Council Work Session

Summary

Meeting Overview

The Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government held a meeting on June 23, 2015, at 3:00 PM in the Council Chamber at 200 E. Main St, Lexington, KY 40507, with Mayor Gray presiding. The meeting addressed 10 agenda items covering routine government business including zoning matters, budget amendments, and various reports from council members and the mayor. The council took 14 votes during the session, with all substantive agenda items receiving approval. Two public comment periods were held, allowing citizens to address both agenda-related issues and other matters of concern, with a total of 2 public comments heard during the meeting.

Attendance

The following members were present at the June 23, 2015 meeting:

• Kay
• Stinnett
• Moloney
• J. Brown
• Akers
• Gibbs
• Lamb
• Evans
• Scutchfield
• F. Brown
• Mossotti
• Bledsoe
• Henson
• Lane

Absent: Farmer

No members arrived late to the meeting.

Votes and Decisions

The Council took 14 unanimous votes during the June 23, 2015 meeting, with all 14 members present voting in favor of each motion.

Procedural and Administrative Actions: - Approved the June 9, 2015 summary (motion by Akers, second by Henson) - Approved the June 18, 2015 docket (motion by Henson, second by Scutchfield) - Approved budget amendments (motion by Scutchfield, second by Mossotti) - Approved neighborhood development funds (motion by Akers, second by Bledsoe)

New Business Items: - Approved new business agenda items (motion by Stinnett, second by Akers) - Removed item C under new business (motion by Akers, second by Scutchfield)

Special Meeting Scheduling: - Scheduled a Special Council Meeting for August 24, 2015 at 5:00pm for a Fire Hearing (motion by Stinnett, second by Evans)

Construction and Infrastructure: - Placed on the June 18, 2015 docket a resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute Change Order No. 18 for the Senior Citizens Center Construction project with Merilla Design & Construction (motion by Stinnett, second by Scutchfield) - Reduced speed limit on Jouett Creek (motion by Stinnett, second by Henson)

Committee Referrals: - Referred the issue of requiring strong tree protection language in city RFPs to the Environmental Quality and Public Works Committee (motion by Gibbs, second by Bledsoe) - Referred street trees issue to the Environmental Quality & Public Works Committee (motion by Stinnett, second by Brown)

Mayor's Report: - Removed Planning Commission and Board of Adjustment appointments from the Mayor's Report pending confirmation (motion by Lamb, second by Akers) - Approved the Mayor's Report as amended (motion by Scutchfield, second by Mossotti)

The meeting concluded with a motion to adjourn (motion by Stinnett, second by Scutchfield).

All votes included the following members: Kay, Stinnett, Moloney, J. Brown, Akers, Gibbs, Lamb, Evans, Scutchfield, F. Brown, Mossotti, Bledsoe, Henson, and Lane.

Budget and Financial Actions

The council approved several significant financial authorizations totaling over $6.5 million in contracts and grants.

Construction and Infrastructure Projects

The council authorized Change Order No. 2 for $9,837.88 with Churchill McGee, LLC for the Public Safety Operations Center Phase 1B Renovation construction project (Resolution L0775-15). Additionally, they approved Change Order 1 to the contract with Tennis Technology Inc. for $1,707.00 for additional guardian coat crack repair and resetting a tennis net standard at Meadowthorpe Park tennis courts (Resolution L0795-15).

Federal Grant Acceptances

Two major federal funding agreements were approved. The council authorized acceptance of $821,600 in federal funds from the Kentucky Department of Military Affairs, Division of Emergency Management under the Fiscal Year 2015 Chemical Stockpile Emergency Preparedness Program (CSEPP) (Resolution L0782-15).

The largest single financial item was authorization to execute Supplemental Agreement No. 4 between the LFUCG and the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet, accepting an additional $2,720,038 in federal funds for the Newtown Pike Extension Project (Resolution L0794-15).

Service Agreements

The council approved authorization to execute Purchase of Service Agreements with various organizations totaling $3,029,075 to provide services to the public (Resolution L0811-15). The resolution did not specify the individual organizations or service types in the extracted data.

These financial actions represent a mix of ongoing construction projects, federal grant opportunities, and service delivery partnerships that support various municipal operations and infrastructure development throughout the community.

Public Comment

The public comment period for the June 23, 2015 meeting included opportunities for community members to address both agenda items and non-agenda matters.

Issues on Agenda: No public comments were made on issues appearing on the meeting agenda.

Issues Not on Agenda: No public comments were made on issues not appearing on the meeting agenda.

The meeting proceeded without any public participation during the designated comment periods.

Public Comment - Issues on Agenda

No members of the public came forward to provide comments on issues included on the meeting agenda during this portion of the June 23, 2015 meeting. This agenda item provided an opportunity for public participation regarding specific matters scheduled for discussion or action by the governing body, but no speakers utilized this time period.

The public comment period for agenda items is a standard component of government meetings that allows community members to address the board or council about specific issues they will be considering during the session. Unlike general public comment periods that may cover any topic of public concern, this segment is typically reserved for input directly related to the day's scheduled business.

With no public participation during this agenda item, the meeting proceeded to the next scheduled item without any citizen input or concerns being raised about the matters under consideration.

Requested Rezonings/ Docket Approval

The council considered and approved the requested rezonings and docket for June 18, 2015. The discussion involved several council members including Stinnett, Evans, Henson, and Scutchfield.

The agenda item was presented as a resolution for the council's consideration. While specific details of individual rezoning requests were not provided in the available materials, the item encompassed multiple property rezoning applications that had been submitted for review.

The council members who participated in the discussion - Stinnett, Evans, Henson, and Scutchfield - engaged with the rezoning proposals, though the specific nature of their comments and any concerns raised during deliberation were not detailed in the extracted information.

