Intergovernmental Committee

Summary

Meeting Overview

The Inter-Governmental Committee convened on September 11, 2007, at 1:00 PM with CM Moloney presiding. The committee addressed four agenda items during the session, covering topics ranging from permit processing improvements to facility naming policies.

The meeting included three informational presentations and one policy approval. Committee members received updates on customer service initiatives for permit processing, discussed the relationship between the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government (LFUCG) and the County Attorney's office, and heard a general update on various committee items. The committee took one formal vote during the session, approving a policy for naming and renaming UCG facilities.

No public comments were heard during this committee meeting. The session focused primarily on internal government operations and policy development, with most items serving an informational purpose to keep committee members updated on ongoing initiatives and inter-governmental relationships.

Attendance

The following committee members were present at the September 11, 2007 meeting:

• Moloney
• James
• Gray
• Blues
• DeCamp
• Beard
• Stinnett
• Crosbie
• Myers
• Blevins

All committee members were in attendance with no absences or late arrivals recorded.

Votes and Decisions

The Committee took one vote during the September 11, 2007 meeting.

Policy for Naming/Renaming UCG Facilities

CM Myers motioned to forward the Policy for Naming/Renaming UCG Facilities to full Council with changes, seconded by CM Blevins. The motion passed by voice vote with one dissenting vote from CM Beard.

The approved change modified language on page 5 of the policy document. The original text stating "if approved Parks would take this via blue sheet to full Council" was changed to "if approved Parks would forward this to Planning Committee for their approval."

This modification establishes that the Planning Committee will review and approve facility naming decisions before they proceed to full Council consideration, rather than Parks Department taking items directly to Council via blue sheet process.

Contested Items

The Committee meeting on September 11, 2007, featured one contested item that resulted in a split vote among members.

Policy for Naming/Renaming UCG Facilities

The primary point of contention during the meeting centered on a proposed policy for naming and renaming UCG (Unified City Government) facilities. The disagreement focused on provisions related to corporate naming rights for public facilities.

Council Member Beard cast the sole dissenting vote against forwarding the policy to the full Council with proposed changes. CM Beard expressed specific concerns about allowing corporate naming rights for government facilities, viewing this aspect of the policy as problematic.

Despite CM Beard's objections, the motion to forward the policy to the full Council with modifications ultimately passed. The majority of Committee members supported advancing the policy, indicating they were comfortable with the proposed framework for facility naming, including the corporate naming rights provisions that troubled CM Beard.

The split vote highlighted differing perspectives among Committee members regarding the appropriate balance between potential revenue generation through corporate partnerships and maintaining the traditional approach to naming public facilities. While the majority viewed the policy as acceptable for full Council consideration, CM Beard's dissent represented concerns about commercializing public facility names.

The policy will now proceed to the full Council for further deliberation and a final vote, where CM Beard's concerns about corporate naming rights may receive additional discussion among the broader Council membership.

Customer Service for Permit Processing

The Committee discussed improvements to the permit processing system, specifically focusing on grading permits. The discussion was prompted by an issue encountered by the Beaumont YMCA during their permit application process.

Key speakers included CM Blevins, Mr. Dewey Crowe, and Mr. Barry Brock, who examined the current permitting procedures and identified areas for enhancement. The primary focus centered on streamlining the grading permit process to provide better customer service to applicants.

As part of the review, the Committee considered potentially transferring the permitting process from its current location to the Division of Engineering. This proposed change aims to improve efficiency and create a more user-friendly experience for permit applicants.

The Beaumont YMCA case served as a catalyst for this broader examination of permit processing procedures, highlighting the need for systematic improvements to better serve the community's development needs.

This agenda item was informational in nature, with no formal action taken during the meeting. The discussion established the groundwork for future considerations regarding permit processing improvements and the potential organizational restructuring of permitting responsibilities.

LFUCG Relationship with County Attorney

The committee discussed ways to improve collaboration between the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government and the County Attorney's office during agenda item 2. The discussion focused on potential cost-saving opportunities and better coordination between the two legal entities.

Key Discussion Points:

• Mr. Larry Roberts, representing the County Attorney's office, presented ideas for enhanced cooperation with the LFUCG Department of Law

• Roberts specifically discussed the possibility of his office taking on additional civil cases currently handled by the city's legal department

• The proposal was positioned as a potential cost-saving measure for the urban county government

• CM Stinnett participated in the discussion alongside Roberts

Potential Benefits Discussed:

• Financial savings for LFUCG by utilizing County Attorney resources for certain civil matters

• Better coordination between the two legal offices to avoid duplication of efforts

• More efficient use of legal resources across both entities

Outcome:

This was an informational discussion item with no formal action taken. The conversation served to explore possibilities for improved working relationships and potential cost efficiencies between the LFUCG Department of Law and the County Attorney's office. The discussion appears to have been preliminary in nature, focusing on identifying opportunities rather than implementing specific changes to current practices.

The item concluded without any binding commitments or formal resolutions, but established a foundation for potential future collaboration between the two legal offices.

Policy for Naming/Renaming UCG Facilities

Mr. Jerry Hancock presented a comprehensive policy for naming and renaming UCG (Unified City Government) facilities during the committee meeting. The presentation outlined specific criteria and procedures that would govern how parks and other municipal facilities receive their names.

The policy proposal included detailed guidelines for the naming process, establishing clear standards for facility nomenclature across the unified government's properties. While the specific criteria were not detailed in the available materials, the policy addressed both new facility naming and the renaming of existing facilities.

Following Mr. Hancock's presentation, committee members engaged in discussion about the proposed policy. CM James and CM Myers participated in the deliberations, though the specific nature of their comments and any concerns raised were not captured in the available records.

After consideration of the policy proposal, the committee took action to move the item forward. A motion was made to forward the naming/renaming policy to the full Council, with the stipulation that changes would be incorporated before final consideration. The motion was approved by the committee.

The approval to forward the policy with modifications suggests that while committee members generally supported the concept of establishing formal naming criteria for UCG facilities, they identified areas requiring revision or clarification before presenting it to the full governing body for final adoption.

This policy development represents an effort to standardize and formalize the process by which the Unified City Government names its public facilities, ensuring consistency and appropriate procedures for future naming decisions across parks and other municipal properties.

Update on Committee Items

Agenda Item 4 served as an informational discussion regarding the status of various committee matters. This item was designated for providing updates on ongoing committee business and did not result in any formal motions or actions.

The discussion was conducted as a general informational session, allowing committee members to receive updates on current initiatives and pending matters before the committee. No specific speakers were identified as leading this portion of the meeting, suggesting it may have been a brief administrative update or roundtable discussion among committee members.

As an informational agenda item, no formal decisions were made and no motions were proposed or voted upon during this discussion. The item appears to have been included to ensure committee members remained informed about the status of various ongoing matters within their purview.

The outcome was purely informational, serving to keep committee members apprised of current committee business without requiring any formal action at this time.