To dribble again, once he stopped his possession or movement, and he can't put the ball back down on the floor, he has to pass this to his teammate or get rid of it, therefore it was double dribbling. When I made my pass to the teammate, the man, the defensive player was already set, therefore I can't run through the man, therefore it's called charging. Possession the other way. Our last and final call of the day was a blocking call. I passed the ball off to my teammate The defender was not set in his proper spot He was moving into me Therefore it's a blocking call possession the other way All the rules we just went over today Rules of the game However at some levels of play Especially during our parks and rec leagues And some intermediate leagues at the smaller age group Some of these plays might not be called Because of the kids age group Therefore the kids are allowed to pick the ball up and dribble and walk and things like that. But just remember, at the younger age group, some of these rules might not be caught. If you have any questions about the rules we want over today, feel free and please call our Aflac Department at 288-2900. Thank you. Have a good day. You've been watching Rules of the Game, brought to you by Parks and Recreation. You're watching Government Channel 3, your award-winning link to the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government. Watch us online at lexingtonky.gov. Save money. Save fuel. Save nature. When driving, don't drive over 55. You'll get an average of 35 miles per gallon when you drive 55. For every mile per hour faster than 55, fuel economy will drop by 1%. The faster you go, the faster the fuel goes. Take the bus. You'll meet new people. And maybe your next best friend. Use a bicycle to get to work or play. By using a bicycle, you contribute nothing to the carbon footprint, and you receive the benefits of exercise and fresh air. So, save money, save fuel, save nature. Here's a broad idea. Install a rain barrel and go green while saving some green. It's an easy and excellent way to help the environment and conserve one of our most precious resources, water. They help prevent water pollution and flooding by directing stormwater from your roof into the rain barrel. When you use a rain barrel, you are also helping save water when your plants and lawn need nourishment. So visit RainBarrelGuide.com to learn about this easy way to go green. This bright idea about going green is brought to you by the Department of Environmental Quality and the Division of Water and Air. The Son of a Kentucky Frontiersman, Abraham Lincoln had to struggle for a living and for learning. Five months before receiving his party's nomination for president, he sketched his life. I was born February the 12th, 1809 in Hardin County, Kentucky. My parents were both born in Virginia of very undistinguished families, second families, perhaps I should say. My mother died in my 10th year and was of a family of the name of Hanks and my father removed from Kentucky to Indiana in my 8th year. It was a wild region with many bears and other wild animals still in the woods. There I grew up. Of course when I became of age I did not know how much. Still somehow I could read, write, and cipher. But that was all. Lincoln made extraordinary efforts to attain knowledge while working on a farm, splitting rails for fences, and keeping store at New Salem, Illinois. He was a captain in the Blackhawk War, spent eight years in the Illinois legislature, and rode the circuit of courts for many years. His law partner said of him, his ambition was a little engine that knew no rest. He married Mary Todd. They had four boys, only one of whom lived to maturity. In 1858, Lincoln ran against Stephen A. Douglas for senator. He lost the election. But in debating with Douglas, he gained a national reputation and won him the Republican nomination for president in 1860. As president, he built the Republican Party into a strong national organization. Further, he rallied most of the Northern Democrats to the Union cause. On January 1, 1863, he issued the Emancipation Proclamation that declared forever free those slaves within the Confederacy. Lincoln never let the world forget that the Civil War involved an even larger issue. This he stated most movingly in dedicating the military cemetery at Gettysburg. That we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain. That this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom. That government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth. Lincoln won re-election in 1864, as Union military triumphs heralded the end to the war. In his planning for peace, the president was flexible and generous, encouraging Southerners to lay down their arms and join speedily in the Union. The spirit that guided him was clearly that of his second inaugural address, now inscribed on one wall of the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C. with malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in to bind up these nations' wounds. On Good Friday, April 14, 1865, Lincoln was assassinated at Ford's Theater in Washington by John Wilkes Booth, an actor who somehow thought he was helping the sound. The opposite was the result. For with Lincoln's death, the possibility of peace with magnanimity died. Thank you. Thank you. We'll be right back. It's hotter than a hoochie-coochie. We laid rubber on the Georgia asphalt. We got a little crazy, but we never got caught. Down by the river on a Friday night, pyramid of cans and a pale moonlight. Talking about cars and dreaming about women. Never had a plan just to live in for the minute. Yeah, way down yonder on the Chattanooga, you never knew how much that muddy water meant to leave. But I learned how to swim, and I learned who it was. A lot about living and a little about love Well, I parked up the windows in my old shed I was willing when she wasn't ready So I settled for a burger and a grape snow cone Topped her off early but I didn't go home Down by the river on a Friday night Pyramid of cans and the pale moonlight Talking about cars and dreaming about women Never had a plan just to live in for the minute Yeah, I went down yonder home to Chattapoochee Never knew how much the muddy water meant to me But I learned how to swim and I learned who I was I'm all about living and a little about love We're way down yonder on the Chattapoochee It gets hotter than a hoochie coochie We laid rubber on the Georgia asphalt We got a little crazy, but we never got caught. guitar solo This is the Budget and Finance Committee meeting. For those of you who are here in regards to the budget and finance issues, welcome. And thank you for being here today with us. We got a pretty full agenda, so I'm going to try to keep everyone on task and try to follow our agenda as close as possible. Hopefully, council members have their copy with them. And today, we're going to start off with a brief presentation from Council Member David Stevens, or former Council Member David Stevens, Dr. David Stevens, who also used to be chair of this committee. Dr. Stevens is going to review the equine task force recommendations that we finished the calendar year 2008 off with in our last meeting. And he's going to review some of those with the hopes that we're able to continue some of this work. Obviously, we don't want the work to be forgotten. We want to be able to continue a lot of those recommendations. So I'll turn the floor over to Dr. Stevens to give us a brief summary of the recommendations. Thank you, Mr. Stenet and members of the Budget and Finance Committee. It's good to see you again, from this point of view at least. And I want to talk a little bit about John Gaines. John Gaines had this idea that we underwrite and subsidize economic development in a lot of different ways. But he thought that the key to our signature industry is the stallion farms. and the stallions that stand in the central Kentucky region. And he thought we should also undertake some economic development to help those farms get started to prosper. And he presented this to the council a couple times, and after the second time, it was kind of languishing. and so the budget and finance committee asked the resolution asking the vice mayor at the time, who was Mike Scanlon, to appoint a task force, and if you could put up a second, please, a task force to review this subject and see what could, and collect the facts and knowledge about it and see what could be done. And listed are the people who are on the task force from the College of Agriculture, from the accounting industry, from the farm manager, two people from the council, Mr. Ed Lane and myself. We also had David Lord from the Lexington Convention Visitors Bureau. Polkman Lane, who represented a horse farm owner. Nick Nicholson, of