Urban County Council

Summary

Meeting Overview

The Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government Council convened on March 3, 2016, at 6:00 PM in the Council Chambers at 200 E. Main St, Lexington, KY 40507, with Mayor Gray presiding. The meeting featured two informational agenda items, including recognition of Science Fair Winners and a presentation on the University Village Tax Increment Financing Development Plan. During the session, the Council conducted 2 votes and heard 2 public comments from community members. The meeting focused primarily on informational presentations rather than legislative action, with both agenda items serving to inform the Council and public about ongoing initiatives and achievements within the community.

Attendance

The following members were present at the March 3, 2016 meeting:

Present: • Mayor Gray • Gibbs • Henson • Lamb • Moloney • Mossotti • Scutchfield • Stinnett • Akers • Bledsoe • F. Brown • J. Brown • Evans • Farmer

Absent: • Vice Mayor Kay

Late Arrival: • Hensley

A total of 14 members were present at the start of the meeting, with Hensley arriving late. Vice Mayor Kay was absent from the meeting.

Votes and Decisions

The council took action on two items during the March 3, 2016 meeting, with both measures passing unanimously.

Ordinance 118-16 3:00 Council member Lamb motioned to amend Ordinance 118-16 to remove three employees in the Planner position from the ordinance, with Moloney providing the second. The amendment passed unanimously with all 14 council members voting in favor: Gibbs, Hensley, Henson, Lamb, Moloney, Mossotti, Scutchfield, Stinnett, Akers, Bledsoe, F. Brown, J. Brown, Evans, and Farmer. There were no opposing votes or abstentions.

Resolution 91-16 7:00 Hensley motioned to approve Resolution 91-16, which authorizes an agreement with the Bluegrass Sports Commission for a sports complex feasibility study. Stinnett seconded the motion. The resolution passed by roll call vote with unanimous support from all 14 council members present: Gibbs, Hensley, Henson, Lamb, Moloney, Mossotti, Scutchfield, Stinnett, Akers, Bledsoe, F. Brown, J. Brown, Evans, and Farmer. No council members voted against the resolution or abstained from voting.

Both votes demonstrated complete council consensus, with all members present supporting each measure without opposition.

Budget and Financial Actions

The meeting addressed two significant financial contracts totaling $774,404.60.

Public Safety Operations Center Audiovisual Systems The board approved Resolution 121-16, authorizing a contract with M3 Technology Group, Inc. d/b/a Multi-Media Masters, Inc. for $403,971.80. This contract covers audiovisual systems for the Public Safety Operations Center, representing a substantial investment in emergency response infrastructure and communications capabilities.

Gainesway Trail Project Resolution 124-16 was approved, establishing a contract with Allen Co., Inc. for $370,432.80 for the Gainesway Trail Project. This expenditure supports transportation infrastructure development and community connectivity through trail construction.

Both contracts represent major capital investments in public safety and transportation infrastructure, with the audiovisual systems contract being the larger of the two expenditures. The combined financial commitment demonstrates the jurisdiction's focus on enhancing emergency response capabilities and improving community transportation options.

Public Comment

Two speakers addressed the council during the public comment period, both focusing on the University Village Tax Increment Financing (TIF) proposal.

Ken Cook 1:00 spoke first, expressing concerns about the environmental impact of the proposed University Village TIF on the local watershed. Cook suggested that the city consider alternatives such as implementing green infrastructure solutions as part of the development planning process.

Nathan Billings 2:00 followed, representing property owners who oppose the University Village TIF. Billings raised questions about the public benefit of the proposed tax increment financing district and expressed concerns about the long-term maintenance responsibilities for stormwater infrastructure that would be associated with the development. His comments focused on whether the TIF would provide adequate public benefit to justify its implementation and who would bear the ongoing costs of maintaining the required stormwater management systems.

Both speakers' comments centered on different aspects of the same development proposal, with Cook focusing on environmental watershed concerns and green infrastructure alternatives, while Billings addressed financial and maintenance questions from the perspective of affected property owners.

Appointments

The meeting included two appointments to city boards and advisory bodies.

Thomas Richards was appointed to the Affordable Housing Board. This represents a new appointment to the board that advises on housing policy and affordable housing initiatives within the city.

Robert Jefferson was reappointed to the Charles Young Advisory Board. This reappointment continues Jefferson's service on the advisory board, which provides guidance and recommendations related to the Charles Young community center and programs.

Both appointments were processed during the meeting as part of the standard appointment procedures for filling positions on various city boards and commissions.

Contested Items

The primary contested item during the March 3, 2016 meeting was the University Village Tax Increment Financing (TIF) project, which faced significant community opposition.

University Village TIF Project

Several community members voiced concerns about the proposed TIF project, focusing on two main areas of disagreement: environmental impact and public benefit. The opposition centered on questions about whether the project would provide adequate benefits to justify public financing and what environmental consequences might result from the development.

Community members who spoke against the project raised specific objections about the environmental implications of the proposed development. They also questioned whether the TIF arrangement would deliver sufficient public benefits to warrant the use of tax increment financing mechanisms.

The nature of the opposition was characterized as community-driven, with multiple residents participating in the discussion to express their concerns about the project's potential impacts on the local area.

*Note: Specific transcript timestamps, participant names, and the final outcome of this contested item were not available in the provided meeting data.*

Science Fair Winners' Recognition

0:30

The meeting included a presentation recognizing winners of the Kentucky American Water Science Fair across elementary, middle, and high school levels. Mayor Gray served as the key speaker for this agenda item (92-16).

This was an informational presentation celebrating student achievements in science education within the community. The recognition ceremony highlighted the academic accomplishments of local students who participated in the Kentucky American Water Science Fair competition.

The agenda item was structured as a formal recognition rather than a discussion item, focusing on acknowledging the winners' scientific work and contributions. No debate or concerns were raised during this portion of the meeting, as it served purely as a ceremonial recognition of student excellence.

The outcome was informational, with the meeting proceeding to acknowledge and celebrate the academic achievements of the science fair participants without requiring any formal action or decision from the governing body.

University Village Tax Increment Financing Development Plan

1:00 The council held a public hearing on agenda item 231-16 regarding the University Village Tax Increment Financing Development Plan. This informational session provided an opportunity for the petitioner to present their proposal and for public comment on the TIF development plan.

Jacob Walbourn served as a key speaker during the hearing, likely representing the development interests or providing technical details about the proposed TIF district. Ken Cook and Nathan Billings also participated as key speakers in the discussion.

The hearing included both support from the petitioner who presented the development plan and opposition from members of the public. The TIF proposal would establish a tax increment financing district in the University Village area, which would allow the municipality to capture increased property tax revenue generated by new development to fund public improvements and infrastructure within the designated district.

Public opposition was noted during the hearing, though the specific concerns raised by opponents were not detailed in the available information. Tax increment financing districts often generate debate regarding their impact on other taxing bodies, the appropriateness of public subsidies for private development, and questions about the necessity and scope of proposed improvements.

As this was designated as a public hearing for informational purposes, no formal action was taken by the council during this session. The hearing served to gather input from both proponents and opponents of the University Village TIF development plan, which would inform future council deliberations on whether to approve the establishment of the tax increment financing district.

The discussion provided council members with the opportunity to hear directly from stakeholders and assess community sentiment regarding the proposed TIF development plan before making any binding decisions on the matter.