Council Environmental Quality Committee Meeting

Summary

Meeting Overview

The Environmental Quality Committee met on November 27, 2012, at 11:00 AM, with Blues presiding. During the meeting, the committee heard five agenda items, including two informational updates and one approval. Committee members heard a Blue Sky Update from Henson and a Distillery District Update from Gorton. The committee approved the September 25 Committee Summary. The meeting included one motion and vote, and the committee heard public comment from three members of the public. The committee also reviewed items that had been referred to it for consideration.

Attendance

The following individuals were present at the meeting on November 27, 2012:

• Blues
• Stinnett
• Gorton
• Farmer
• Crosbie
• Myers
• McChord
• Martin
• Henson
• Lane

No absences or late arrivals were recorded.

Votes and Decisions

The body considered one motion during this meeting.

Amend 16-403(d) regarding stormwater management fee exemption 2:37

Ellinger moved to amend 16-403(d) to include urban county airport board runways, taxiways, and public ramp areas in the stormwater management fee exemption. Lane seconded the motion.

The motion failed on a roll call vote with 2 ayes and 6 nays.

• Voted in favor: Ellinger, Lane
• Voted against: Blues, Gorton, Farmer, Henson, Stinnett, McChord

Budget and Financial Actions

The meeting on November 27, 2012 included approval of three significant financial actions related to the Blue Sky wastewater infrastructure projects:

Purchase of Blue Sky Wastewater Treatment Plant The body approved a purchase of the Blue Sky Wastewater Treatment Plant for $250,000.

State Grant A grant of $600,000 was approved from the State of Kentucky for the Blue Sky Pumping Station project.

Low-Interest Loan A low-interest loan of $1.9 million was approved through the Kentucky Infrastructure Authority to support the Blue Sky Pumping Station project.

These three financial actions—totaling $2.75 million in combined funding—represent a significant investment in wastewater infrastructure improvements for the Blue Sky area.

Public Comment

Steve Wilson – Boonesboro Manor Sewage Treatment Plant and Blue Sky Rural Activity Center

1:00:13

Steve Wilson, representing JFG Enterprises, addressed the council regarding the Blue Sky project. Wilson expressed concern that JFG Enterprises had not been consulted or given input on the project despite their substantial financial interest in the matter. JFG Enterprises owns the Boonesboro Manor sewage treatment plant and surrounding land in the project area. Wilson requested a follow-up meeting with the council to discuss the Blue Sky plan and to address potential financial burdens that required infrastructure upgrades could impose on his company.

Council Member Martin – Future Growth and Infrastructure Planning

1:05:16

Council Member Martin commented on the need for comprehensive growth planning across all parts of the city, not limited to the east side. Martin urged the committee to consider long-term capacity needs when making infrastructure decisions, emphasizing that failing to plan adequately would result in costly future upgrades.

Council Member McCord – Infrastructure Underbuilding and Future Planning

1:05:16

Council Member McCord reflected on past infrastructure planning decisions, citing Manowar Road as an example of underbuilt infrastructure. McCord warned that failing to plan for future growth locks the city into ineffective infrastructure and increases long-term costs. McCord urged the committee to think strategically about capacity requirements when making current infrastructure decisions.

Contested Items

Blue Sky Pumping Station Project and Boonesboro Manor Plant

JFG Enterprises, owner of the Boonesboro Manor plant, raised significant opposition to the Blue Sky Pumping Station project. The company's concerns centered on a lack of prior consultation regarding the project and the potential financial burden it would impose through required infrastructure upgrades. JFG Enterprises requested a follow-up meeting to formally discuss and address these concerns with project planners.

Cost Escalation and Future Planning

A substantive debate emerged regarding the project's scope and funding approach. The disagreement centered on whether to pursue option two, which would provide expanded capacity, or maintain the minimum requirement for the project. Some meeting members advocated for option two, arguing that future-proofing the infrastructure would be prudent planning. However, other members cautioned against this approach, expressing concern about overcommitting financial resources without identifying a clear funding source to support the expanded option. This split resulted in a divided vote among participants.

Blue Sky Update — Henson

Charlie Martin presented an update on the Blue Sky Pumping Station and Forest Main project 3:09. The presentation focused on three service area options for the Blue Sky Rural Activity Center.

Options Presented

Option one represented the minimum requirement under the consent decree. Options two and three offered expanded capacity alternatives designed to match current zoning requirements. Both expanded options included gravity sewers as part of their infrastructure plans.

Key Discussion Points

The committee discussed cost implications associated with each option, examining the financial impact of the different service area configurations. Members also considered future growth projections and how each option would accommodate potential development. Additionally, the discussion addressed downstream infrastructure impacts, evaluating how the pumping station and sewers would affect existing systems and future capacity needs.

Outcome

This agenda item was informational in nature, with no formal decision or action required at this meeting.

Distillery District Update - Gorton

1:17:23

Commissioner Paulson provided an update on the Distillery District TIF project. The presentation focused on the status of a feasibility study being conducted by Strand, which is funded at $501,000. According to the update, the study is nearing completion and will serve to inform future planning efforts for streetscape and trail development in the district.

The committee discussed budget constraints affecting the project and identified the need for a development agreement to move forward. The feasibility study's findings are expected to guide decisions regarding infrastructure improvements and public space enhancements in the Distillery District.

This agenda item was presented for informational purposes.

September 25 Committee Summary

2:37

The September 25, 2012, meeting minutes were approved unanimously.

Discussion Topics

The committee discussed the 5-Year Solid Waste Plan, which included the following elements:

• Goals for zero waste
• Regulation of private waste companies
• A proposed Materials Recovery Facility

Concerns Raised

Committee members raised concerns about two specific issues:

• Opt-out procedures
• Inclusion of new developments in the solid waste tax district

Key Speakers

The discussion involved Steve Feese, Stinnett, Blues, Lane, and Gorton.

Outcome

The agenda item was approved.

Public Comment

During the public comment period, stakeholders were given the opportunity to voice concerns about ongoing projects and initiatives.

Steve Wilson of JFG Enterprises raised significant concerns regarding the Blue Sky project. Wilson highlighted two main issues: the lack of consultation with affected parties and the financial burden associated with the project.

Council members engaged with Wilson's comments, with Council Member Martin and Council Member McCord participating in the discussion. The council members emphasized the importance of long-term planning and the need to ensure adequate infrastructure capacity to support projects moving forward.

The public comment period resulted in an informational outcome, allowing concerns to be documented and discussed but without immediate binding decisions or resolutions at this time.

Items Referred

The committee discussed the referral of matters related to the Department of Environmental Quality and partner agencies 1:30:46. Key speakers on this item included Blues and Stinnett.

During this discussion, the committee noted the need for future coordination on infrastructure and environmental projects. No specific items were acted upon during this portion of the meeting.

The outcome of this agenda item was informational in nature, with the committee establishing a framework for ongoing coordination rather than taking formal action on particular referrals.