course, who's now the chairman and CEO at Keeneland. Frank Penn who is a farmer here in our community also on the Lexington Commission Planning and Zoning Commission. He has a small general farm operation but also has some mayors that he stands on his farm. David Schweitzer, who's the chief executive for the Kentucky Thoroughbred Association and the Kentucky Thoroughbred Owners and Breeders Association, as well as Bill Thomason, who is one of the managers of Mill Ridge Farm. This commission met, our task force met over the course of about two years and interviewed and received comments from various people. We were assisted by the people on this next list who kept minutes and prepared them, and Bob Quick and Frank Penn were the co-chairs. Following the completion of this task force business, a presentation was put together, which the council received last fall, referred it to the Budget and Finance Committee, which we went over in November, and we're going to, in the last meeting in December, compile a list of things the council might be able to do and the urban county government to help this initiative. Unfortunately, we didn't get that accomplished by the December 9th meeting, So over the holiday and the recess, Jerry Southers and I got together and did a little research. We did interview David Schweitzer and went over the report with him. We also went to the Lexington Convention Visitors Bureau and talked to David Lard. And I went over to Frankfurt to meet with Mr. Larry Hayes. Mr. Hayes, he works in the governor's office, and he's kind of in charge of economic development for the state at this time. So then we came up with this list of things which you see. I hope you can read that better than I, but it's on the first page of your docket. And the things we thought would be helpful would be to consider an office which would represent not just Fayette County, but represent Woodford, Scott, and Bourbon in Fayette County and be responsible for the thoroughbred breeding industry in those various counties. Mr. Hayes thought that was a good idea and thought that the state might be able to help that get done. Of course, we're in economic distress right now. We don't have any money, and I think you'll get a report later confirming that. but this is something that probably would be helpful if we could get somebody who would be knowledgeable about the horse industry who could work in that area. We also thought somebody needs to keep the ball rolling on this and we need a cheerleader and I talked to some of the people involved and they think that the Kentucky Thoroughbred Owners and Breeders Association might be the appropriate group to do that. The University of Kentucky, as you know, is increasing their equine options, and they're developing an equine center, and will develop a campus out at Coldstream, actually, to be involved with this kind of work. And we need to partner with UK in that as we can. And I think if the suburban county government and the UK gets together, the outcome can be improved greatly. Number four says initiated analysis and support for breeding financing incentives for breeding and racing. And, of course, what the thoroughbred groups would like for you to do is to think about putting some slot machines in the racetracks or even casinos, and they're ready to do that should the opportunity come along. As you know, Mr. Stumbo has introduced a bill in the General Assembly that's currently meeting, considering placing slot machines, or slot, I guess there are more than slot machines now, in the racetracks. Whether that will go anyplace or not, we don't know. One of the things that we have are strong veterinary hospitals here in central Kentucky. They have a big investment in their plants, facilities, and industrial revenue bonds would be very useful to development of things like that. However, for some reason, which is not clear to me, they are not allowed for that. And I think that you could initiate an investigation to see why they're not and maybe get that changed. and I think you need to maintain some surveillance of various things, such as the purchase of development rights. We did talk to Mr. Lord, as I said, Jerry and I, and we're confident that he has the tourism part under his control and direction, and they're moving forward on that. The Blue Horse, which is a coloration of the thoroughbred Lexington, is moving along, So that seems to be in pretty good shape. But whatever the city can do to help would be great. And the final thing would be to work with the state, as I mentioned, Larry Hayes and others in the governor's office, to facilitate the help for that industry. Mr. Chairman, I'm happy to leave this in your hands because I know that you and the committee will carry this thing forward and see that what you consider to be worthwhile will be done. I will be happy to try and answer any questions, should there be any. Do we have any questions from the committee? Dr. Stevens-Wine is here about the recommendations. Senator Gordon. Just a comment, David. You may or may not know that last week the issue of the blue horse for our city branding has been moved into planning committee so that we can move forward on that item. Well, that's great. I'm glad to hear that it's out of the starting gate, so to speak. Out of the barn. Moving along, I know that it seemed like a good idea to me. And, of course, we had it presented to the council workshop a couple months ago. There weren't many of us there, but I thought it was a great idea. I'm looking forward to getting a Blue Horse. Vice Mayor Gray. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Welcome, Dr. Stevens again. Welcome back, I suppose. Thank you. You may have said this and I missed it. But what role is the Fayette Alliance, what role does Fayette Alliance have in ongoing support or encouragement sustaining this work? Well, the Fayette Alliance's primary mission, I think, has been to support the PDR program. Of course, they're getting involved now in infill and redevelopment, as you noted, because they feel if we have adequate infill and redevelopment, will take the pressure off the urban service boundary and make it less likely to expand. But their original purpose was to support the PDR initiative, which is doing very well. So I guess my question really relates to the recommendations for ongoing constituency support for this and who's sitting around that table. And I guess one of the reasons for that is that Fayette Alliance seems to have done a pretty effective job at bringing together different voices and different constituencies around the land preservation issues and also the equine industry to some extent. So is there any suggestion on that, Mr. Chairman? I'm just saying who's around the table, basically. I would hope it would be around the table with room for everybody. Yeah. I think that's one of the things we need to do after today's meeting, is sit down 1-2-8 and kind of put a who's going to head up each one. Like, for instance, 6, Fed Alliance, for instance, does do what 6 talks about, monitors the PDR program. Of course, Councilman Gordon said 7 is already in planning committee. I think we can do the same exercise on the rest of those. So that probably needs to be done after today, and we can keep a follow-up with each of those groups and see where we're at on each recommendation. If you would like, I would be happy to see if Mr. Quick and Mr. Penn and some others from this task force would meet with you. We can do that. Definitely. Yes, sir. That would be great. Happy to come back. I know the way. Is that it, Vice Mayor? Council Member James. Thank you, Chair. Dr. Stevens, I'm wondering, and this may have been in some previous information, but I'm wondering the attachment or the connection locally for the Urban County government, how much money locally is based on the equine industry? Like how much of our revenues are based on equine industry currently? I'm sorry, but I don't know the answer to that question. I guess, and maybe you don't know the answer, but is there someone that keeps track of that? Is there a clear connection? Yes, there is, and I'm told that it's over a billion-dollar industry for our county. For our county? Yes. Okay. Okay. And on the task, the consideration items here, I don't see Fayette County Public Schools listed here. Do you know if there's conversation as to how, you know, part of our sustainability is going to be getting our youth engaged in the things that could potentially lead to a revenue stream? Do you know if there's conversation with Fayette County Public Schools or the Kentucky Department of Education on getting equine taught on primary and intermediate levels? No, though there is some activity by the U of K and their equine initiative. And as you know, they have a