year towards our general fund would start kicking in? And the, the, correct me if I'm wrong, professional finance person, but the $470,000 is assuming a $6 million construction project. We're hoping that, uh, the cost of it might actually be less. I've heard that many construction projects are coming in 15 to 20% less than they were just a few years, years ago, given the economic conditions today. Also, another reason, sooner the better. That's correct. The sooner we can lock in better prices, the better for everybody. Thank you. Thank you, ma'am. All right. Any other questions for Commissioner Coville? All right. I'd like for, uh, Charlie Bolin, who has been the mayor's office liaison on this project for most of its existence, to, uh, step to the podium and, uh, provide just a little additional context, and then we'll work the list. Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen of the council. It's good to see you again. And as the mayor mentioned, I was the staff person who didn't seek this assignment in 2005 when I got it, but was grateful to have received it after having had the opportunity to work on it diligently over the course of a couple years with so many good people. Um, as you recall, uh, the Lyric project is the final project under a large memorandum of understanding with state government that dates back to 1997, and which was amended again in, I believe, 2001 or 2002 with regard to the Lyric project. ... because of the fact that this project was held up due to an eminent domain proceeding. It's the last project under that MOU to be done. And, uh, after about a eight or nine year court battle, we finally acquired the property in Sept, uh, August Sep, or September of 2005. A task force was appointed at that time, and, uh, I was assigned to staff that task force, uh, to come up with a concept for the building, to collect public input, and to try to come up with a redevelopment plan, uh, for that facility. In our words, that would have the best chance for success. We had seen several of the MOU projects, um, take only a minimum investment that was required under that MOU, and as a result, they were fledgling, and some even failed. And we just felt that we oughta learn from, from those mistakes, and with regard to this project, take advantage of the opportunity to do a truly sustainable facility, one, again, that has the best chance for success. Many of the task force members that have volunteered their time for the past three years, uh, working on this project are in attendance today. In particular, Chair Juanita Betts Peterson is here, and her leadership, um, has really, I think, brought this project from, uh, where we received it as a dilapidated building, uh, with not a lot of visible, uh, attributes that would lead one to think anything good could perhaps happen at that facility, to one I believe that really has a great chance, uh, for being a great new landmark on the arts and cultural landscape of Lexington/Fayette County. I've heard that from the Downtown Entertainment Task Force. I heard that through the Destination 2040 process, how much people are really interested in seeing the arts and cultural landscape broadened. And I believe this is a great opportunity for our city government to, as it has in many other facilities over the years, make another investment in that. Uh, I'll talk more about that later if I need to, uh, given the opportunity. But I just wanted you to know a lot of people have worked diligently over time to, uh, with regard to this project. They, we've done any number of technical studies along the way. We've hired, uh, the AMS Group. We've had open houses. We've had 30-some-odd task force meetings. Um, we've had 2 to 3,000 people walk through the facility during times when it was open, and all of whom expressed a desire to see it be something again. And we feel that the concept that we proposed and presented to council in October 2006 was, uh, the sustainable, the most sustainable opportunity, uh, for that facility. I'll note that that concept was unanimously approved by the Urban County Council at that time, at the $6 million figure. We've done our best to, to, uh, hold the line on that amount, even though more time has passed. And, um, we've, uh, had some very good tweaks. We hired project architect Susan Hill, who is here today, um, to carry forward the approved concept into a final design, and I believe she's just completed that, or about to be completed with that design, so that it can be put forward to bid. Uh, all of that basically just to sum up that this is an obligation that we have as a community to the state under an MOU, uh, for which a clock is ticking. But this is also more than that. It's a situation, and I've had this discussion with Mayor Newberry, where we really want to do something. We've made significant investments in this neighborhood, and I think there's probably none more key than this one that we could make to nail down what I call that corner of downtown. These are the last two downtown business-zoned lots to the northeast. Um, and, and draw our arts and cultural landscape in that direction in a way that also helps lift a community that, that we've seen significant investments made in over the past, uh, particularly three to four years, through Hope VI and through the boulevard that's been extended, and, and CVC has made significant investments there. And, and this is really the next step, and I think one that's very important to take, and one that I'm very happy to support. I will be here to answer any further questions, should the discussion warrant. Thank you. I know a couple of council members wish to speak. Um, if you prefer to speak first, that's fine. If you wanna wait until we get the input from the, uh, folks who are here, that'd be fine. Okay. Uh, the, the preference is to hear from the folks, so I've got a list here, and we'll just start down page one. The first one, uh, on the list is Joe Graves, from 1306 Fincastle Road. Mr. Graves? Mayor, I believe someone has deferred their time, so maybe I have six minutes rather than three? Okay. Um, I think almost everybody in Lexington is agreed that we wanna be a progressive community. We want to have a community where the young people who go to school here can stay and get a good job. We wanna be a progressive community that attracts new people, and keeps the new transfusion of ideas and energies coming in. I think we all agree on that. I think we don't all agree, of course, on how to get there. And that's what we're here to talk about today. Um, and I think there's some other things that have happened since we last talked in public session, uh, about the Lyric Theatre, uh, project. ... uh, we are now in a very serious national depression. Some people say it's a financial crisis. And you and I know that many Lexingtonians, your constituents, our neighbors, are having a very difficult time meeting mortgage payments, losing jobs, finding jobs, and so forth. So that is a new environment that we all are in as we consider, uh, this project. The other thing that I think is relatively new in our experience as a community is that this council, this government faces, I read in the paper, a $27 million deficit in terms of their next, your next, uh, budget year. So, whether that is completely accurate or not, I don't know, but it certainly is a time for elected officials, as well as private citizens, to be very, very careful about incurring more debt or more expenses. Um, what I'd like to do, I've tried to make this very concise. I have thought about five ideas to suggest that you consider as you take the time to make a decision about this proposal, uh, of having $6 million released so this project can start. First of all, this plan, which actually is a summary version of the final report, so you don't, I don't think you received the final report. You received a summary version of it. This plan proposes a blank check commitment by which this government pays $6 million to build and own the Lyric Theatre complex, and further indicates that each year, this government will foot the bill for all operating shortfalls and maintenance fees. Now, that is a first in the history of Lexington, to my knowledge, that a local government, this government, or any of its predecessors made that kind of offer to any group. I believe such a blank check is a historic first for this Lexin- for Lexington and it is unfair to other agencies and organizations which work hard to support themselves and receive some city support. This blank check is also unfair, in my opinion, to city employees and taxpayers. So I suggest that before the $6 million is released, that th- those who propose the Lyric development raise and escrow $4 million and put it in a local bank to guarantee payment of all operating shortfalls and maintenance fees for the first seven years. Now, the result of that would be that you all, or the, the government, would provide the $6 million and pay the debt service on those $6 million in bonds, but those who propose, uh, the Lyric Theatre will go out and raise $4 million and guarantee, which will guarantee that the operating expenses, uh, will be paid. Um, this plan, or, or preliminary plan, which I have reviewed, uh, does not include a parking structure, uh, to serve the Lyric complex. A safe, well-lighted parking facility is essential. Where can attendees park who want to attend a concert in the 588-seat proposed new theater? I think it would be a fatal mistake not to include a very good parking facility in this complex. Number three, there's an important disclaimer at the bottom of page three in the reports you received. Let me read it to you. Mr. Graves, you've got about 30 seconds left. Or six minutes? Yes. Okay. Mm-hmm. Well, uh, look at that disclaimer on page three of the report, um, because it indicates that no feasibility study's been done. I think, um, we're entitled to know, the community is entitled to know who the officers and directors are of the non-profit which will receive, who will be responsible to this government to repay or to manage this project. So, I appreciate the opportunity to talk to you. I hope you'll give this some thought. There should be no rush, in my opinion. There are many things to consider. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Graves. Next on the list is Sharon Chiles. Ms. Chiles? And after, uh, Ms. Chiles is to speak, George Chiles. Is Mr. Chiles here? Okay, thank you. My name is Sharon Chiles and I've been a resident of Fayette County for approximately about 40 years in June. Uh, my mother, who is 91 years old, uh, attended a function at the Lyric Theatre when she was probably late teens or early 20s, so it has some s- historical significance, I think, to the African American race. And also, uh, the contribution that it can make here in Lexington to the arts and to all kinds of cultural activities, I think, is vital, especially in the community where it's located. So, I totally support the project. Thanks for the opportunity to express myself. Thank you, Ms. Chiles. And Mr. Chiles, I understand you wish to pass, so, uh, Jean Woods is next on the list. Good afternoon, honorable mayor, um, council members. Thank you for the opportunity to speak to you today in support of the Lyric Theatre. My name is Gene Woods, and I stand before you as a healthcare executive, as a patron of the arts, and a very passionate and dedicated member of the, ah, Lyric Theatre Task Force. As CEO of the St. Joseph Health System, uh, an organization that's making very, very significant infrastructure investments in this community, and an organization that's the largest private employer in this community, um, I understand firsthand the importance of the thriving arts community to recruiting and retaining top talent when you're looking at physicians, nurses, technicians. On a personal note, it's really what, one of the factors that attracted me f- and my family four years ago to Lexington, is the thriving, uh, uh, increasingly thriving arts community. And as you know, uh, three-fourths of your budget comes from payroll tax and expanding the jobs, uh, in this, in this community. Um, the, the connection between arts and the economy is one that you clearly understand, and is, it's, it's the reason why you commit 350,000 to LexArts to be used as awards for arts, uh, around the community. It is why the city bought, restored, continues to own several arts and cultural facilities, including the Kentucky Theater, the State Theater, the Arts Place, London House, the Downtown Arts Center, the Carriage Heart, um, House Theater, as well as the Downtown History Center. It is why you helped to fund the restoration of the Children's Theater on Short Streets years ago, and contributed over $200,000 to the Children's Museum. It is why you made a significant contribution within the past two years to restore the Opera House. It is because of your appreciation between the arts, jobs, and a vibrant economy that every single project in the memorandum of understanding has been completed over the years, every single one, except the Lyric Theatre. This commitment the city made over 12 years ago to restore the Lyric Theatre is simply one that must be honored. This commitment was made to the state in a legally binding MOU, but m- more importantly, this is a committed, a commitment to the citizens of Lexington, especially those in the East End, who see the Lyric Theatre every single day, a reminder of the historic legacy, and the reminder of the commitment previous and current mayors and councils have made to them. After an eight-year com- condemnation battle, in which the city used its power of eminent domain to finally acquire the building in 2005 for the explicit purpose of making it into an arts and cultur- and cultural facility, it still stands there, untouched and deteriorating. As we move forward as a community on various exciting projects to revitalize the East End and the Third Street corridor, as well as improve our downtown through the work led by the Downtown Entertainment Task Force and the Legacy Center, I would contend that the Lyric Theatre is a vital, critical part of those revitalization efforts. So in closing, we appreciate the support of this council in the past to move with the $5.8 million, um, design of the Lyric Theatre, and we also thank those of you who adopted this year's current