Council Work Session

Summary

Meeting Overview

The Lexington-Fayette Urban County Council held a meeting on March 16, 2010, presided over by the Mayor. The meeting addressed three agenda items spanning land use regulation, social services planning, and technology infrastructure. A total of 6 votes were taken during the session, and 1 public comment was heard. Two of the agenda items — the Social Services Needs Assessment and the Enterprise Resource Planning Update — were presented as informational items, while the Zoning Ordinance Text Amendments were brought to a vote and approved.

Attendance

All 14 council members were present at the March 16, 2010 Council meeting. No members were recorded as absent or late.

Members Present: - Council Member Gordon - Council Member Lawless - Council Member Crosby - Council Member Beard - Council Member James - Council Member Ellinger - Council Member Henson - Council Member McCord - Council Member Martin - Council Member Feigel - Council Member Stennett - Council Member Blues - Council Member Lane - Council Member Wallace

Votes and Decisions

All votes at the March 16, 2010 Council meeting were taken by voice vote. Six motions were considered and all passed.

• Approval of the March 9th Summary 13:05: Moved by Council Member Beard, seconded by Council Member Crosby. The motion passed by voice vote.

• Postponement of Item F 14:10: Council Member James moved, and Council Member Crosby seconded, to postpone Item F until the following Tuesday. The motion passed by voice vote.

• Approval of New Business Items A–E, G, and H 17:31: Council Member Ellinger moved, and Council Member Blues seconded, approval of new business items A through E, G, and H as a group. The motion passed by voice vote.

• Resolution Referring Items to the Planning Commission 24:20: Council Member Gordon moved, and Vice Mayor Gray seconded, to place on the docket a resolution referring items one, two, six, and seven to the Planning Commission. The motion passed by voice vote.

• Administrative Officer Position for the Division of Youth Services 28:34: Council Member James moved to place back on the docket for approval the position of administrative officer of the Division of Youth Services. No seconder was recorded. The motion passed by voice vote.

• Approval of the NDF for the Week 1:30:29: Council Member Beard moved, and Council Member Ellinger seconded, approval of the NDF for the week. The motion passed by voice vote.

No roll call votes were recorded at this meeting, so individual member votes for or against are not available for any of the above items.

Public Comment

One member of the public addressed the Council during the public comment period at this meeting.

• Jack Birch spoke at approximately 1:17:50 on the topic of Census 2010. Birch emphasized the importance of the 2010 Census, specifically highlighting its role in determining federal funding allocation. He encouraged community members to participate in the census process to help ensure an accurate count.

Contested Items

• Zoning Ordinance Text Amendments [timestamp: N/A]

The most contentious discussion at the March 16, 2010 Council meeting centered on agenda items three, four, and five, all related to proposed zoning ordinance text amendments. Council members engaged in significant debate over whether to proceed with these items or postpone them for additional review.

The core concerns raised involved questions about definitions within the proposed amendments and whether the language had received sufficient legal scrutiny before being brought to a vote. Members indicated that further legal review was necessary before the Council could act responsibly on the measures.

The outcome of the discussion was a decision to postpone items three, four, and five, allowing additional time for the definitional and legal concerns to be addressed before the amendments would be reconsidered by the Council.

Zoning Ordinance Text Amendments

24:20

The Council took up a discussion on proposed zoning ordinance text amendments. The session focused specifically on items one, two, six, and seven of the amendments, while items three, four, and five were set aside and postponed for further review before any action would be taken on them.

Council Member Gordon and Council Member Martin were the key participants in the discussion. The debate centered on the substance of the amendments under consideration, with the Council working through the specific provisions of the four active items while deferring the remaining three to allow additional time for examination.

The amendments that were addressed — items one, two, six, and seven — were ultimately approved by the Council. Items three, four, and five remain pending, with no action taken on those portions at this meeting.

Social Services Needs Assessment

25:22

Commissioner Helm presented key findings and recommendations from the Social Services Needs Assessment to the Council.

Key Recommendations Presented:

• Establishment of a youth czar — a dedicated position focused on coordinating youth-related services and initiatives
• Creation of a centralized rental assistance program to streamline access to housing support services for residents in need

The presentation was informational in nature, providing the Council with an overview of the assessment's conclusions. No vote or formal action was taken on the recommendations at this meeting.

Enterprise Resource Planning Update

36:25

Rama Dewaraha and Aldona Valicenti presented an update to the Council on the Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) project. The presentation covered the current status of the project, including modules that have been completed, plans for future phases, and the financial implications associated with the initiative.

The update was informational in nature, providing Council members with a progress report on where the ERP implementation stands and what steps are anticipated going forward. No vote or formal action was taken as a result of the presentation.

*Note: Additional details regarding specific completed modules, cost figures, timelines, and any questions or concerns raised during discussion are not available in the source data for this agenda item.*