program at Midway College which can teach people how to be grooms and how to work with horses. So that's a good idea and certainly should be pursued. Okay. Is the steering committee still kind of up and running, or have you all dissolved? Well, we've gone our separate ways. Okay. I don't know if we're dissolved yet, but at least we're not meeting. I did talk to someone this morning, and they would be happy to convene again if that were to be indicated. Okay. And the rural settlements is something I know when Council Member Schaefer was here, I ended up with tons of research, boxes of research on the rural settlements. And I know that a lot of those rural settlements were supportive. They were the supportive industries to the horse farms. And I'm wondering, during your conversations with the steering committee, did you all talk about the role of rural settlements and how you could engage them and involve them? That would bring in some of that diversity component that I think our equine industry is in need of. No, I don't recall that we talked about that specifically, though we did recognize the importance of Little Georgetown and Texas and places like that in the development of our community and its equine industry. Okay. Chair, I would just like to, as we move forward, I think these are great, you know, eight action items, but I think we can enhance upon them. We've got to show that very clear connection economically, since we are the Budget and Finance Committee, that there is an economic reason for us locally to do anything with this. And also I'd like to see us kind of challenge ourselves that rural settlement pursuit is something that I think is set on a shelf for way too long. And how can we, as we move forward, how can we bring those valuable assets of rural settlements so that we don't lose those and encourage the conversation with Fayette County Public Schools for that primary and intermediate so that we can perpetuate the equine feel in the area to our children. Thank you. Excellent suggestion. And when we get together to divvy up some of those tasks, I think the educational piece is a real key, as well as the financial impact on effect county LFUCG will be a definite topic for this committee. I have Council Member Beard. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Dr. Stevens, item number one on that list of activities was Clark County and Jessamine County invited to the table, or were these other counties, have they been involved all along, or are you suggesting they be involved? There are horse farms in Jessamine County, and there are horse farms in Clark County, not many and not as many as you find in Bourbon and Woodford and such. No. The reason we put down those four counties, we thought they might be able to help with financing of such an activity because of the concentration of farms in those counties. I certainly think that no farms should be overlooked. The ones in Jessamine County, like the Taylors, and a few that are left in Clark County, should be a part of it. But maybe they don't have the resources that they would like to contribute. Maybe they do. I don't know. That may be. I just don't want anybody to get their nose out of joint. I think it needs to be a concerted effort of everybody to push as hard as they can on this. I certainly agree with that. Thank you. That's all I have. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Council Member Henson. Hello, Dr. Stephen. I just have one quick question. I know it mentioned thoroughbred breeding activities, but I was just curious if other breeds were also mentioned, like the standard bread? Yes. At the report we had last October, the sporting horses are now becoming a big part of the activities in our region, so they certainly shouldn't be neglected. Mr. Gaines' idea was about thoroughbred breeding and the importance of the stallions here in central Kentucky. Thank you. Anyone of us wishing to speak today on this topic? Dr. Ellinger. Dr. Stevens, you raised that issue, and I think that would be on number four, the incentive in breeding and racing. Did the state not implement a program where they tax basically the stallion and they put it back into an incentive program so that we help out the Kentucky bred horses? Yes, the tax on stallion services goes through that pot. Right, so how would we go about doing number four, then, if that's not already being presently done in the state? Well, if the thoroughbred and the horse industry decides to make a push in the legislature, certainly the help from this government would be assistance in getting that job. So our support, then? Yes. Okay, thank you. Any other committee members have a question for Dr. Stevens? Dr. Stevens, thank you, sir. Thank you very much for the opportunity to come back and finish up this. And we will hopefully see you soon on this issue and many others. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Okay, next up on our agenda is our monthly financial report and discussion. Mary Pfister is here representing our new and improved financial report that every council member should have. In terms of the way it looks, not necessarily the numbers in the report, But in terms of the way it looks, you'll see a new structure. This is a work in progress, Council Members, in an effort to try to give everyone a better piece of information to look at and see exactly where all of our different accounts are and different revenues. There's some new percentages on there. I won't attempt to go through the whole thing. I know Mary won't either. But if you have any suggestions or input after today, please let us know. But, again, we're just trying to get as much information to committee members out there to make more informed decisions on our budget. So Mary, without further ado. Thank you, Chairman. I'm glad to be here today. As Councilman Stenet said, we have been working to develop a new report. And what we have before you is what we're proposing as the format for each month. So as you can see, this is for the General Services Fund. It's a little different than what you've received in the past because this report contains the general service funds as defined by our comprehensive annual report. So it includes not only what we historically have called general fund as 1101, but it also includes some other small funds that get rolled up when we develop our actual auditive financial statements. So that's the first thing that I want you to know. But the very first page is just a summary of the bullet points of what we feel is important that you need to know, kind of in, you know, 25 words or less, an attempt to tell you what's going on. And then as you turn to the second page, you'll see that it has details. And hopefully it will suffice some of the, I know Councilman Henson had asked for some information by division. So hopefully page two will provide the information at a level of detail so that you can know how by department things are tracking as far as personnel expenses and then operating. It also provides you information on your debt service and capital transfers. And then the last page I know is one that Councilman Lane has got to be happy to see in the package. It actually provides the budget by month, and we are still, as Kevin alluded to, kind of fine-tuning the monthly budgets at a level of detail that we need for these reports. So I'm not going to go through these in great detail, but I'm available to each of you as you go through the reports. If you have recommendations, changes, questions, anything, feel free to contact me and we can walk through any concerns that you might have. The general message that we need to, that you're going to hear today is probably very similar to what Commissioner Cole said in the past. You know, revenues continue to decline. Withholdings have actually, employee withholdings, which is part of the license fee category on the reports that you hold in your hands, have declined. January of 2008 compared to January 2009 reflected a decline of about $2.1 million month to month. Of that, we know that about $1,250,000 was related to some timing things that we can explain, but there's still an $850,000 decline from January of this year to January of last year. Net profits also took a dive down in the month of January, and we continue even though that that is looking strong for the year we have concerns about where that wind up at year-end because we know that there may be payers who are paying in based on last year's taxes tax liability and with the economy the way it is you know there could be foreseen refunds that we will have to do in April and May. On the expense side in personnel I believe last month that you had requested some information regarding where we were related to the retirees and we had budgeted for lump sum payouts 6.4 