budget with funding to finally provide it for the construction of the Lyric Theatre. I ask you today to please keep that commitment to this city, made to this community, and not to delay this project any further. Thank you for your consideration. Thank you, Mr. Woods. The next person I have is Barry Stumbo, and then following Mr. Stumbo is Bill Scott. Okay, thank you. Uh, following then Mr. Stumbo will be Steve Kay. If you could come around and be ready, Mr. Kay. Mayor, uh, council members, uh, I really appreciate the opportunity to be here. I've served on the Lyric Theatre Committee for the last couple years and have been very involved in this process. Um, I think today is one of the most historical votes I think this council is going to have an opportunity to make, and, and that is for the reimbursement resolution to go forward for the Lyric Theatre project. It's not only a very significant investment in our arts and our culture, it's a historical event for the African-American community and residents, all residents throughout central Kentucky and the commonwealth. The Lyric has been designed with community input throughout the process. Several thousand people have been involved in, in various, um, in various, uh, programs that we have, we have unveiled to the community and invited community support. Emphasis was, was, uh, was given to bringing about a concept that has the best chance for success, and which serves the entire community. That's why a standalone museum will not accomplish that. By focusing on live entertainment, which is what the ly- what the Lyric's legacy really is, and arts, education, other community leadership development uses, this redeveloped facility, I believe, can succeed if a capable, experienced management team is put in charge of the facilities. And those decisions obviously will be made as the future unfolds. There are numerous examples of millions of dollars that this council has spent over the years in investments in our arts, our facilities, and other cultural organizations, and this is no exception. While this is a significant investment during very difficult times, I think that it will have a tremendous impact on our citizens, on our community, and throughout the region. The community has expressed through several mediums the desire to grow and enhance the arts and cultural life of our community, most ris- recently through the Destination 2040 and the Entertainment Task Force th- that Mr. Bolin had mentioned. I truly believe that this represents an opportunity to provide a needed facility that fills a cultural niche in the downtown cultural landscape, both culturally and geographically. This is the last project, has been mentioned, of the memorandum of understanding long overdue, and it must move forward to completion. And as a... ... as a longtime member of this task force, as a taxpayer in this community, I support it. And I certainly appreciate your consideration, and thanks again for the opportunity to address you here today. Thank you, Mr. Stumble. Mr. Kay, if you will step forward. Mr. Maher has yielded his time, and the next speaker I have is, uh, George Brown. Um, if you could let him know he's on deck, I would appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of the council. Uh, thank you for the opportunity to speak to you today. Uh, I come here as a longtime resident of the neighborhood that, uh, Lyric Theater sits in. In fact, if I were standing in my backyard right now, in my younger days, I could have hit it with a rock. Um, not sure I could still do that. But it's, for me, it's something I pass every single day. It's my route in and out of coming downtown or, uh, going to other parts of the community. And for me, it's been a symbol of too many things that have been deferred or delayed or denied in that part of town. Um, the Lyric is the remaining project in this understanding with the state, and I would say simply that absent some extremely compelling and clear reasons that can be explained to the community, especially the residents of the north side, why this project should not go forward, there should be no good reason to prevent it. I ask that you support the project. I know it will make a great deal of difference to my, my neighborhood, to the community that I live in on the north side, and to the larger community. You've heard a lot of reasons from other folks, and I think you'll hear some more. I simply, um, ask for your support for the project. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Kay. Mr. Brown, if you'd step forward, and Joan Branham, if you would, uh, step around. You'll be our next speaker. Mr. Brown. Good afternoon, Mayor, members of the council, and, um, the viewing audience and my colleagues on the Lyric Task Force and other, other folks here assembled. I, um, I rise as a ... M- my name is George Brown, and my residence is 424 East 4th Street, and I am a former First District Council member. Uh, I actually worked very hard to move this project forward. I rise to, um, ask the council to pass the reimbursement resolution that is put before you, to put it on the docket for first reading, um, and then to move this project forward. There are any number of ex- um, circumstances that I think people will say to you, that the economic times are tough, that we d- we can't afford it. My contention is that we can of- cannot afford not to refurbish the Lyric Theater. It stands as a, as a blight on this community, that this community, number one, the City of Lexington, the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government owns the Lyric Theater. There was a contention made to you earlier that the task force should raise $4 million to operate and maintain the Lyric Theater. I think that it is absolutely ludicrous to talk about the community raising that kind of money to operate and maintain such a facility, a facility that the community does not own. The Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government owns the facility. So as you deliberate, please remember who owns the facility and the reason for it. I think that, that historically, lest you forget, you would make the same egregious error that was made in the Ben Snyder block. The Ben Snyder block, um, this government said to the state that it would build a cultural center on that block. This community, this government reneged on that agreement, and there was a suit. History is the best reminder for all of us as to where we are, where we've been, and where we're going. So please remember that this MOU is not something that was done by accident. It is, it is certainly something that was done to remedy a, a situation and a problem. This government stands, if it does not move forward, and it is late today. This discussion is late. The completion of the Lyric Theater was to be completed January 27, 2010. It's approximately a year for this project to be completed. It will not be completed on time. We will have to go begging, head in hand, to the state to say to them that we have made substantial and significant progress on the Lyric Theater, and that this theater is being built, and we've made the commitment, and we're going to make it happen. So as you deliberate, and as you consider, and I know it's a very difficult situation for you, and as difficult as it is, it is even more difficult for you to sit and say that you're not, that you're gonna twiddle your thumbs and not make this happen. I w- I would like to thank Mayor Newberry for, for your letter of support. I've gotta cut you off now. I've got, I've got- I've got some more minutes. Okay. I've got some more minutes. I thought you'd- That's fine. ... given them to me already. Um, I'd like to thank you so very much for ... You know I have additional minutes. Um, I'd like to, uh, thank you, Mayor Newberry, and your administration for your commitment to this project. And I would ask that the, the, the persons who serve in the legislative body of this government, that you would follow his lead, and that you would move this project forward post haste, that, that we have to say to the state sometime early next year that we have made significant progress on this project. And I think that not making progress on this project, we do it at our peril to the citizens of this community and to the, and to moving forward with what is absolutely necessary, what we have committed to. We have committed to this community that we would do the Lyric Theater. So as we have committed to them, I think we follow through with that commitment and we do the things that are necessary, we do what's necessary on this particular project. Thank you for your time. And on behalf of the citizens of Lexington Fayette County, the First Council District, and the citizens of North End of Lexington, we thank you for your deliberation and your time. Thank you very much. And we're glad to have you back here in the council chambers, Council Member Brown. We're glad to have you back with us. Awesome. My friend, Peter. Thank you. Uh, Ms. Brannon is next and Sherry Maddick. Ms. Maddick, if you would, uh, stand by please. Ms. Brannon. Good afternoon. As a lifelong resident of Lexington, I have witnessed many changes in this city, some that seem progressive and some that seem detrimental. We have all watched the Lyric Theatre building decline over the years. Many have had visions of what it ought to be. The change in this instance is that the community has given up, has not given up on this project. Citizens from all sectors of Lexington have attended meetings, have attended open houses, have given personal insight, and gone to charrettes since the 1980s. This building that has been a symbol of hope and renewal in the African American community has become an economically viable project that reflects and encourages the city's movement toward renewing urban life for all people. City government has worked alongside citizens to move this project along. This has been yet another positive change for this community. I urge this council to lock arms with the community and continue to walk with us by passing this reimbursement resolution. This project is long overdue. Even in these difficult economic times, I ask this council to not be afraid. Just as in our personal lives, we can't be afraid and we can't be stagnant, and we need to dare to dream and move forward together. Thank you. Thank you very much, Ms. Brannon. Uh, Ms. Maddick, if you'd step to the podium. And the next person I have on the list is Freda Merriweather. Uh, Ms. Merriweather, if you'd stand by. Ms. Maddick. Thank you for the privilege to speak. My name is Sherry Maddick, and I live on 262 East Fourth. My house is on the corner of Fourth and Elm Tree Lane. And like Steve K., I see the Lyric every day from my kitchen window, uh, and walk past it, uh, daily. I'm also the, um, Martin Luther King Neighborhood Association president currently. And so I care very much about what happens, uh, downtown and especially, uh, in our part of downtown. Um, while I can't appreciate the rich history of the Lyric Theatre, I've been very moved, um, from what I understand that it means to the community and from the stories, uh, and the heritage, uh, and what it symbolizes. I can appreciate it, what it means for the future, uh, and for Third Street development and for our neighborhood. And I think it has great, uh, potential for, um, economic development, uh, for revitalizing the neighborhood. Um, I think most importantly, we desperately need shared spaces. We need community spaces, third spaces, uh, where people can gather, people can celebrate. Um, and I, I think that, that it would offer that. It would be a space for community events. Uh, with this, um, these times, uh, of economic, uh, crisis and environmental, um, crisis, I think that we're gonna enter a new era of neighborhood life. I think place is gonna matter a lot more. We're gonna be less mobile, and my hope and prayers that we'll know our neighbors better. Um, and because of that, with this new era of neighborhood life, I think we need neighborhood-based activities. Uh, and the way I see it is our neighborhood, um, is strengthened and it would be strengthened by, um, the revitalization of the Lyric. Uh, as our neighborhood is strengthened, we will make a stronger Lexington. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Maddick. Ms. Merriweather, if you'll step forward. And the next person I have is Jim Carroll. Is that? All right. Thank you. I really don't have that much to say other than the fact that my name is Freda Merriweather. I am a member of the Lyric Theatre task force. Thank you, Mayor, thank you, Council, for allowing me to come before you today. Um, I've been working on the task force since '06 and it seemed like it's been almost three years. Uh, for other people, it's been a lot longer. It's been 12 years trying to see this project come to face. And we can make all the excuses we want to about parking and lighting. It needs to happen. Let you be the mayor, let you be the council that lets this project go through. Do not be the ones to give it another 12 years. We, we don't have time. We can't wait. We need to get this thing through today. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Merriweather. Uh, Joseph Smith? Here. All right. Thought that was the case, but wanted to be sure. Then, uh, last person I have on the list is Holly Salisbury. Don't wanna use up my time. Many of you know me. Uh, I was the director of the Singletary Center for the Arts for 26 years. Some of you actually worked for me , but we won't go into that. Um, I, I'm here to tell you... Yeah, I'm stunned. I'm here to tell you it's doable. I've actually looked at the plans. I've, I've met with Mr. Bowling. I've looked at the space. And in developing, uh, the programming for the Singletary Center for the Arts, the most important thing that you have when you have a performing arts facility is to be used by all people of the community. It really is doable. I envision much more arts education. I would love to see yellow buses parked on the side of Elm Street, and we do a curb cut in and have programs every morning and have programs every night, have people dancing in the community space. It is doable and I come with 26 years of that experience of how the arts are so incredible that we can do more with a dollar 95 than anybody else. This community needs another facility. It is, as you well know, the scheduling of the current facilities that we have are very limited and very tight. It can be an opportunity, and I'm all about seeing the Lyric be used by all the people and primarily be a venue to develop arts education programming. If you have any questions, uh, I'd be happy to answer 'em. Thank you. Thank you very much. Does anyone else wish to address the council from the public on this particular issue? All right. Mr. Haskins, if you would, uh, for the record, give us your name and home address, I'd appreciate it. Michael Haskins, 693 Coffee Tree Lane. I've seen the plans for the Lyric Theatre, and I've loved it. I've been to open houses where other people were there, and they was commenting on what a great project this was and that they'd like to see it stopped. I'd hope that this council would get this done so we can get the Lyric Theatre taken care of because this be a asset to the community. As, uh, Martin Luther King said, "If not now, when?" Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else? All right, I know I've got a couple of council members who wish to speak to this issue. Um, first is Council Member Meyers. Thank you, Mayor. Uh, Mr. Bowen, could you come up for just a second, please? Thank you for all the hard work that you've done, and I know that you're not the only one that's, that's produced that hard work and, um, but you have been one of the point people that come up to speak to the council and the community a lot on behalf of the Lyric Theatre. So if you could just speak briefly about the 12 years and about the MOU and, um, the penalties associated to not completing the MOU. Um, I addressed some of that in my earlier remarks. To go to your last point, the penalties are, I believe, 182,500 annually that are set forth in the im- memorandum of understanding with the state for non-performance on the project for every day that it's, goes beyond the timetable that was set forth in the MOU. The way the MOU is structured, since it was uncertain when the city would finally acquire the property, uh, that acquisition date is what triggered then a series of windows to, to, uh, complete work on the design of the project and to complete work on t- construction and open the facility. So that's where those dates come from, but they're extrapolated from a, a series of windows that are laid forth in the MOU. I, uh, I began work for the LFUCG in 1985, and it was in 1988 that this issue first came, I think, to my attention through then-councilperson Robert Jefferson, uh, and his, his group of retirees in the second district that were interested in doing something with the theater. And from that time on, it has really never been off the radar screen. In one form or another, there have been a number of reports, uh, for feasibility or for projected, uh, uses or concepts put forward. Um, at least three different occasions that I can recall where we had brought those to council in the anticipation that it was ready to, to be delivered upon. But, uh, because the imminent domain proceeding took such a, a long course and we never really actually acquired the facility until late 2005, uh, we really weren't able to substantively work with that. As I said before, we had the benefit of lessons of seeing how other MOU projects had been, had been dealt with, and again, we wanted to, uh, to do our best to produce a facility concept that would be usable by the greatest number of members of the community. Yes, it needs to reflect and respect the African-American heritage, uh, the struggle, sacrifice, the good accomplishments of our African-American community up to a, a point in time and going forward. But also, I think with some degree of emphasis, to sound, sound, uh, to make it sound that times have changed. It's a different time and this is, this, I think this facility is such a great way to do that, to say that thank goodness change has come in, uh, over the course of history so that, you know, here is, uh, a, a very great example in terms of entire community use of a facility that had at once been relegated simply to one part of the community because that part of the community could not go to other parts of the community. Thank goodness we've gotten past that time. And I just, I feel like particularly in Lexington, Kentucky, this facility is very symbolic and is one that I believe, uh, makes a very strong statement that, that good days are ahead, and with this facility, we're gonna use it to celebrate our entire community. That's, that's been my experience working with the project. I think that's the intent of the MOU. I think the, uh, MOU, you know, the, the funding that was talked about in it so far, it was known in 1997 when that document was put together that that, that amount of funding would not get the facility done. It was looked at as a minimum investment. I was part of those discussions. And so that, that is some years ago, as we all know, so we just feel that the investment that's, uh, that- ... represented by this concept is the one that will give the greatest benefit to the community and has the greatest chance for long-term success given the appropriate management team, so. Okay. Thank you very much. I won't belabor, uh, my comments, but I was just writing down some notes as I listened to the different distinguished people that have served on the committee and also to the community that has come forward to speak. And, um, from Mr. Woods, I heard, um, 12 years in the making. Um, he talked about arts, jobs and thriving economy. Uh, for Mr. Stumbo, I talked... he, he talked about historical votes and, you know, this mayor's talked about this last council on being historic and the things that we were able to accomplish together with his administration and that we have an opportunity to continue to move in that direction. Uh, Mr. K talked about, um, things deferred and put off, and that it's time to change that. Um, Mr. Brown talked about, um, it's not that we can't afford to do the projects, it's that we can't afford to not complete the project. And he talked about the Ben Snider block and the lawsuit that was a result of that. And to break that $182,000 down, um, per year, it's actually five, um, $500 a day fine that the city will be paying to not complete this project. Um, Ms. Brandon, uh, and I kinda paraphrased a little bit, um, 'cause she had an opportunity to rhyme and she didn't quite get it, but, um, says, "I've seen several policies in this city, some progressive, but some recessive." And this is an opportunity to be progressive. Uh, Ms. Maddox talked about, um, she can appreciate what this project means for the future and the new era of neighborhood life. Um, Ms. Meriwether talked about being the one, this council, along with this administration, being the one. Uh, Ms. Salisbury said, um, it's doable, and education, education, education. And Mr. Haskins basically said get it done. I'm, I'm here to speak on behalf of this project today. You know, when we look at 1988, um, Mr. Bowen said that he was first made aware of this project back in 1988. That's 21 years ago. And when this council talks about economic development and, and, you know, Councilman McCords talked a lot about, um, the 20-somethings and the 30-somethings and keeping them here and allowing them to have a progressive city that's, that's something that they want to be proud of and want to be a part of. You think about that 21 years and the people who, when this project first came up, are now 21 years old, and that's our target group that we are trying to keep here and trying to be successful in a way that they want to keep Lexington as their residence and then raise their children here 21 years from now. Um, we've had an economic development taskforce that's been put together to look at how we grow our economy. That's the number one thing in this community right now, and it is across the country, how to grow our economy. And to say that this is gonna do that would put a lot on the shoulders of, of this committee and this, this facility, but if you go back to what Mr. Bowen said, the opportunity that we have here before us today is the most economically viable and economically long-term sustainable project, uh, and option for a Lyric Theatre that's 12 years overdue, 21 years overdue, and that has to get done. So I'm here to speak my support to move this, um, issue forward on the docket and, uh, move this project forward. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Councilmember Myers. Councilmember Lane. Uh, thank you, Mayor. Um, I guess the first thing I'd like to say that I strongly believe that Lexington is obligated to fund a city government's commitment to, uh, renovate the Lyric Theatre. And I have voted on more than one occasion to support the city's commitment for this project. At the same time, I have, uh, been an advocate, uh, for a feasibility analysis and a financial plan so that the long-term financial obligation to the taxpayers of Fayette County would be known before the council, you know, votes to spend the money to build a building. And I think too many times in the past that our council has voted to build a building without looking at the long-term commitment and financial expense to the taxpayers. So here are a few points that, that I think need to be reviewed. Uh, first off, the original commitment was to spend more than a million dollars to create a museum. And, of course, the plan has grown substantially. The size of the building has been increased from 13,000 square feet to 29,000 square feet, which obviously would run up the operating cost and the development cost of the facility. Now, I'm not saying that's a bad idea, but I am saying that is gonna cost more money. Um, the, uh, consultant's agreement or engagement to review the Lyric Theatre did not call for an analysis or judgment as to the feasibility or viability of the, uh, Lyric Theatre project, which is really what the idea of that report was, is to give us some input as to whether they thought this was a feasible or viable, um, project. The, the Lyric Theatre, when it reaches its stabilized income, according to this analysis, which would be about $240,000 a year in the third year of operation, the annual net cost that would include debt service, operating expenses, subsidies, would be over $800,000 a year. And this is at least a 20-year commitment, so when we vote on this, you know, we're looking at somewhere between a $16 and maybe $20 million cost to the taxpayers over that period of time, if you consider there will be inflationary costs in operating the property. The, the other aspect of it that I think we need to look at is we are in serious economic conditions right now, and... You know, our budgets are very tight and, you know, I think we need to look at the timing on this, and also the possibility, uh, there is a very strong possibility we might be able to apply for money from the stimulus fund, because this is a ready to build project, and maybe get full funding of this by the federal government, and maybe at no cost to our city at all. Um... The other thought is that, although this is a, a very good project, um, we're not doing this because this is an emergency. This is not a public safety issue we're dealing with. This is not an essential, uh, safety net service for people who are poor- ... indigent or sick. And this is not just a basic government service. This is sort of a wonderful project when our city has the money available to spend for it. So my, what I'm asking for, I would like to make a motion is that the council put it into our Budget and Finance Committee and let us, you know, look over the numbers. I'm not saying table it, I'm not saying vote against it. I'm just saying I feel that we need to look at this in a lot more detail. Uh, we just received the feasibility on this a few days ago, and we haven't even had the consultant who wrote the feasibility to come in and answer any questions. Uh, I don't feel like this would be unreasonable and, uh, as, um, when I talked to Kevin Stennet, who's the Chair of Budget and Finance, and I'm Vice Chair, and we would try to, you know, accelerate getting this through our committee for, um, a review. Just allow us to answer some questions. A few other questions that I'd like to ask is, you know, what, um, you know, Lexarts, uh, feels about how this particular facility fits into all the other facilities we have in town and if it's complementary. I did not see that in the feasibility study that I reviewed. Um, and those types of issues. And I'd, I'd also be interested to know, um, you know, other theater operations here, what their capacities are and how this relates to what facilities we currently have in our community. So I'm just saying, let's do our due diligence before we spend 16 plus million dollars on behalf of the taxpayers. Mm-hmm. So that being said, I move to refer the Lyric Theatre project to the Budget and Finance Committee for further review and to request the Mayor's Office to ask the Kentucky Governor's Office for an extension of Fayette County's deadlines to finalize its investment in the Lyric Theatre. So moved. Second. All right, I have a motion and a second- Second. ... to refer, uh, item G to the Budget and Finance Committee. And the debate now is on the motion to refer- So moved. ... only. Council Member Gordon? Yes, thank you, Mayor. Uh, well, I wouldn't want to see the, this get slowed down much, and I realize it would give us an opportunity to ask questions of the consultant, so I'm wondering, uh, Council Member Stennet, when you think the Budget and Finance Committee could hear it. How soon? We could probably hear it next Tuesday if the consultant could be here. Perfect, if the consultant could be here. That's what I was looking for. Thank you. Vice Mayor Gray. Uh, that's what I was gonna say, Mayor. All right. Suggest that as soon as possible, get it before Budget and Finance. Thank you. Council Member James. Um, thank you, Mayor. Shea, um, can you step to the mic a little bit? Because we've, we've talked a little bit about, um, delay, um, and what that could possibly mean. And if, we wanted to be sure that we were differentiating between delay of construction of the building, um, or, or, um, the release of the funds to be able to bid for construction versus the business plan. And if you don't mind, just share a little bit