Following the discussion among the participating council members, the council voted to approve the requested rezonings and docket as presented. The resolution passed, allowing the rezoning requests from the June 18, 2015 docket to move forward through the approval process.

This type of docket approval represents routine municipal business where the council reviews and acts upon property rezoning applications that have been submitted by developers, property owners, or other parties seeking to change the zoning classification of specific parcels within the jurisdiction.

Approval of Summary

The council considered approval of the summary from their June 9, 2015 meeting. Council members Akers and Henson participated in the discussion of this agenda item.

The council voted to approve the summary of the June 9, 2015 meeting without any recorded objections or amendments to the document.

Outcome: Approved

*Note: Specific transcript timestamps are not available for this agenda item.*

Budget Amendments

The council considered and approved various budget amendments during the meeting. Council members Scutchfield and Mossotti were the key speakers who participated in the discussion of these financial adjustments.

The agenda item was presented as a resolution requiring council approval. While the specific details of the individual budget amendments were not provided in the available materials, the council ultimately voted to approve the proposed changes to the municipal budget.

The item proceeded through the standard resolution process and received approval from the council members present at the meeting.

*Note: Specific transcript timestamps and detailed discussion points were not available in the source materials for this agenda item.*

New Business

The council addressed new business items during this portion of the meeting. Key participants in the discussion included council members Stinnett, Akers, and Scutchfield.

During the proceedings, the council made a notable modification to the agenda by removing item C from the new business section. The specific details of what item C contained or the reasons for its removal were not detailed in the available information.

Following discussion among the council members, the remaining new business items were approved by the council. The approval encompassed the modified new business agenda after the removal of item C.

The outcome of this agenda item was successful passage of the new business matters that remained under consideration after the agenda modification.

*Note: Specific transcript timestamps are not available for this agenda item.*

Continuing Business/ Presentations

During the continuing business portion of the meeting, the council addressed two primary matters involving neighborhood development and traffic safety measures.

The council engaged in discussion regarding neighborhood development funds, with participation from multiple council members including Akers, Bledsoe, Stinnett, and Henson. While specific details of the funding discussion were not detailed in the available materials, this item represented ongoing business from previous meetings.

The primary action item involved a proposal to reduce the speed limit on Jouett Creek. Council members Akers, Bledsoe, Stinnett, and Henson participated in the discussion of this traffic safety measure. The proposal likely stemmed from community concerns about vehicle speeds in the area and the need for enhanced pedestrian and residential safety along the roadway.

Following deliberation among the participating council members, the council approved a motion to proceed with the speed limit reduction on Jouett Creek. This action represents a concrete step toward addressing traffic safety concerns in that particular area of the jurisdiction.

The approval of the speed limit reduction demonstrates the council's responsiveness to local traffic safety issues and their willingness to implement measures that prioritize community safety over traffic flow considerations. The involvement of multiple council members in the discussion suggests this was a matter of broader council interest rather than a routine administrative action.

Both the neighborhood development funds discussion and the Jouett Creek speed limit reduction reflect the council's ongoing attention to community development and public safety matters that directly impact residents' daily lives.

Council Reports

During the Council Reports segment, members discussed tree protection measures and city contracting practices. The discussion focused on incorporating stronger environmental language into the city's Request for Proposals (RFP) process.

Council members Gibbs, Bledsoe, Stinnett, and Brown participated in the discussion regarding tree protection requirements. The conversation centered on how the city could better protect existing trees through its contracting and development approval processes.

A specific concern was raised about street trees and their protection during city projects and private development. The council recognized that current RFP language may not adequately address tree preservation requirements for contractors working on city projects.

As a result of the discussion, the council decided to refer the broader issue of street tree protection to the Environmental Quality & Public Works committee for further review and recommendations. This referral will allow the committee to examine current policies and potentially develop stronger tree protection standards for future city contracts and development projects.

The council approved moving forward with referring this matter to the appropriate committee, indicating consensus that tree protection deserves more detailed consideration and potentially stronger policy language in city documents.

Mayor's Report

The council addressed the Mayor's Report during the meeting, with several council members participating in the discussion. Key speakers included Lamb, Akers, Scutchfield, and Mossotti.

The primary action taken during this agenda item involved amendments to the original Mayor's Report. The council made the decision to remove Planning Commission and Board of Adjustments (BOA) appointments from the Mayor's Report. These appointments were removed pending confirmation, indicating that additional review or procedural steps were needed before the appointments could be finalized.

Following the removal of these appointments, the council proceeded to approve the Mayor's Report in its amended form. The modification suggests that while the council was generally supportive of the Mayor's Report content, they required additional time or information regarding the specific appointments to the Planning Commission and BOA before giving their approval to those personnel decisions.

The outcome of this agenda item was approval of the amended Mayor's Report, allowing the majority of the report's contents to move forward while ensuring proper vetting of the appointment decisions through the appropriate confirmation process.

Public Comment - Issues Not on Agenda

During this portion of the June 23, 2015 meeting, no members of the public came forward to address the governing body on issues not included on the official agenda.

This agenda item provides an opportunity for community members to bring matters of public concern to the attention of elected officials, even when those topics are not scheduled for formal discussion or action during the meeting. However, no speakers utilized this public comment period.

The absence of public comment on non-agenda items concluded this portion of the meeting, allowing the governing body to proceed with the remaining scheduled agenda items.

Adjournment

The meeting was formally adjourned at 3:40 PM following standard procedural protocol. The adjournment motion involved key participation from Stinnett and Scutchfield, who facilitated the formal conclusion of the proceedings.

The adjournment resolution was approved, bringing the June 23, 2015 meeting to its official close. No additional discussion or debate was recorded regarding the adjournment itself, indicating a routine conclusion to the meeting's business.