million dollars for the retirees we were projecting I think 170 retirees in last year's budget our actual lump sum termination payout ended up being around 1.4 million because we had 87 retirees we also had to pay those retirees a payout for their their sick accumulated sick and so that ended up being 1.3 million So in total, related to the 87 retirees that we had for the fiscal year, our actual expenditures were about 2.7. And when you look at the lump sum that we had budgeted of 6.4 less, what we had anticipated pulling out of the economic contingency to cover part of that, we actually have a budget deficit of $765,000. These aren't on those reports. I was just reporting to you the numbers. So without the economic contingency transfer, if we do not do that, we have about $765,000 additional costs in the general fund related to retirees. But the good news is, you know, every January we produce a sick check, we call it, where employees have the opportunity, if they save their sick time, to actually get paid out the additional sick that's accrued through the year for employees who have been here for a long time. And we had budgeted that sick check payout to be $4.7 million in January. It ended up only being $3.6 million. So we had a $1.1 million savings related to the sick check payout, which will be able to go to offset the retiree payout difference. So all in all, we're to the good about $300,000 when you look at that. Does anybody have any questions regarding the retiree numbers? So when you look at retiree lump sum payout with the sick check lump sum payout, we have a positive variance of about $300,000 is my message. Okay. On the operating accounts, we have taken some actions. I think Keena spoke to this last month. specifically in limiting the food purchases out of the general fund. We've actually gone through and tried to standardize some of the uniform purchases so that we can obtain savings off the state contracts on those. And we've enhanced the monitoring on the personal service contracts that we're issuing to make sure that they are absolutely necessary. So because of those actions, we still feel like we can manage through 2009 and, you know, in the year on a positive note or close to even, not very positive. Okay. Does anybody have any questions regarding the monthly report? If you could, before we open up to other questions. On the last page, page three, just kind of if you could summarize January 09, just kind of if you can give us a summary on the license fee permits, the total revenues, personal expenses, operating, just so everyone in public sees where we're at year to date on those numbers. If you can just kind of read those out for us and say if we're positive or negative and by one amount. Okay. Would you mind doing that? For license fee year to date, we actually are up $1.1 million year to date. Again, there are many categories in that over and above the employee withholding, some of which are carrying us. When you say up, you mean ahead of budget or below budget? Because it looks like it's a negative on our chart. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Oh, it's okay. This is all new. We are below budget. We are under budget. I'm sorry, exactly the opposite of what I just said. I'm sorry. The year-to-date actual is actually below what we project our year-to-date budget to be by $1.1 million. Most of that is being driven in the employee withholdings. Employee withholdings, we said, was over $2 million under, and there are other categories that's offsetting that that's coming in stronger than anticipated. So that's the reason why we're only 1.1 under. If you drop down to total revenues, our actual total revenues is $150 million. The budget was $148. So we are strong in our total revenues. On personnel expense, we are actually over budget a little bit by $3.7 million. One of the big areas or drivers of the personnel variance is in the fire and we're working with fire and Commissioner Bennett to come up with an action plan. We've had two meetings already to talk about where they think they'll be as of year end. And then the operating, which does include debt service, and just for future reference, we'll be tweaking this report in this section because I think that including debt service kind of skews the numbers a little bit. But total operating the clients with debt service is actually under budget by $9.4 million. Very good. Thank you for clarifying some of those numbers so we all can understand where we're at on totals. If customers have any questions, can you click in on our screen and we'll try to follow that format. And Vice Mayor Gray. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mary, thank you. I think it's real important that we, just what the chair had asked for, I appreciate him asking for those January numbers because those should give us some indicators, some signals as to what the economy is doing to us, and we need to listen carefully to that. And I'd like to go back to those numbers again. The top of this 8 1⁄2 by 17. This is the spreadsheet here. Okay. I just want to make sure that I understand what you're giving us here. In January, the monthly actual receipts for licenses and license fees and permits, and that includes withholding, employee withholding, what is the payroll tax, right? Okay. Those monthly receipts in January were $8.9 million, correct? Correct. We budgeted $12.3 million, right? Right. All right. This time last year, that number was $12 million, right? Yes. Okay, so we are down $3 million, or roughly 40%, from last year. Right. Now tell us again where that reduction lies. Well, I think that what we saw in January is bringing to light that what Phil O'Meara had been saying for the last few months is coming true. The withholdings was down 2.1 million. So of that 3.4. Of the 3.4, withholding was down 2.1 million. Okay. Okay, and net profits was down bill do you have that number with you? Net profits were down a million Employee withholdings were down 2.1 so 3.1 of the of the 3.4 variants is in those two categories our two largest Okay, all right and those numbers for everyone all the counselors is are on page one of this handout those numbers he just spoke are on page one. In the headlines in the summers? Yes. Yes. And if I could just point out that looking at one month by itself, it is not necessarily the end game. We have to look at everything including year to date and because we're on a cash basis we have timing differences of when major revenues are posted when compared to last year. And when we analyzed that 2.1 million variance in withholdings, we identified where revenues were posted in January last year that had already been deposited in our year-to-date last year. So we were expecting a hard comparison this year. We also found what I call a forward variance where a major employer deposits were processed in January of last year, and were processed in the very first week of February this year. So we identified 1.2 million in two major events to explain part of that 2.1 variance. Okay, so you're saying 50 percent, but even with that, then... We still have a negative January to January. Right, of how much... You know, I tend to believe that businesses are run on percentages, and I'm trying to find the percentage. How much down are we then as a net effect of what you just described based on your best crystal ball? Well, we were down about $800,000 on a base of $7 million last year. So 10%, 12%. Okay. And down to the personnel expenses? that 3.7 million represents about 3% on 100 million. Right. So, and I didn't quite understand what you were saying, Mary, in terms of the explaining where that was, except that some of it's in FIRE over time. We are right now. FIRE is projecting that they are going to be about a million dollars over in their overtime budget. This is year-to-date, so they're projecting for the year a million. Year-to-date, you're $3.7 million. You know, the year-to-date numbers, the $103,000 for this year, includes payouts for retirees, so that would bump that up. I don't know what the number was as of the end of January for just the general fund, but I can tell you as of December 8th, the general fund had 102 vacancies that were budgeted. So you had less positions filled, but you have payouts for the retirees, so that's the reason we're still tracking to last year's January year-to-date number. So because you see last year's personnel was 103.7. Right. And this year we're at 103.3. Previous year, PYTD. Yes. Last year, 103. Okay. Right. Okay. Thank you. Okay. And one other side note on page two, if you look at exactly what Vice Mayor was referring to, if you look under fire and emergency services under payroll, we put together some percentages on the far right columns in terms of what percentage are they added