of our conversation as we talked about this, because I, I do, I will not support the motion, um, to go to Budget and Finance, it, it, to hold the reimbursement resolution or this going to the docket. I believe we can move this forward to the docket, but I do understand that folks want to dive into the business plan, which is something that I would like to encourage to do as well, to have a, to have a for sure business plan, but just talk a little bit about our conversation and what you think about this, um, Council Member Lane's motion. Okay, I'll do my best. And first I'd like to invite anyone who's interested to come to my office and see the boxes full of Lyric information from the past 21 years and the various people who've been involved in this. I've learned a lot in the past few weeks as I've, um, been happy to take over this project for Charlie Boland. I'm glad to also see, say he's, um, remaining on the task force even though he's no longer on, in the Mayor's office. But to address your question directly, you are correct that we're talking about, while they're obviously combined, there are two different questions the council needs to consider, and one is about moving forward with construction and when, and the other one is, what kind of business plan or management do we have over the next several years for the Lyric Theatre? And I don't think that there's any reason why we can't move forward with both of those. And what I mean is, the reimbursement resolution will allow, will give the administration at least a nod that we intend to sell bonds or to seek stimulus dollars or somehow otherwise repay the general fund for any money that is spent on the construction, but we're a long way off from actually beginning the construction. The next phase will be to work with, um, Susan Hill to actually prepare a request for proposal to determine how much it actually is gonna cost in that six million dollar range. And as I mentioned earlier, we're hoping it'll be less than it was two years ago. At that point, once we get the bids back in, we'll have a committee that will have to select whoever will be the person to do the construction, the firms to do the construction, and the council will then again be asked at that time for permission to actually move forward with construction. I believe that we can also simultaneously have conversations in whatever committee and whatever forum you wish about the actual business plan. Um- That can happen with the help g- you know, the council could form their own committee, we could bring Lexarts in, whatever. The AMS business plan is an example of one way, or actually many ways, based on, uh, information from, from other people around the country, one, i- it's an example of how we can manage. With the best, with one of the, the scenarios being the city would supplement about $150,000 a year in operating expenses, which is not far from the norm of what we do with some of our other partner agencies. But also in the business plan, they speak to fundraising, endowments, memberships, many other opportunities. And what I think the best thing to do, in working with the council, is to, at some point soon, do, uh, request for a proposal for business management firms to actually propose to manage and operate the Lyric Theatre. And in that RFP, we can put specific criteria, based on some of the points made here in the AMS report, but we can also add some open-ended questions or other specific things we wanna see that come out of conversations we have with council members to address any concerns you might have, or that Lexarts might have ideas. The point is, is to get the best possible management operating of the Lyric. But that is a separate issue as to whether or not we actually proceed with construction, which we are obligated to do. And the reason why we're on the current timeline we're on is because in 2006, the Irving County Council member, many members who are still sitting up here, unanimously authorized the $5.8 million design, which we then submitted to the state for their approval. They gave the thumbs up. Now the clock is ticking to construct. No doubt about it, we're gonna have to ask the state for an extension as it relates to when the completion date is, because we are behind schedule given the request of the business plan from the council, which was a legitimate request from the council. But I think it's gonna be much more difficult to have the state grant us an extension. They've already given us one extension because of the condemnation proceedings. But unless we can show some very serious and positive commitment to moving forward with this project, we have no guarantee that they're actually gonna grant us an extension. And the longer it gets tied up in more and more conversations, it could cost the city more money in the end. Thank you, Shay, very much. And, and I do think, uh, I do encourage, um, council members to think very seriously, um, prior to supporting Council Member Lane's motion, um, because this is the prime time for construction, um, to bid for construction. Um, i- in my belief, if we wait any longer, um, for the stimulus to come down, th- things change. People hire people, um, and, and what is going on is, um, if you read anywhere about construction, um, and we've got some experts right here on this, on this, um, or on this horseshoe, um, w- when folks had to scale, when contractors had to scale back, they kept their best and brightest. Um, they got rid of the folks that were gonna do maybe not so good of a job. They held onto their, their experts. Um, the market is prime right now, um, to bid out, and that's what's happening all over the nation. Um, so strongly consider supporting this going forward on the docket. Again, it will be some time, um, before those bids are, come back for, and we'll have to vote on that. Um, so these things can happen simunt- simultaneously, and please know I do support an in-depth look at the business plan. I think we are, we're, we should do that. Um, we're obligated by our constituency to make sure we're, we're doing the best and brightest that we can as we sit here and, and represent them. But please do not support this motion. Thank you, Mayor. Any more discussion on the matter of referring the matter to, uh, business and finance? Council Member Stennet. Thank you, Mayor. Just to clarify, Council Member Lane, your motion is to put the report into committee or to postpone this resol- uh, G today and put the whole thing into committee? 'Cause, you know, G can still move on while we digest the report next Tuesday. Right. Yeah, my- So, two documents- ... my idea was to postpone it and put it into committee. When we come out of committee, we can vote on it. Okay. The whole thing. Yes, sir. The whole thing? Okay. And then, uh, Shay, can you come back real quick? H- have you all made contact with the state to let them know our intentions yet? No, 'cause I'm not really sure what our intentions are. I know what the administration's intentions are, but we haven't had any conversations in recent weeks with them. Well, I think regardless of what happens today, we're gonna have to have an extension period. Right. So, um, would you all plan after today to contact them immediately? What is your timetable? We absolutely, I mean, given, whatever the council does with the reimbursement resolution, which will then allow us to move forward into the next phase in putting out, uh, requests for proposals. A- and we could, we could ask for requests for proposals without a reimbursement resolution, but it would be a huge waste of time and energy. Or I shouldn't say waste, but, um, we would be putting forth a huge deal of time and energy for something the council might not ultimately approve. And so this is, we want you to give a initial nod. We are gonna have to have a conversation with them no matter what, but I'd like to be able to go with them to say that there's some kind of positive movement forward. And that is, we're going out to bid for construction, and we're planning on starting construction later this year, and we're gonna come as close to the January 2010 deadline as possible, but talk to them about what might be possible if we're under construction, what is the likelihood of them granting us an extension for a matter of months versus if we just completely ask for an extension with no movement from the council, what does that mean? And also, the RFP will be coming back here to, to finalize too for the bid- I'm not sure how that -- you mean, in terms of approving who gets the- Yes. ... contract? Well, the approving the final RFP for the final amount, because it could come back over six million. Are you talking about approving the RFP or are you talking about approving the contract that results from the -- from the bid and the response? Proving -- well, certainly, the contract would have to come back. Ah, yes. Thank you. And then of course, lastly but not least, will you be asking to make this part of the stimulus package that we've been discussing as early as last Friday during the com- uh, commission meeting? Will this be- ... asked for through that? Because I know there w- we reviewed, I think, 52 programs, Mayor- Right. ... last Friday, but- Right. I'll let the- ... I think this definitely fits into a couple of the programs where, um, you know, one is LED projects or, um, you know, arts. There's a lot of programs I think we can fit this into. Right. I'll let the Mayor speak to this. We, uh, listed the Lyric on the initial request that we sent in back in November, December, and January. Now, h- having said at the meeting on Friday, you know there are a lot of different pots of money out there. We have had some preliminary conversation with Lynne Simon about the extent to which the Lyric might qualify for one or m- more of those sources of funding. He indicated there may be multiple sources, but we don't know yet. It's still too early in the process to really make a, a definitive judgment about the extent to which stimulus funding might be made available, but we're looking, we're exploring that now. As long as the effort's there, th- that- Yes. ... that's the main thing that- Yeah. ... a request from the administration to have us look at that on the commission would be s- would be- Sure. Sure. ... sufficient at this point. And, and I think the administration and the community shares, um, the same feelings that we want to minimize the cost to the Urban County Government General Fund, because we have many other needs. So if we're able to repay the funds with either all or some of them coming from the stimulus, the better for everyone. The email that you received from Keena today also clarified that the resolution does not speak to it having to be re- the reimbursement having to be repaid from the sale of bonds. It could also be repaid from other sources, including stimulus dollars. Hopefully, at least at a minimum, we'll have a combination, but best case scenario, it'll be stimulus. I want to reiterate the point that Keena made earlier. Because of the timing, we're already behind schedule. And because of the time it'll take to actually begin construction, we will not have to sell bonds until fiscal year 10, which means there will be no- 500. No, well, fiscal year 10, we'll sell the bonds. Debt service will not- Right. ... be repaid or have to be paid until fiscal, fiscal year 11. And I think that takes away some of our concerns, the -- our immediate concerns with this next year's budget, which currently has about a $25 million hole. We share those same concerns, but this is something we, we feel strongly we need to m- more move forward with. Councilmember Gordon. Councilmember- Mayor, I had one final comment. I'm sorry. That's okay. I apologize. Um, to, to Councilmember Lane's motion, I certainly support putting the report into Budget and Finance because I think there's some serious, serious issues on the management side o- o- of operations. Um, but, but to hold up G, all it's doing is going on the docket. We still have two council meetings that, if we don't get what we need next Tuesday, um, we can pull it off the docket at any time over the next, um, three weeks actually now, three weeks. So, um, that's where I stand. Thank you, Mayor. I apologize. Uh, Councilmember Gordon and Councilmember Lane. Uh, I wanted to thank Councilmember Stennet for clarifying or asking the clarifying question about the motion. Uh, now that I know that it includes both the, uh, Lyric report and item G, I'm gonna vote no, because I don't want to hold up the reimbursement resolution. It'll get first reading on the 26th and it would not get second reading until March the 12th, so I think we have plenty of time in between there. So I'm gonna vote no since it includes both pieces. May I ask a clarification of Councilmember Lane? I think part of your motion included asking the state for an extension. Does that just mean ... Can you clarify what you mean by that? Like an extension? Well, uh, I wish you had said you were going to contact the state and ask for an extension. I, I just felt that it would be appropriate to ask for one now. Um, and I ... Since I'm next, Mayor, so I keep on going, proceed with a couple of questions. Uh, yes. Uh, I think the speakers listed on the screen here are, are folks who wish to speak to this particular motion, so we'll just go down the list a- as is here and so, Councilmember Lane, you would be- Okay. Thank you, Mayor. Yeah, I, I ... A, just a couple of quick questions. Do you know how much money has already been invested in the Lyric Theatre, we've already spent in cash, that's already ... I know that we have already spent, uh, nearly $1 million already, and that's past 10-plus years. It, it took us, uh, significant dollars to acquire the theater and some property around it that was necessary. Uh, Council in 2006 approved about $350,000 for the architecture, for the architect and the design work. Uh, I have no idea how much legal fees we have incurred, uh, during the eight-year-long condemnation proceeding. The business plan, which you have before you was about $55,000, and then there's some, been some engineering and appraisal work. But we've already spent a lot of money. So the, the feasibility, you're talking about the consultant's report we just got was $55,000? That's correct. That's in your, um, on your fact sheet- Okay. ... in, in