of their actual budget that we put in the budget versus what they actually have incurred in personnel. And you can see they're at 60% of their budget through January of this year. And that's where some of those indicators are. Really, you should be around close to 50%, a little over 50% of your budget. So if we're tracking it as a month-to-month calendar year basis. But that's why we put those percentages in there so everyone can see what percentages of their budgets people or departments are actually into through January. Right. And one of the first things, you know, when I receive this report, one of the first things I do is scan that column that's the third one in, the percent of the annual budget achieved, which is where if you look under fire, you'll see it's 60.5 under personnel. And I compare that to the last column, which is the percent that the prior year end was to the prior year period, which kind of gets to, Vice Mayor, what you were saying as far as being able to know, because there are seasonalities for some divisions. And so this tells you that fire last year was at 54.7%, and this year they're already at 60.5%. Well, absent any explanation, you know, as far as a new event or something that would be driving that, or a major storm, you know, you would think that they should be running for personnel about what they were running last year, and they're not. So those two percentage columns are very useful, I think, in knowing, okay, you know, these numbers are great, but what do they mean? Well, when you see those percents in those two columns being varied from each other, you know that that's an area that you need to look at. Yes. We have customer Elaine. And then anyone else wishing to speak, will you sign in? Thank you. I was just curious. Are there any timing issues where we had three pay periods in one month that would have impacted any of the data for the monthly personnel cost? There were early in the year. There was in July and November. but those right now we have the same number of pay periods in both periods. Okay, so you're feeling the main differential is the retirement cost from people that retire towards the end of the year. Yeah. All right, that's all I had. Thank you very much for your work on this. Councilman Henson. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Mayor, for generating this report. I think it's great. It's what I was looking for. I just had some questions about like police and fire, for instance, and their percentages. I believe police is also up. The ice storm might contribute to that, which would make that we didn't have that last year. So would we get FEMA recovery, some dollars? Yes, these numbers would still include the FEMA personnel costs. We have not moved those off. We've set up, we've designated a special fund and project code to track those with, but they haven't been actually moved out of the departments yet. I have had meetings with police, and they are confident that they can manage to their year-end budget, even with their vacancies. So, you know, I think that while there may be a little bit of a difference, the chief is doing an excellent job in managing. that budget. Thank you, Mary. Anyone else on the committee have any questions for Mary? Councillor Hellinger. This probably is hypothetical, but on the business returns and when we start looking at our refunds, how do you go about budging that? Because if it's a down year and people are paying last year's quarterly and then they come back this year and there's going to be less and we're going to be paying refunds, I think that could be a big hit that we're going to take in April. How do we go about budgeting for that? And Bill, you might be able to, yeah, you want to jump in this one? Well, the quick answer is we didn't because we didn't identify when we were building last year's budget that this kind of a severe economic downturn would happen. But the complete answer is that's why we look every month and project out. And so we're working with the numbers as they come in to try to track that. However, again, it hasn't happened yet, so we're trying to do something of a crystal ball here, and we're identifying that the potential is there. We don't know how large it could be, but it could be significant in the fourth quarter. Yeah, I think that's something we've got to be really concerned about, because I can see that refund coming back and really being a big number. Another question, Mary, on the retirees. We had 170 budget, 87. How many of the 87 were in public safety? Are you cleaning any of that? I do not have that number with me, but I can get that for you. Is 87, that was not for public safety, was it? No, that was. When we budgeted the 170, we didn't budget for public safety, did we? Was that total employees or was that outside? The 170 was total employees. I'm not sure how many were projected in public safety, if any. So I need to check that. I can let you know. Because for some reason I was thinking that if for public safety we would add and subtract, when we were looking at about, I think we would add in 45 back into that 170. I think the public safety we would have kind of kept out of that 45 number, I believe, I would think, out of the 170. And then we paid less on the payout because of the less retirees, so we did make money up on that, correct? Yes. You said that. But then we're going to have more people on the payroll then, right, for 09 and then probably 010 then, correct? Well, for the first question on the lump sum payout, we had budgeted 170. We only had 87. So the budget we had said was going to be $6.4 million. We only actually paid out in lump sum payments $1.4 million. But those where we kind of had a gotcha, if you will. We also had to pay out the sick pay service credits, and that ended up being 1.3. So it was 2.7 total, I think, in that. We did have a savings there, but by not having all the retirees, we'll have more than on the payroll on personnel costs then, won't we, for this year then? Because we would have an extra 83 people, wouldn't we, that we had planned on? Savings for personnel that were down, yes. Actually, throughout government right now, from 2006, December 30 of 2006 to today, or to the end of January, we're down 200 people total for all of government. But are we budgeted for those 200 people? Because we budgeted for 170 less by the end of this budget cycle by the retirees. And we're going to add back 45 of those, right? Right. So we would have 125 then that would have been added. So we're going to still be short on hitting that number. So that means there are going to be more people on payroll that we're going to be paying. Yes, yes. Potentially there could be. As of December 8th, there was 102 vacant budgeted positions in the general fund. Now I'm not sure exactly what that number is today. But to get to your, you know, for your example. Yeah, because when we predicated this budget, we were downsizing the budget by 170 less 45 or with 45 new ones added on. Right. So that. And we didn't get that. Exactly. So I think that means we're going to have additional costs, not just this budget, but then it'll be also if they continue, they'll be for next budget. Right. The number that gets thrown around, and Linda and I were talking about this, that gets thrown around here that we're going to be $25 to $27 million short, that's not for this budget, but is that for next budget? That is what we're projecting for 2010. And we're looking at that, you know, almost daily. Bill and I have become best friends along with Kena. You know, we meet. He's monitoring revenues weekly now, trying to see if we have any change. But, you know, what's causing that $26 million to $28 million is the decline in revenues that we're projecting. Bill has been tracking everything from employment rates to new business starts to building permits for, you know, the last three years, trying to get some trending information. He's had conversations with University of Louisville professors, University of Kentucky professors, to try to get the best economic forecasting that we can, you know, internally do. And so he's projecting, and we're starting to see in January that a lot of his projections are coming true, that revenue will decline. We also had renegotiated police and fire corrections, collective bargaining agreements. That's going to increase the cost for those personnel for 2010. And CERS has increased its contribution percent for 2010. And we have some new debt service. You know, we've issued, we're getting ready to issue on the 12th, if the market holds, the police and fire pension bond. We have, you know, so we have two other bonds. One we've already issued and one we're getting ready. So, you know, we have additional new debt service that we're going to have next year that we