the AMS report. Okay, and if we start construction of the Lyric Theatre and then apply for stimulus funds, would it be eligible or n- if it's already in construction, will that make it ineligible for funding? Do you know that? I -- I'm not sure- We -- we really don't know the answer to that question right now. We -- we don't know, but -- but I would venture to guess, we're not gonna begin construction until at least May or June. That's the earliest at this phase, at this stage. I hope, and given, uh, President Obama's intentions for the stimulus dollars, he wants the money to -- to go quickly and for projects to begin quickly. The original timeframe was wit- within 90 days of passage of -- of the stimulus bill. So I'm hoping, and we're -- we're -- we've been told that we're gonna hear from Washington within a matter of weeks, if not less, on how to apply for grants and whatever funding it might be. So I'm hoping that before we actually break ground and do any kind of construction, we will also have money, we will have applied for money for the stimulus. And certainly by the time we'd ever have to really spend the dollars, we would know what, if any, we get from the stimulus. I hope that sort of answers your question. All right. Thank you. That's all. Thank you. Uh, Council Member Myers. Thank you, Mayor. Um, I move to substitute the motion that's on the table for a motion to place this Lyric Theatre report into Budget and Finance, and then go ahead and move forward with G on the packet. Second. The motion by Council Member Myers and second by Council Member James is to substitute a new motion for Council Member Lane's motion to, uh, refer to the Bus- Budget Committee, and the new substitute motion, which we're now considering, would require that, um, only the report be referred to the Budget Committee so that item G could be on the -- the docket for the next council meeting. That is correct. All right. Everybody clear about where we are procedurally now? Question is, uh, whether to approve Council Member Meyer's motion, and so please direct your comments to, um, to those proposals, uh, to that proposal. Do you have anything further to say, Council Member Myers? Oh, I -- I would like to go on record to say that I do have questions about the management of -- of the Lyric, and I think there's plenty of opportunity there I won't get into right now, but I do think that G oughta move forward and we put the report into Budget and Finance. Thank you. All right. Uh, Council Member Hinson, then Vice Mayor Gray. I think I had some comments for Sh- or Craig. Mayor, is this to the motion? Oh, this is on the motion. This is just to the motion to substitute. Well, I do support the replacement motion, but I ha- 'cause I have a problem with the plan not going ahead and getting the bonds for the m- construction, but I would have a problem with construction beginning before we got approval on the design. And -- and just to clarify, it's my understanding, the annual operating cost of the Lyric in its current form would cost us about $350,000 annually, correct? That, first of all, that's a best guess. Okay. And about 100 and- According to this report. Right. About 150,000 of that is direct operating cost. Okay. The other, what AMS says is about 188,000 is to maintain the facility, and that includes utilities, that includes, um, janitorial services or whatever kinda maintenance, and it includes insurance for this facility. I'm not sure where they came up. Charlie, you might... Where'd Charlie go? Mayor, this point be- Okay. Point of order, Mayor. That's off the -- the motion that's on the floor. I, um- Th- that point is well taken, and I think what we need to do is -- is for the moment confine our debate to whether or not we want to substitute the motion that Council Member Meyers proposed just a moment ago for Council Member Lane's motion to refer to the Budget Committee. Uh, so the -- the question right now is does anyone wish to debate Council Member Meyers' motion to substitute? Council Member Stennet. Council Member Meyers, did that include the request to ask the state for an extension as Council Member Lane, did you wanna put that in there? Or were you specifically leaving that out? I -- I wanna leave that out because I wanna see what the council does, um, with respect to the motion once it gets on the docket because if we don't vote to put... once we put G on the docket, if we don't vote for it, then I think we're shooting ourself in the foot asking the state for an extension when we haven't shown due diligence. Very good. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Council- uh, Vice Mayor Gray. Yeah, this is a question to the, uh, substitute motion. Um, so would we be then bringing the business plan before Budget and Finance only, but not the building? Okay, so my question then is, the building itself is built or the business plan is built around the building. So if we're not discussing the building at the same time we're discussing the business plan, how are we being productive in that? I don't- Is that directed to anybody in particular or, or, uh- Well, I'll direct it to Shep that, that because the amendment or the substituted motion is, allows us to go ahead with the resolution supporting the building, right? Correct. Correct. But up for discussion is the business plan. I'm sorry? I was just- L- let me take a stab at that and then others can chime in. I think the point is, and -- and somebody spoke to, maybe it was Council Member Stennet a moment ago, I- We'd have about three weeks within which to consider whether or not we wanted to go forward with a resolution at the sec-- March 12th council meeting. So that is, during this three-week window, we would focus on the report in the budget committee, while the resolution to proceed with the reimbursement resolution stayed on the docket. All right. Now, any further discussion on, on Council Member Myers' motion to substitute? Council Member McCord. I just wanted to make a, a comment that I appreciate Council Member Myers making that motion, because I was getting ready to make the same, same motion to split those two things out. And, and I think that, for me at least, you know, coming into this discussion, it really wasn't a matter of if or yes or no or whatever. It was yes, but tread very carefully. And, and I think it's echoed across here that there are certain things in that, in that business plan that are extremely, um, give me a lot of pause. And I think by the fact that we've got some time, that we've got the ability to, to move forward, uh, and not, not put the brakes on, uh, it, but having some time to, to digest that, what I'd like to go on record, Council Member Myers, that when we, if this does pass, um, you know, some of that discussion needs to be around what is that real cost, as Council Member Lane said. Uh, where is the operational oversight gonna come from and who ultimately is accountable? 'Cause that's a big question that never seems to get answered very often. And I, I really would like for that to be a core of this discussion that if we move forward or as we move forward, um, you know, who, who ultimately bears the burden of, of accountability, of, of what's, what's being said there. But I very much appreciate you splitting that out and I do not want to delay moving forward because we do have time. It's not a matter of today and not tomorrow. It is three weeks of process and I appreciate Council Member Stennet being very aggressive in, in hearing that and, but I do want to go on record as those things need to be discussed in that budget and finance meeting, please. Thank you. Council Member Beard. Thank you, Mayor. I too support the substitute motion by Council Member Myers. Um, I will ask the chairman of the Budget and Finance if in fact we cannot lay this to rest in one meeting, is it possible to have another special called meeting to take the time to massage this thoroughly? Anything's possible. Let's, let's get through next Tuesday first. I understand, but, uh, but we are on, under some kind of a deadline anyway if we keep item G, uh, on, on the track it's on or would be on at that point. Anyway, I do, I do support this. All right. Any further discussion on Council Member Myers' motion to substitute? Council Member Crosby. Um, just procedurally, um, if, if indeed it sounds like there's some issues regarding the business plan, I think everybody has questions regarding that, yet we're gonna keep item G on. I guess my question is since they do go hand-in-hand and we do, we are gonna discuss it next Tuesday, um, why can't we just add them both on I guess would be my thoughts if they're hand-in-hand. I mean, I'd be more for separating the two out of, you know, your motion instead of... But I, I guess I don't understand procedurally because it doesn't really hold it up if it gets added back on to the docket during next week's meeting. There's not a... The next council meeting is a week from Thursday night, so us discussing that we're holding it up in any way is, to me, a moot point because it still can be added back on to the docket for a week from Thursday. And then all the questions could be cleared up on both. Council Member Myers. Thank you, Mayor. That, that's a great question and I, I think that there's some pause with the management and those type of things, the questions surrounding the management of the operation. And so people are saying, "Well, we shouldn't vote for the whole thing until we at least talk about these other issues." So by separating it out, you're right, they can add this back as soon as we have that budget finance meeting, we may come back and say we're fine with the business plan. But I think it just makes it easier to not hold up G. With people being able to get on record that they have questions about the management of it and then we also start that conversation about the management so that those questions can be heard and if there are solutions out there that are better than what they have in this plan, then we can address it that way. So I guess then to clarify, there, there are no questions, there will be no questions discussed on the actual building during budget and finance or it will just be on the business plan? That, that's the intent of the motion. All right, let me apologize for a little confusion on the screen here. When we go from the original motion to where people wind up to speak to these, um, I can't remember the technical term for it, but the motion to refer and the motion to substitute, it gets kind of screwy. So, um, that's a technical term. If, um, if, uh, you wish to speak on Council Member Myers' motion to substitute, just raise your hand and I'll try to noti- write you down on the list as to you. Vice Mayor Gray. Okay. Mayor, I want to explain my, I want to explain my vote and I can explain my vote on this and, and, and the, uh, the rest of it as well. You know, I think all of us on this who have, uh, sat in these chairs now for a little while have learned that it's, uh, often uncomfortable and inconvenient, um, to take a position, particularly if it's adverse or it's not one that is, uh, supported by many of your friends. And, um, and that, and I find myself a little bit in that position today. Um, t- the inconvenience and the discomfort of it is associated with the precedent that we are taking here. Um, the numbers on the report show that we will be approaching a million dollars in a, in three years with the project. My questions related to the building and the business plan have to do with, d- directly with the business plan being built around the building. So by voting in, by voting, uh, for this substitute, I would be today endorsing the business plan and the building. And, you know, this is an enormously ... I've been involved when ... I've been in meetings about the project. I'm familiar with the project. I live downtown, I work downtown. Uh, it's enormously symbolic. The passion and the commitment and the conviction of those who are supporting this project is enormously important. It's not a matter, in my view, this is not an issue on whether or not the project is, has merit or whether or not we're obligated to the project, or whether or not we're committed to the project, or whether or not the city and the community is deserving of the project. It's whether or not, and how much we can afford. So that is the reason that, I'm, I'm explaining my vote, um, in support of or my no vote on the substitute. Thank you. Uh, Council Member Stennet. Just to clarify a couple of points, at the Budget and Finance meeting, we can talk about anything we want to. We can talk about the numbers, the management, the building, anything at all. Just 'cause some, one person would support this motion doesn't mean they'd actually vote on it in favor of it on March 12th. You have three weeks to dissect this plan, to talk about it publicly, to talk about with everyone in this room and, and h- people at home watching. So just because one vote is one way today doesn't mean ultimately you will support the final plan, which is March 12th, w- at this point would be that vote. So back to all those points. Thank you, Mayor. Mayor. The question on the floor is a motion to substitute as, uh, Council Member Myers has proposed. Anybody else? Uh, Council Member James and Council Member Lane. Thank you, Mayor. Um, just to echo a bit of what Council Member Stennet is saying, today's vote is not to support the business plan, not even to support the building. It is to allow for the moving forward of the bid. And then once we receive that information back, we will see that around this horseshoe, and you can vote up or down, however you feel. Um, it is my hope that Budget and Finance will look at the business plan and look for a successful model, not to shoot down what people have put out as a proposal, but instead to say, "What can we do that would be feasible since we are mandated to build this African American cultural arts facility." Um, so I think that as we move forward, if we can move forward with a positive thought of, okay, how can we get to where we need to be, um, in a successful manner? Not how can we shoot it down, or how can we do anything to stall it any longer than w- than 12 years and more ... We can't, w- as folks said, we just can't do that. So please know today's vote, and anybody watching, anybody voting any particular way today, if you vote in favor of, it doesn't mean that you necessarily support it. You're not gonna know that until people vote in the affirmative on the final day. Um, nor does it mean you support the business plan. We need that business plan looked at. I hope that Budget and Finance will do that. As a matter of fact, I hope that there will be a task force which includes some of the experts that have been working on this for such a long time that can confo- confer with council members on the business plan to see, so you understand the angle from which w- we were coming as we've been working on this for years. So, um, thank you, Mayor. Council Member Lane. Thank you, Mayor. I'll make this very brief. Uh, I just want to concur with what the Vice Mayor said is the current business plan is really centered around the proposed building, which increases the Lyric from 13,000 to 29,000 square feet. So, you know, the project has grown over the years, and that's why the cost has gone up. So as long as we can look at, you know, the cost of the building and the cost of operations, uh, and w- I think we have the opportunity to vote on that as we go into the future, uh, we'll be okay. But I do think it's important that we look at both areas, the building size and the, uh, the plan. Thank you. Any further discussion on Council Member Meyers' motion? Council Me- I'm sorry. I apologize. Council Member Feigl. That's what you get when you sit next to the mayor. That's right. He can't see you. Um, well, I would just kind of like to explain my vote too. Uh, as a new council member, it's very apparent to me that there's been a lot of work done over very, a very long period of time. And, uh, I am certainly not up to speed on this issue, and I, and I'm sensing an urgency to move forward, and I don't feel that I'm comfortable moving forward. And so, um, I would like to spend more time studying and asking more questions, and I'm not really clear what, you know, the, the lack of a business plan, all this is just new information to me. So I, um, I plan to abstain on this motion just because I feel like that I am not in a position to make a, a, a knowledgeable vote. Thank you. Any more discu- Council Member Martin. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I sort of am on couple sides of this. One is that, uh, I've had the privilege through the years of, of playing with Mike, uh, Allen and Jim Rankin and Norman Higgins and, and Duke Madison. Um, I was a Jazzer in my previous life. I -- I was also the general council of the economic deve-- economic development cabinet about the time that this memorandum o- of understanding was entered into, so I understand a- a couple of sides of this. Um, I, one of the concerns I have is that, uh, if we have to vote on this a week from Thursday, uh, whether, uh, we're gonna have enough financial instr- information in front of us to be able to, to vote in favor of it, and I wanna vote in favor of this. And so, um, I- I am gonna, uh, I guess, uh, oppose Council Member Meyers' motion, simply because I- I don't know whether we can get, uh, Council Member Stennet can get, uh, e- enough of the financial information reviewed in order for us to h- be able to vote on this a week from Thursday, and I don't wanna vote no on this. I wanna vote yes on this. And so, um, uh, and so I'm- I'm not gonna, uh, support the- the motion to, um, um, to amend Council Member Lane's, uh, motion. Thank you. Any further discussion on Council Member Meyers' motion to substitute? All right, the question now before the ... Is there somebody else? Okay, listen, if- if you want to speak on this particular motion, just raise your hand- Jump up and down or something. ... 'cause this, um, is getting confusing. Yes? I was standing, you just can't tell. Um, I just wanna clarify, I- I'm just a little bit confused. I wasn't confused at- at the beginning, but I am now. So, what we're- what we are voting on is authorizing, uh, saying that the, basically that the general fund will reimburse, will have authorization to reimburse the bond ... No? Okay. Putting G back on the docket. Let- let me- let me try to- Okay. Yes. Let me try to help out here. Putting G back on the docket. Okay. Yeah. The ... Keep in mind, the fundamental motion which started all this conversation was to approve the items of new business, okay? Then we had a motion to refer one item, item G, to the budget and finance committee and do some other things- Okay. ... that Council Member Lane put forward. Okay. Following that motion being discussed, Council Member Meyers moved to substitute a new motion for Council Member Lane's motion. Correct. The effect of Council Member Meyers' motion is to say the report which evaluated the lyric proposition would be referred to the budget committee for consideration, and item G would be left to go forward on the docket. Okay. So, all we're voting on now is do you like Council Member Meyer's motion better or do you like Council Member Lane's motion better? Okay, thank you. Tha- that's the short of it. All right? Now, any further discussion? Council Member Martin. My good friend, Council Member Blues informs me that I won't have to vote on this for three weeks, and so I will support Mr. Meyers, uh. All right. Now, I think that concludes our- our, uh, debate on the motion to substitute. Let's proceed to vote. If you are in favor of substituting Council Member Meyers' motion for Council Member Lane's motion, please indicate by voting aye electronically. If you're opposed to substituting, please indicate by voting no. All right, that motion carries by a vote of 11 to 3 with one abstention. So, the question now before the council is do you favor or oppose referring the report to the budget committee and leaving item G on the- on the docket? Any questions? Any further debate on that issue? See- seeing none, we'll- we will vote, and the issue you're voting on now is do you favor referring the report on the lyric to the budget committee and leaving item G on the docket for the- for the next meeting? Everybody with me? Any questions? Then those in favor of referring the report to the budget committee, please indicate by voting yes. Those opposed to that motion, please indicate by voting no. Okay. Mayor? Yes? Just a point. On our screen is showing, um, the motion mover is Council Member Lane. Is that correct? Um, actually, the- the motion to refer is now Council Member Meyers' motion. Okay, if, um, if staff will be able to fix that. You may not be able to fix that now, but just for the record, Jeanette. All right. Thank you. And it appears as though that motion carries by vote of 14 to 0 with one abstention. Now, we are back to the original motion, which is to approve the items of new business. Is there any more discussion on any of the items of new business? Those in favor, then, of approving the items of new business, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion carries. Thank you. Um, we have a report, I understand, from the Corridors Committee, and I'm not sure who was bringing that today. There's no chair. All right. We'll move along. Uh, the inter-governmental- ... committee. Mayor, I'll take that one. Council Member James. Um, the -- your -- the minutes of the, or the summary of the minutes is included in your packet. There was no legislation that came forward from the inter-governmental committee. Um, we dealt with two issues, the grievance pro- procedure and the citizen's advocate policy and procedures. No legislation came forth, however, I did want for the record to indicate that Council Member Feigl agreed to be my vice-chair. So that's just for the record. That's the end of my report. Thank you, Mayor. I've been asked to make an announcement, uh, for the benefit of those of you who are here and those watching on GTV3, I'm reading this as, uh, as I, uh, tell you. There has been a high pressure gas main rush, rupture near Harrisburg Road between New Circle and Man of War. It's recommended that we avoid Harrisburg Road at rush hour and into the evening hours. Harrisburg Road is down to one lane in each direction between New Circle and Man of War, and the police and fire departments are on the scene. That's all the information I have available right at the moment. On Harrisburg Road between New Circle and Man of War. So, uh, that's ... I'll see if I, we can round up a little additional information as, uh, the meeting progresses. Um, let's see. We're now ready to proceed with the update on the Parks Master Plan, and Mr. Hancock, I'll let you, uh, introduce the presentation to the council. Thank you, Mayor, Council Members. What we would like to do in a relatively brief period of time is give you a summary overview of the Parks Master Plan update. We did our first Parks Master Plan, we started in 1996. It was approved by the council in 1998. Doing an, an update of the master plan for a parks agency is a requirement of maintaining our accreditation. As all of you remember, we were the 69th parks organization in the country to be accredited in 2008. And we bring together today a couple of professional planners for parks and recreation, uh, who have been asked to build this master plan. Some of you sat on the selection committee last summer, and in July of '08 we began to do two pieces of work, which you will see summarized here today. The first is to prepare a master plan for Hisel Park, that 280 acre donation to the city from several years ago from Robert and Mrs. Hisel. The second piece was to look at our service delivery, our recreational packages, and our organization maintenance and funding issues in parks. And that has resulted in about 150 page document that you will all receive from me this week, and that we're gonna present in the next 15 minutes or so, and then we'll take all of your questions. With me today, I have, uh, the folks from Lowest & Associates and the folks from Norris & Hempleth that helped us put this together. There was a third organization, Norris Design from Denver, who wasn't able to be with us today. But I'm gonna introduce now Chris Camp, the president of Lowest & Associates, a nationally known recreational and land planning agency, uh, who will lead us through this summary of those two pieces, the Hisel Park and the Parks overall master plan. Thank you, Jerry. Uh, Honorable Mayor, and, and Council, I'm gonna move fairly quickly to get into questions and, um, uh, Jerry did a very good job giving a little bit of background history, so I won't spend much time on this particular slide. But we did begin in July of this year and did interviews with almost everyone who sits on this body. Uh, there were a few we, we did miss, but, um, this morning, uh, for an hour and a half, uh, we gave a presentation to many of you, and we talked, uh, about what I would call some of the finer grain detail, uh, that's in the master plan. And between that time and, and this presentation, I had time to reflect on some of the comments that, uh, council members, uh, and questions from this morning. And I, I've taken a little different, uh, tack in how, uh, we're gonna present this. And then it's really about a vision for a modern parks and recreation department here in Lexington because I think, um, from the questions this morning and our, our work over the past six months, there, there, there are a couple of underlying fundamental issues that I wanna bring to your attention. And so in, in moving forward, what is a modern parks and recreation department, and what does it look like? Well, it's, it's, it's the, it's an agency that has wellness and recreation centers, uh, that not only, uh, improve the quality of life through citi- for citizens by helping them live a healthier lifestyle, but it's also a place where people can gather and recreate. It's a place, uh, where you have indoor swimming pools, you have meeting rooms, you have- ... uh, game rooms. Uh, a modern parks and recreation department has a variety of outdoor recreation components. No longer are modern parks and recreation departments building square swimming pools that we all grew up with in, in the '60s and, and, and '70s and even back into the '50s. They're building modern sports complexes, complexes that can host tournaments. This is an example of a 20-field soccer complex in Murfreesboro, Tennessee, a community of about 75,000. They invested $18 million to build this regional attraction to draw soccer tournaments to their community. It's, it's an economic stimulus tool, it's a recreation facility for their community. Community parks, parks that blend a variety of activities, whether it's running tracks, whether it's sports fields, whether it's tennis courts, but they're, they're in a pleasant environment, they're a, a blended facility, uh, and they meet current and modern, uh, activity standards, whether it's sports programs. Miracle fields, fields for challenged population groups where they can come and participate actively with, with able-bodied members of your community, uh, a- and not feel ostracized as, as we did in the, in the years past with, with special needs populations. It's a place where you have a, a system that has rental facilities that are attractive and that can generate revenue for an agency. It's a, it has individual, uh, sports programs such as skate parks and, um, uh, this happens to be a new skate park we did in Bowling Green, um, uh, in one of their parks. But it, it, it provides opportunities for the masses. It, it doesn't simply provide the old team sports programs that many of us grew up with. It has na- nature components, nature preserves, places where you can go out and simply reconnect with nature, uh, de-stress, uh, from, from our busy lifestyles. So that's part of a modern parks facility. Greenways, pathways that connect our homes and neighborhoods to the community a- and to community facilities and they come in all shapes and sizes. Uh, discovery centers, education centers, children's museums, places again where y- where you blend recreation and learning activities in a natural setting and a, and a natural environment. So what are the challenges for the Lexington-Fayette County Parks and Recreation Department? I think it can be summed up in, in these few bullet statements. You need to convert a 1960s model parks agency into a modern parks department. Fundamentally change the method of capital investment