didn't have before. So to somehow close that gap up, what are we going to be doing to close that hole up of the 25 to 27 to 26 to 28? Whatever number you want to say, what are we doing to be ready for that? Okay. What we've done is we did the budget call, rolled out the budget submission process, and actually folks are, the last ones are trickling in as we speak. We had each department director prepare three plans. One is that they receive the same dollars that they received this year, which does not mean that they get the same personnel because it's on dollars, remind you, and we just said that CERS and police and fire had increases in their personnel costs. The second scenario was to assume that they had to take a 7.5% reduction, and the third scenario was to assume a 15% reduction. We had originally planned for budget hearings to begin this week, but with Kina's announcement that she's leaving, Jim Deaton has decided to retire, and as you all know Scott Brown died unexpectedly last week so we have postponed the budget hearings to give us some time to give actually Bill and I time to to get as much information as we can from Kima and to give me time to work with Jim Deaton and and you know to fill the void with Scott's death so So the budget hearings are going to start next week, and the mayor will be meeting with each department director. And at the same time as the budget hearings are going on, we will have February revenue numbers. And we'll be able to close February around March 10th because we're able to close now. We have all the people solved issues and accounting resolved. And so we'll be closing by March 10th. And so we'll have February numbers. so we'll have the best possible guesstimate, if you will, on what revenue is going to be because we're in uncharted waters from an economic perspective, and we'll arrive at what the whole is based on where we think revenue is. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. Any other questions for Mary? Just to hammer home what you just said, though, and so everyone understands, this year we're operating a $275 million general fund budget. So basically, if we're going to add those added expenses in police and fire corrections, the employees' retirement through CRS, I mean, we have to find an additional $27, approximately million, add on top of that $275. Otherwise, we've got to cut that $275 number down, which right now stands roughly at 10%. So that's the hope we're facing, not to mention if revenues start declining sharply. We've got to add that on top. So good luck preparing the budget next week when the mayor starts having his hearings. Again, they begin on March 2nd with public safety and go all through next week. Exactly. Council members, you should have received a copy of the links. Feel free to attend those hearings through the members of the links. And our next meeting next month, we'll be discussing our link assignments and how we're going to report out in the links. I know several of you have some suggestions on better ways to report those out, and we'll be taking that up at our next meeting in March. So we won't be talking about that today. But I also plan to float out to each of you within the next week or so a proposed mayor's proposed budget format because I know my understanding is there was some some comments about you know that you might have wanted to see it a little bit different so you know I'll look for feedback from you on once we come up with the Anticipated and when we have time to talk about that are in March meeting or where you need to have that format set for printing prior to that meeting probably so we were looking at probably March the 20 something for our next meeting so I mean we'll need to have concrete what the um when's it's the 20th yeah we'll need to have it we'll need to have it so I'll need your feedback prior um yeah you'll get us a copy and we'll get it out I'm sure we'll have plenty of feedback okay thank you thank you Mary okay Mr. Chairman yeah You just were running through those budget hieroglyphics pretty quickly with that $27 million and 10%. I think it might be worthwhile to scroll back on that and do it one more time because there was a pretty big headline there. Would you please just do that one more time? Well, just based on this year's current general fund budget of about $275 million, We have anticipated additional increase in costs for next year in those categories Mary named. Police and fire, collective bargaining contracts, corrections bargaining contracts, the additional CERS retirement payouts, not to mention the additional debt service pay that we're going to have in this budget. So all that together totals about $27 million. So that would be in addition to that 275 number if we kept the budget flat and didn't increase anywhere else. Well, the $26 million that's being floated around actually includes an anticipated decline in revenue as well. And what was that number in there? Because the numbers that Commissioner Coe gave us just gave us the flat fixed increases, and those totaled about $23 million. Yeah, I would hate to say a number off the top of my head. And I want to say that the increased cost is around $16 million of it, $17 million of it, and the rest of it is what we're projecting revenue to. Well, I think that we need to get a list of those fixed costs. And I've got that in my office. I have it too. So we may have a different list, but, you know, the list I got had $46 million, but we took off the $20 million for the pension issue. So it left about 26 on the list I got it did not include any revenue So I love to see that list But I guess the important thing to hammer home is we've got our work cut out for us to balance this budget coming up Yeah, okay. Thank you. Thank you, Vice Mayor. All right next on our agenda. We have the Lyric Theater Business plan discussion and what I thought I would do hopefully is Shay did everyone get a copy of this information did you were you able to hand out? I'll let Shea Rabel from the mayor's office kind of get us started and introduce our guests that are here to speak as well. And then we'll work from there. Shea? Thank you very much. Is this microphone on? It is. We can hear you. In your packets that you received, I guess, last week, I believe you had a copy of the AMS report. And what you received today, and I know that you haven't had a chance to review it, probably are some additional documents that were requested by some other council members. And there's a copy of some of the things that happened in 2006 relating to the design and the approval by the council to move forward with that. And the minutes are in there along with some resolutions. Most importantly, though, the first item you should have a copy of today after my memo is a handout from Susan Hill from Tate Hill Jacobs Architects, who you all know by now is the architect working on the Lyric. and she'll walk you through what she's handed out to you. I was just trying to get it to you as soon as possible today, again recognizing that many of you probably haven't had a chance to review it. We were asked to try to get AMS here today, and unfortunately given the short notice, they were already committed to be with another client today. So they're not here, and having conversations with the chair and vice chair, we decided to go ahead and move forward with talking with the architect and Juanita Betts-Peterson, who's the chair of the Lyric Theater Task Force. We also have Jim Clark here from LuxArts. I know some were interested in talking with him. And so we can start any way you want. Probably the – let me say another word about AMS, because I know that's kind of why we're here today is to talk about the business plan. I think understanding the concept of the design helps us get to why the business plan is the way it is, and then we can have a conversation about that. The AMS consultant can be here the week of the 9th, and I suggested a Tuesday without having talked to any of you all, but I looked at the council calendar, and I don't believe there's anything in the morning. And we can obviously have that conversation later today, but he could be here on a Tuesday, Tuesday the 10th, if that works for the members of this committee. If you choose, we could do a workshop, however you want to do it. But that's as soon as he could be here. So he can't be here at all next week? And he only leaves us two days before we have to take the second reading? That was his preference, was to be here the week of the 10th, the week of the 9th, excuse me. he could be here the 3rd if necessary. I don't know what the committee's purview or opinion is on that, but I think we'd want him here as soon as possible. And I agree with that. I'm just trying to be, you know. I mean, maybe the 3rd at 10 