in parks. City leadership, uh, i- it's, it's needed to shift and change policies impacting the development and delivery of parks and park programs and then embrace a new way to manage parks. So let me take those individually, um, very quickly. The 1960s model is the park system that you have out there today. Most of your parks inside New Circle Road, with the exception of few of your larger community parks, were built in the '50s and the '60s and the '70s, and they are still being managed and maintained and facilities that are there are being replaced with very similar facilities without a reflection of what a modern parks department looks like. It's time to, uh, one of our recommendations is to remaster plan many of your urban parks because you still have sports fields and tennis courts and things that, that are tied to the, the sports leagues that you ran many years ago. Many of those facilities are underutilized and through remaster planning, you can pick up valuable green space for passive recreation opportunities, for dog parks, for open play, and also to reprogram to reflect the population, uh, entities that you have in those communities by, by building, uh, men's sports fields, uh, where you currently have youth sports fields and things like that. So you need to take your 1960s model park system and move it into a modern system with modern facilities. Fundamentally change the method of capital investment. You are unique and all the agencies I've worked with over my 24-year career, with the amount of dependence that you have on having other entities build your capital for you, the example of youth sports groups being, b- being the builder of the actual sports facilities is unique t- in my career. Uh, many of, many of the, uh, facilities you have, uh, and continue to have through your agreements with youth sports groups, they're paying for those. That's highly unusual and it leads to some, uh, management difficulties, it leads to perceptions through our interviews of, of inequality among, uh, access to facilities. So fundamentally, you need to, to change and become the capital builder of your recreation facilities rather than farming that out to, to different groups. The city leadership, in the management audit that you did, it suggested new strategies for bringing parks online faster and we agree with all of those recommendations. But it, it's gonna require this body to change policies in purchasing which allows larger contracts to be let together. It allows for change orders to be processed on construction without having to come back to this body for vote. It allows a process where you could streamline the selection of consultants to move projects on faster, but all of those activities ha- cannot happen within the parks department, those activities have to... ... to happen at this level, and we support all of those. And then embrace a new way to manage, um, to manage the, the parks department. And, and we made a lot of recommendations on staff reassignments, new ways to approach things. We've recommended a time and motion study for your maintenance department to see that you're operating in a, a, uh, your efficiency levels. We've, we've, we are recommending that you divide the county into districts for maintenance. There's a lot of time being lost on the roads. In part, again, it goes back to the capital investment. You have two maintenance compounds, two primary maintenance compounds for parks and rec. One is, uh, um, is what they call North Base. It's downtown. It, it was a, probably a public works facility before it became a parks facility. The other's at Masterson, where you inherited barns. So, so your maintenance staff are, are based in parks, based on the facilities that were there, not because it makes sense for them to be there. So that, th- fundamentally looking at why and where you are, embracing new ways to manage your parks will help drive down your overall operating cost, uh, but also improve your efficiency. So to take it a step further- ... uh, you know, investing in Hisle Park. Um, uh, Jerry mentioned the public meetings we held. Uh, we presented this master plan to the public, and they said we, we nailed it. It is a park that is primarily passive. It has walking trails, it has equestrian trails, and it has facilities for, for summer day camps and after-school programs. It's 280 acres of basically a natural park. Uh, the primary physical improvements are, are some water and sewer improvements, providing parking areas for equestrian vehicles and trailers, and, and, and starting a satellite riding program. You're turning away children at, at Masterson because you, you have maxed out your capacity to pro- to offer riding programs there, and Hisle Park gives you a grand opportunity to expand your riding programs and your summer camp programs, which you're also turning, uh, children away from. Uh, as far as our tier one priorities, uh, you have a 10-plus-year-old master plan for Cardinal Run North. It's desperately needed for implementation for, uh, uh, additional soccer and multi-use fields. Uh, again, Hisle Farm, uh, developing renovation master plans for your downtown and urban parks, increasing the rate of greenway development. I probably heard more frustration th- through the interview process about the speed at which greenways are being developed. Um, developing a youth football complex. Uh, you're playing on a lot of your outfields, which is wearing them out of your baseball fields. Uh, stop building the neighborhood association buildings. These are a drain on your operating costs. Um, you know, again, that's a 1960s model facility. People, m- uh, in parks and recreation agencies are not building standalone little neighborhood buildings anymore, because those are being provided by the developer and the new subdivisions as they come online. But, but you still have a, a large number of those and are continuing to build them. Consolidate park staff is one of our recommendations. Up- update the, the Lakeside and Takes Creek golf courses so that they can, they can cashflow and become revenue-neutral. Um, implement staff and organizational changes. Um, change the purchasing procedures. I've mentioned that, uh, uh, already. Conduct a, an aquatics facility audit. In the, all of the public input we've done, senior centers and indoor programming space are in the top 10 every study we do. Whether it was public meetings, whether it was interviews, whether it was statistically valid surveys, and whether it was internet web-based surveys, swimming and indoor facilities was in the top 10 list. Um, and so, uh, identify new and, and potential revenue sources. We've discussed that in detail, uh, in the plan, but, but, but you are in a similar position to where you were in 1998, that because you do not have dedicated capital funding, your, your infrastructure needs and your deferred maintenance needs are in the hundreds of millions of dollars. So we have recommended, and, and obviously it's not a, a great economic time, but this is a ten-year plan that, that, that you fund this deferred maintenance, that you defer, that you fund new community centers and indoor programming spaces. And the only way you're gonna be able to do that is through a bond program. And, and, and just two community centers, uh, modern community centers, as I, I showed you, would be in the, you know, they run from $12 to $20 million each, depending on what you build. So that's half of the budget that we have proposed. So, um, tier two, um, uh, priorities, uh, conduct, um, um, surveys of performance. Again, uh, continue development at, at Hisle Farm and Cardinal Run North, upgrade your aquatics facilities, extreme sports, and continue playgrounds. And then the tier three is renovating community parks and continuing greenway development. And then begin replacements. Your Cardinal Run Park, which you developed in 19-, um, uh, well, I guess in nine- in 2000, you're gonna be looking at renovation needs there by the time we get to the end of this ten-year plan. Mister- So with that, I'll take questions. Thank you very much. Any questions for Mister Camp? All right, um, is, if our list is working now, Council Member McCord. O- okay, I just saw Council Member Lawless' name. Oh Okay, sorry, sorry. I, I, I'll use my technical term again, if need be- ... to describe the situation, but, uh- I'm pretty sure- ... I think we're rolling now. Okay. Council Member McCord. I, I, I really appreciate all the work, uh, that's, that's gone into this, Chris, and, and appreciate you spending time with me individually and, and, uh, as we go through this and, you know, this is, for me, possibly one of the most important, uh, areas. Uh, this is where I've spent a lot of my attention, a lot of the monies, uh, that, that we've brought in outside of this government have, have flowed into parks. Uh, and I feel like that, that, uh, I'm as invested in this a- as, as any council member and, you know, uh, some things that I heard this morning, um, I, I love what you said, Chris, about look for the areas where you're turning people away. You're winning there. Go ahead and start looking at, at putting resources in those types of, of situations. Uh, you know, grouping our, our, our parks into certain districts and so forth, which is a little bit of Back to the Future. We, we did group them, but it was more geographic than it was urban, suburban and rural. Um, so I, I really appreciate some of these things. What... As we came into the meeting this morning, none of us had seen anything but, uh, just the executive summary. We had not even had a chance to, to see that. I would ask Jerry, if you can make sure every council member has a, has a bound copy of that big, thick document, that would be very helpful, uh, as we move forward. Um, you know, Ch- Chris, you said master plan, you know, what is a parks master plan? What is, what is that? Mm-hmm. Uh, I personally feel like it should inspire a- and, and, uh, I think that what we ha- what we have in our community right now is, uh, a lack of inspiration. I think we have a terrible morale issue inside and outside of government. Um, I think to call it anything else is, is we're just sugarcoating it, but, but I'll call it what it is. We've got a, a morale prob- problem. And, um, one of the things that, that's wasn't in your report is, yes, we have a, a 1960, '70 version of parks and we've got to convert it to a modern day situation and that has some very unique challenges given lack of money and things like that. Um, but we also had a phenomenal parks program in the '60s, '70s and '80s and a, a national model in a lot of ways. High morale, highly qualified, highly professional folks dedicated, uh, and saw our parks as a tremendous PR tool. Now we've grown, uh, we've exploded in population. Uh, we are going to continue to grow. We're going to get more people over the age of 55, as you pointed out, and, uh, there's a couple of things that I think Council Member, uh, Stennet is going to make a motion to, to give us some time to digest this and put it into planning, but I, I just wanted to, uh, to go on record and say that as I'm looking at this, I'm looking at a parks master plan, uh, that is very administrative, um, heavy, very, "Let's shift around positions and things like that." And while I know we have to do that, um, you know, that, that to me is, okay, fine, we can call this that and so forth and so on. Does that really inspire us and move us forward? Um, you know, funding, and I said going into the RFP on this that what I was going to grade this on was how creative were we about funding and how could we look at different ways to bring in money. And, you know, one of the things that's interesting is the community has said over and over and over, "We want trails, trails, trails, trails," equestrian, bike and pedestrian, mountain bike. They want more of it. Uh, and I'm so grateful for this council and this mayor that have decided that, that we're going to start putting money towards that. But I really think that, that when we focus on, on trails, not only are we meeting a community need, we can meet a lot of those programming needs you identified for us 'cause it's for people of all ages and stages and, and, um, but it's also a critical area where we can get funding. And this is one place people want to give money to. But we got a fundamental problem and it, it, we don't address it in this parts master plan and I want it to be on the record that, that I'm diving into this and I'm looking at it because in our, in our '08, '09 budget, when you go to Parks and Recreation and you look at objectives and activities that we're gonna be doing, one of them says, "Encourage private investment in parks." And we're gonna develop a marketing plan in six months to address this and do a more specific, uh, approach. We're gonna approach businesses and interested parties about investing in parks. And when you dive down into this, this big thick document, what it shows is we, we got out of our, our sponsorship and financial so forth, about $150,000 in in-kind and monetary, uh, donation. That's less than 1% of park's $18 million budget last year. Y- you know, that- that's not inspiring. Here's the other problem. If we, if someone came in tomorrow and offered us a million dollars to name the trail system after themselves, we really don't have a, a way to take that money in. We have no way of naming it or saying who names it and so forth and so on. So while certainly there's naming rights opportunities and these other things, w- what, what I'd like to see is I'd like to see how other communities are doing it. What are these private side options? 'Cause we know government can't do it. We've grown to a place it won't work. So as we dig into this and that, I'm gonna let you make your motion, Council Member Stennet. As we, we dig into this a little bit further, those are some of the things that I'm gonna be asking for or really demanding of this because this document sets the tone, uh, as much as anything we do in downtown. Uh, this document is an economic development piece and if we don't get this right or if it isn't rudder us in the right direction, then we've missed a golden opportunity. So again, Chris, I really appreciate all the work that you put into this and, and really look forward to kind of working with you and digging down a little bit further into it. But thank you. Council Member Stennet. Those were brief comments. Thank you, Council Member McCoy. I appreciate that. I had several other comments to add, but, you know, in light of, of the time of day and also, um, several of us sat through the hour and a half this morning, thank you for coming today. Thank you, Jerry, for delivering this report to us. Um, I know I, I don't want to prohibit anyone else from speaking, but I'll make a motion to go ahead and place this into planning committee so we really can get into this report. It's I don't know how many hundreds of pages, but it's a pretty thick packet and there's no way we're gonna be able to cover all of it today given the timeframe. So moved. Second. I have a motion by Council Member Stennet and a second by Council Member Gordon to refer the matter to the planning committee. Any discussion on the motion to refer? All in favor then please say aye. Aye. Oppose no? Motion carries. Also, I didn't know if it'd be appropriate to go ahead and make the motion to do the $150 million worth of bonds. Yes, sir. Would that be your recommendation? Just 50. Just 50 million? Okay. Thank you, Mayor. Uh, I think we may have some workers' comp claims from the folks on the back row up there, uh, as we try to figure out how to spend this. Yeah, thank you. All right, um, that takes us down now to the, uh, um, well, I'm not sure where we are from a, uh, procedural point of view. Now it's been referred to the, um, to the planning committee. Um, does anybody care to, I mean, is there somebody else that wishes to speak? Yes, ma'am. Since I was on the list, I just simply wanted to thank Chris before he leaves town again. Uh, I've enjoyed working with you on the Parks Board on this issue, and thanks for all your hard work. All right. If there's nothing further, we'll proceed to, um, um, council reports. And first person I have is Council Member Gordon. Thank you, Mayor. I move approval of the Neighborhood Development Fund List. Second. Any discussion? All in favor, please say aye. Aye. All oppose no? Motion carries. And, uh, the Stormwater Fee Task Force will meet February 26th, that's next week, from 9:00 to 11:00 AM in the council chamber. Thank you. Thank you. Council Member Stennet. Thank you, Mayor. Just a few items. Uh, one, council members, I'll be placing into your boxes the, uh, council links, um, tomorrow, actually by email. We'll get those to everybody. Um, I can give a preview if you'd like. It's, it's kind of like seeing the NCAA tournament, but, uh, uh, I'll just wait and, um, put th- that information in your mailbox unless anybody wants me to read out the links here now. Good. Um, one, uh, we are having lane closures for those people that live in the Liberty Road, Todds Road/Man O' War corridor, uh, due to the Cadence Health Center sewer work. We are not widening that road from Todds to Palumbo or from Liberty to Palumbo down Todds. Um, that road is simply closed, uh, until March 26th, off and on, uh, for sewer line work. So we've received several calls this morning, uh, 'cause it was the first morning it was closed. Uh, they are working on the traffic lights in that area to make sure we can get as m- many cars through that Liberty, Todds, or Liberty, Man O' War intersection as possible, but for those people watching tonight, that is the reason why that road's closed. And so please have patient with, patience, uh, with us as we work through that area to get those folks on the sewer system. Also tonight, we'll have the Hamburg, um, which is the Schetelons and Westwind Neighborhood Association meeting at 6:30 at Residence Inn there in Hamburg. And also next Monday night, and Mayor, thank you for agreeing to be there with us, we'll have the, uh, Sixth District Presidents Meeting at 6:30, uh, at Spitz Center and College, and Vice Mayor, you're invited, as well as my other at-large council members. Uh, please feel free to attend to have all the neighborhood presidents there, so you can address them if you'd like. And then also I'll be putting in the council members' boxes, uh, the resolution according to the, or referring to the World Equestrian Games and signage, signage issue. Uh, I did not have a chance to do that last week, but I will put that in your box tomorrow as well. That's all, Mayor. Thank you. Thanks. Council Member Ellinger. Thank you, Mayor. I want to thank, um, last Tuesday, David Christerson and Bill Embry Senior for putting on the workshop for the tax, or for the Affordable Housing Trust Fund. And then Vice Mayor, I'd like to make a motion that we, that you form, or I guess just ask you to form a task force for the Affordable Housing Trust Fund. And the issue that came out of that is the funding for that. So if you would, um, create a task force, I would appreciate it. I don't think I, do I need a motion at this point, or you can just, you can just create one, correct? Thank you, Mayor. Thank you. Council Member Martin. Mr. Mayor, thank you. As reported in today's Herald Leader, uh, former Mayor Pam Miller's husband, Dr. Ralph Miller, was seriously injured in a hang gliding accident in Mexico City last week. Uh, the paper indicated that Dr. Miller is in critical condition, but improving. Our thoughts and prayers are with Mayor Miller and her family, and we hope that Dr. Miller makes good progress in recovering from these serious injuries. Uh, on a much lighter note, my daughter, Ellie is six years old today, and I wanted to wish her a very happy birthday. Thank you. Thank you. Great photo. Council Member Blues. Thank you, Mayor. A couple of, um, neighborhood association announcements. This Thursday, February 19th, 7:00 PM, the Melrose Oak Park Neighborhood Association will meet at the, uh, at the Thompson Road Baptist Church, and at the same time, same night, Spiegel Heights Neighborhood Association will meet at Antioch Baptist Church on Ferguson Street. Then next week, Monday, February 23, the Oakwood Neighborhood Association will meet at 7:00 PM in the community center in Oakwood Park, and at the same time, 7:00 PM in the community center at Marlboro Park, the Marlboro Radcliffe Neighborhood Association will meet. Look forward to seeing folks at those, uh, those neighborhood associations if I can get to, uh, all of them at the same time. Thank you, Mayor. Council Member Fragle. Thank you, Mayor. I don't really have a report, but I do, um, have a motion. Uh, in your box, I, I put a resolution, uh, that we've talked about before, uh, regarding requesting the airport board members to come before the council. And so I would move that, uh, we place this resolution on the docket for the next meeting. Do I hear a second? We have a second by Council Member Lane. Uh, any discussion on Council Member Figel's motion to add that resolution to the docket? If you didn't- But- ... have a copy of it, I have more copies. Vice Mayor Gray. Um, in my report, I was gonna give d- some new information related to the same, uh, subject. Uh, Council Member Figel, um, might as well do that. I got a call, I guess, a couple hours ago from, um, State Auditor Crit Lewellen. And she said that she's, um, that her audit is, um, ready to be, um, um, distributed, uh, shared with the airport board and with, uh, the public and with the council. And she asked, in fact, I was gonna ask y'all if you got your calendar. She asked if, um, she requested a specific time, um, for meeting with the council, and in a special meeting next Wednesday at 1:00. Not tomorrow, but the following. I think that's the 25th. And we're really operating on her schedule here. I belie- there's a statutory requirement that she's, uh, obligated to. And so that's, that's the, uh, time that she asked for to meet with us, 1:00 on the 25th, um, here. There's an MPO meeting scheduled for 1:30 that afternoon here in the chambers. Um, what time did you say she wanted to meet? She said 1:00. Um, how ab- Um, do you have any idea how long that meeting will last? Maybe an hour? Could we shift things here? Well, why don't, why don't we see if she could come at 12:30? And if she can't, then we'll see if we can move the MPO meeting back until 2:00. And, uh- Okay. ... one way or the other, shoehorn it in. Okay. I'll ask. So if you would, mark your calendars from 12:30 until 2:00. And hopefully, we'll be able to provide a little specificity about that in the next day or so. And we'll work with the clerk's office to get a notice out. Now, I guess, the question on the floor is Ms., is Council Member Figel's motion to, uh, add that resolution to the docket. Well, in, in light of the new information, I would withdraw my motion. All right. Anything further? All right, Council Member McCord. Thank you, Mayor. Just a brief announcement about Stonewall Neighborhood Association. Their annual meeting is, uh, two weeks from tonight, Tuesday, March 3rd at Stonewall Elementary, uh, at 7:00. Uh, everyone is, is welcome. And as I had said last week also, uh, it's great to hear stories of, of really good things that came out of the ice storm. And one of the best stories so far, uh, that's, that's making the rounds, it was in the paper this weekend, but, uh, but it's an amazing, uh, testament to what happens when somebody steps up and leads and does the right thing at the right thing, at, at the right time. Uh, Jim Sawyer, who owns Sawyer's Restaurant right here on, on Main Street, uh, was going home one night during the middle of the ice storm, and, uh, it, it was four degrees outside. He noticed that the, the guys from KU were out stringing lines, uh, in the freezing cold. And, and it just struck him that, uh, you know, he needed to do something to say thank you. And so he got it in his mind that he would just offer, uh, coupons at the end of, of their work, uh, to come in and have, have a free meal on him. And, um, there's about 108, 88 or 180 some odd, uh, free meals that he has, he has passed out, uh, to those folks and just saying his personal thanks to those that worked during some really tough times. And, uh, and it was funny, I saw Jim today, and he was saying, "You know, it's just, it was just the right thing to do." Uh, and he said, "I'm amazed now that people are coming to me asking how they can be involved in, in helping these, these folks and saying thanks as well." So my, my hat is off to Jim Sawyer as, uh, you know, he's certainly somebody that has a long history in this town and is kind of the mayor of that end of the, of Main Street. And, uh, he's just, uh, he's, he's one of those people that, uh, really stepped up and, and showed, uh, what being neighborly is all about. And I just appreciate him and wanted to, uh, to let folks know. Thank you, Mayor. Vice Mayor Gray, do you have anything further? All right, uh, Council Member Wallace. Uh, yes, after, uh, reading more about the Big Blue Horse and, um, being pretty excited about that campaign that's going on, I'd like to move, make a motion that we, uh, put into planning, the planning committee, looking at the Big Blue Horse for our branding and marketing of Lexington. Is there any discussion? All in favor, please say aye. All opposed, no. Motion carries. Anything further, Council Member Wallace? Council Member James. Thank you, Mayor. Wanted to, um, remind council members, it did not get on the calendar of meetings for some reason this week. But on Thursday the 19th at 4:00 is, um, what we're calling the DMC Workshop. It's the disproportionate minority confinement workshop. Um, this is a group of, uh, folks that work with youth, um, youth services, um, a couple of the judges that deal with family court. And they're gonna come talk with us about the disproportionate minority confinement and some things that we can do as an urban county government to help, um, eliminate or to help eliminate that disparity. So that's on the council, um, fifth floor conference room- 4:00 on Thursday. It's -- it'll be immediately following the planning, um, the joint planning meeting that will go on that afternoon. I also have two issues I need to put into committees. Um, the first issue, um, I'll just give a little bit of background. The Tree Board has been working, and you may have been reading in the newspaper about the Heritage Tree Program, and they're identifying some of the older trees in Lexington and working with the Department of Law. They've come, um ... Some of the members of the Tree Board have come up with an ordinance to actually begin this Heritage Tree Program. So I make a motion to place into the Planning Committee, um, an ordinance, a draft ordinance relating to the Heritage Tree Program. Is there a second? I have a- Thank you. ... second from Council Member Ehlinger. Uh, any discussion? All in favor say aye. Aye. Oppose no? Motion carries. Thank you, Mayor. And my last motion, uh, for committee, several of us met with, um, some folks related to the apprenticeship program, uh, dealing with construction, um, and through the, um, relating to some of the trades, the construction trade. And w- they're working with law, um, economic development on an ordinance. We had a draft. We had a, a discussion about that draft, and by the time we hear this in committee, it will probably be ready, um, for a full discussion. So I make a motion to place into intergovernmental the draft ordinance relating to, um, construction apprenticeship programs. I have a motion and a second to refer that item to the Intergovernmental Committee. Any discussion? All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Oppose no? Motion carries. And lastly, I just would like to thank, uh, council members for supporting, um, for those of you that supported the reimbursement resolution moving forward to the docket on behalf of the First District. Um, this is a monumental day, um, historic day, um, uh, just to get it on the docket, and I appreciate you moving forward with that. Thank you, Mayor. Thanks. Does any other council member wish to make a report? There a... I see none. There's no mayor's report today, so, uh, we're down to public comment on issues not on the agenda. Does anyone wish to address the council? I see none. We'll entertain a motion to adjourn. So moved. So moved. We have a motion by Council Member Blues and a second by Council Member McCord to adjourn. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Oppose no? Motion carries. Thank you. See you, man. Take it to the people. Ooh.