o'clock in the morning or 11, whatever the committee feels would be appropriate for that discussion. But if everyone's okay with 10 o'clock on the 3rd, that way we have more time to ask enough questions before our 1 o'clock meeting and have lunch. That's perfectly fine. And I'll just tell him that, you know, we can't make the 10th work. I was trying to make sure it was convenient for everyone, but the third, if that's when we want them, we'll get them here. Okay. Would you all like to start with hearing from? Yeah, if we could, can you first of all start with, if we can go in this order, the memorandum, the MOU with the state? You gave everyone just a copy of it just to give us a quick public rehash of when this started back in 1997 and how we got to where we're at today. And if you've had discussions with the state since our last council work session about the extension between January of 2010 and going beyond, then we'll start off with the architect and let her present. And then we'll finish up, if we have time left, hopefully today with the Lyric Task Force and how they came about their work. Sure. Okay. And I'll do my best to summarize what happened from what others have told me. I was not in Lexington at the time, and I was looking to see if Dr. Stevens was still around. He probably remembers quite a bit of it as well. But what you have in front of you, and you should have had before, but we had a request to give to some of you again today, is a copy of the Memorandum of Understanding with the State of Kentucky. It's between LFUCG and the State of Kentucky. And basically in the 90s, in 1990, urban county government received about $18 million, I believe, from the state in order to do a World Trade Center and to do a cultural center. I'm not 100% up to speed on what exactly happened, but I know that we didn't do what we were supposed to do, and it resulted in a lawsuit filed against LFUCG by the state. And in order to settle that lawsuit, the two groups came together and formed this Memorandum of Understanding in 1997 that said instead of us having to pay back the money that we received in 1990 and didn't use appropriately, we would commit to doing a series of projects. And you have within the handout here all of those projects, the Kentucky Children's Theater, the History Museum, UK Basketball, lots and lots of things you're familiar with. And one of those projects was the Lyric Theater project. You've all heard us say before that the Lyric remains the only one yet to be complete. One of the major reasons why the Lyric has not been completed yet is because we did not own the property when we entered into the Memorandum of Understanding with the state. We had to buy it from the owner at the time. The owner of the property was not willing to sell to us, and so we had to go through a long condemnation process to use our power of eminent domain. And the case that we made in order to be able to use our power of eminent domain was that it met a public purpose, a public good, public purpose, which was that we were going to take the property, the Lyric Theater, and turn it into an arts and cultural facility, as stated by the Memorandum of Understanding. That process took about eight years, and we finally acquired the property through an eminent domain in, I believe, August of 2005. And I have a copy of the deed that I'll be happy to share with all of you and the other members of the council because it helped kind of put all the pieces together and certainly for some of the newer council members that are new to this. And in the deed, it says that we purchased the land because we were going to do the Lyric Project. And I say the Lyric Project generally, but specifically it said Arts and Cultural Facility. That started a long process, basically, of moving. In 2005 was when Mayor Isaac then formed the task force, which we can get to a little bit later here. But the mission they had was to come forward with a conceptual idea of how the facility could be used, what would the community want it to be used for, and how much was it going to cost. We can get into that a little bit later about how they gather community input because they did get quite a lot of community participation. I know that's something we're all very much in support of and ask for. Part of that process in 2005 was, and actually in 2006, was to hire an architect to take what the community said they wanted and put it together into a conceptual design on paper, get some experts together, see what it looks like. And that's when the Urban County Council, let me take a step back. October 10th of 2006, the presentation of the report was made to the Urban County Council at a work session, and it was adopted, the report was adopted. That precipitated Irving County Council in 2006 in November, authorizing the city to enter into a contract with Tate Hill Jacobs to complete the design of the Lyric that had been suggested within the report. And that's kind of where we are today. You all know that we put $6 million in this current year's budget to fund the project. And that's why we're here, to move forward with that. I think I summarized everything, and I'm happy to answer any questions on the history. Does any committee member have a question on the history and the MOU with the state? Do we have a current copy of the MOU that we amended back in 2006? Actually, I'm glad you said that. In the back of what you have today, the last few pages, I believe the last four pages, that is the amended version of the MOU. It's dated, it was amended in 2002 because we were undergoing, we were in the condemnation proceeding at that time. And so at that point, Irving County government went to the state and said, we cannot complete this in the time frame you gave us. We need an extension. And it was an extension until we acquired the property. And once we acquired the property, we had so much time to move forward. And that's kind of where we are now. Now, to your question, have I contacted the state since last week? I have not. I was waiting to see what happens with the current resolution that's before you all to consider and whatever happens today. So when I call the state, I can have more concrete information about how we decide to move forward. Vice McGrath. Yeah. Thanks, Shay. I just want to confirm a couple things. What I'm reading, this MOU that you just gave us, it's not specific. You said that I want to make sure that we do have a good understanding of what the facts are. So that's the context of the question. What I'm reading in Section D, page 4 on the Lyric Theater Project, is that the LFUCG shall expend $700,000 for an African-American cultural project. and that will be in addition to the $230,000 to be expended from the proceeds of LFUCG Public Facilities Corporation. So that's a total then of $930,000. Right. And of that amount so far, we have invested roughly, based on my reading of the business plan, we've invested about $900,000, maybe. I think it's a little bit more than that. It's close to a million dollars over the past many, many years. Okay. Was that your question? That's the question. I just wanted to confirm that. That is the, and if I can expand on that just a little bit, because, you know, if we were all sitting here in 1997 when this memorandum of understanding was signed, we'd be starting from a different point than we all are now. There are many more facts that happened after the memorandum of understanding was signed. And the most important one, I feel, is the work that was done by the task force between 2005 and 2006, in which they were asked to get community input. We now have the property. Now what are we going to do with it? And they went out and they sought public input and presented to the Urban County Council their recommendation on how the facility should be used. and some conceptual designs from the architect that they had been working with. And at that point in 2006, if I can get these dates correct, the Urban County Council adopted the report, which gave thumbs up to the conceptual design. If that had not happened, we probably would have a, I don't know what we would have before you, but it would be a similar project, but some elements might be different. But I think it's important for everybody, including the public who are not familiar with the history, to understand that the reason we have what we have today is based on community input that was approved by the council in 2006. And now we're asking for permission to see that through. In terms of the, just again, just to confirm, the extent of our legal commitment, binding commitment to the state as it stands today, has there been anything since the original memorandum of understanding, any amendments to it that have adjusted the financial commitment so far? No. Okay. The amendment from 2002 only speaks to the timeline we have. And the liquidated damages of $500 a day, right? Correct. And that did not change. Okay. That was in the original memorandum of understanding. Okay. Just to clarify a little bit, there was a feasibility study done by the Brasley brothers back in, 1993, I believe, and within that feasibility study, there were estimates for construction with the percentage that it should increase for every year that the construction project is not complete. So there were percentages worked in there that this is an estimate for today. But if this goes annual, there's a percentage of increase that should be added to that number for construction cost. And so if that helps to clarify anything as far as, you know, there was a feasibility, there was an estimated cost, but there was also reference by the consultants hired and paid for at that time, that you would have to take into account any amount of time you were going to have to add more, as would you do with any construction. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else have any other questions for Che? Councilman Lane. Yeah, my recollection is that I'm the person who passed the, or made the motion that we should have a study of the facility to estimate the operating expenses in the long-term liability for the urban county government whenever we finalize the arrangements there. And, of course, I think that's why we're having the meeting today, because that report just came in. We're basically evaluating the cost to the urban county government over the next 20 years or so. That's correct, and I think that's entirely appropriate. I think that's what we need to do with all of our projects, and so we're happy to be able to talk about this. Before we get going today, and especially since the consultant from AMS is not here, I just wanted to say that I think it's important that we all understand the business plan that was presented from AMS is just a blueprint. It's not no one is saying this is the absolute business plan we're going to adopt. We know it's not perfect, and we know that there are some elements in there that need to be added, such as fundraising and grant writing, in order to make sure that it's as successful as possible and minimizes the amount the government has to put forward. And so my point in saying all of this is we look forward to having the conversation about finalizing a business plan, but we're not saying that the business plan presented by AMS is 100% the model we're going to adopt and going to move forward with it tomorrow. I just want to get that on the table. Thank you. Does anybody else have any other comments or suggestions? I will want to also add to what Shay just said and preface our discussions. Today we're not here to talk about if we build a Lyric Theater or if we build something there because we need to build and we have obligated ourselves to build something there. I think that the big question that we're exploring is how and when. And I think, you know, if we can keep it within that context, I know there are people in the community that want to still debate the if, but I think we've already obligated ourselves to the if. Right. And I think we need to really keep our attention focused on the how and the when going forward. And hopefully we can begin that discussion with the architect. I think so. And I think everyone knows Susan Hill. I'll go ahead and ask her to come up. And I think that her presentation today will help everyone, especially those of us that weren't here when it first started, understand how we got to where we are today. And I know that she's more than happy to answer any questions, too. So thank you very much. Susan Hill. Thank you. Hello, Council. Welcome. Thank you. I did provide this, and my apologies, it was just several hours ago, but did want you to, if you had a chance to look at any of it, but to have some written material after our conversation that you could continue to work with. I do have on the PowerPoint the three images that are in the packet and I do have a board if that's easier to look at I just felt like the projection would be easier but the color rendition on it is not nearly as good as your color copy so you may want to reference that but just flipping forward to the first sheet in the packet just talking about how we got to where we are and essentially laying out the project schedule and sequence that mostly I was a part of, not going back historically as Shay was speaking of. When we first got involved was after the programming was completed with the public meetings with the task force And then the request that we undertake a feasibility study for that programming to see how it fit into the buildings. And that presentation was made on October the 10th of 06, as we've noted. And then you'll see the next sequence of dates and the work that's been undertaken since then. The program elements themselves, as shown on the October 10th presentation, are the theater in the historic building, the museum, multipurpose space, and then the public circulation and bringing the building up to code, basically. We have a second floor on the historic building that only has one means of egress, and the only way to really get a second one is through addition. So a lot of code issues to deal with with the 1948 building. As part of looking at those elements and the feasibility, there were a series of site visits. There were input sessions with local professionals. There were standards that we were using, particularly with the museum, since there had been expression of having traveling exhibits as part of the museum. and there are requirements for HVAC and for size of space and linear feet and all to be able to make certain that traveling exhibits would not large, not fancy, not extensive, but just smaller, appropriate exhibits would be able to be housed there for an interim. And then our lighting and sound consultant, Steve Woodring from the Kentucky Center for the Arts, has been involved looking at the design and working with us for some time. He was also the consultant that worked with us at the Downtown Arts Center. On the flip side, you'll see just an additional copy of what was presented in the October 10, 2006 packet with the programming that was provided to us by the task force. And then you'll see on this next sheet the program elements, and I've broken them out into those three primary areas. The theater, which is within the historic building, the museum that is on the second floor only, and that is both part of the historic building on the second floor, and then the second floor of the new building, and then the multi-purpose space that's all contained on the first floor of the new building. The programming for the theater involves performance, specifically music, theater, and dance with strong focus on music given the existing acoustical dimensions of that space. And then non-performances, continuing the movie and videos, lectures, and convention meetings. These were both noted by the task force and also included in AMS's report. So just kind of the basic description. In working with Steve Woodring, the stage itself, which was quite small, has been enlarged out into the theater space to allow additional reasonable space for performances. Given the scale of the historic building, it will never be all things to all people. I think it's really important to understand that this is not a fancy project. This is a functional, flexible project. That's really what our charge had been in terms of the design work. We do not have a large fly space on the back of the theater stage. That had never been part of the volume of the building. It does not fit. So I think it is really important to understand both the opportunities, but also the restrictions of what that existing building provide. One of the things that the building did not have at all was support spaces for the theater, for the stage, for the musicians. And so in the new space, in the new addition, on the first floor, going to your floor plan, you can see on the outside of where the stage and the theater are, you can see the new dressing rooms, the green room, the loading dock, the support spaces for the theater. it's in the green on the first floor it's that area the other addition within the historic building that needed to be made had to do with public restrooms which have historically been located in the basement and meet no codes of any sort in present day time. So they were added in the historic building both on the first and the second floor. In addition, a control booth at the rear of the theater up on the second floor. So there is, in the green areas inside the theater on both the first and the second floor, or are those continued support spaces both for the public and for the performance?