Urban County Council Work Session

Summary

Meeting Overview

The Lexington-Fayette Urban County Council convened on May 10, 2016, at 3:00 PM in the Council Chamber at 200 E. Main St, Lexington, KY 40507, with Mayor Jim Gray presiding. The council addressed four agenda items during the session, including public comment on agenda issues, approval of meeting summaries, budget amendments, and new business items. The council took four votes throughout the meeting, with all substantive matters receiving approval. Three members of the public provided comments on agenda-related issues during the designated public comment period. The meeting successfully concluded with the approval of budget amendments and new business items, demonstrating the council's continued work on municipal governance and fiscal management.

Attendance

All council members were present for the May 10, 2016 meeting.

Present: • Mayor Jim Gray • Council Member Farmer • Vice Mayor Kay • Council Member Lamb • Council Member Fred Brown • Council Member James Brown • Council Member Evans • Council Member Bledsoe • Council Member Stinnett

Absent: None

Late: None

Votes and Decisions

The council conducted four unanimous votes during the May 10, 2016 meeting.

Approval of April 19, 2016 Work Session Summary 0:30 Council Member Scutchfield motioned to approve the April 19, 2016 work session summary, with Council Member Farmer providing the second. The motion passed unanimously.

Approval of New Business 1:00 Council Member Farmer made a motion to approve new business items, seconded by Council Member Kay. The motion passed with unanimous approval from all council members present.

Approval of Budget Amendments 2:00 Council Member Farmer motioned to approve budget amendments, with Council Member Lamb seconding the motion. The motion passed unanimously, but with the condition of excluding the People's Bank relocation item until further discussion could take place.

Adjournment 4:17 Council Member Stinnett made the motion to adjourn the meeting, which was seconded by Council Member Mossotti. The motion to adjourn passed unanimously.

All four motions received unanimous support from the council members present, with no recorded dissenting votes or abstentions. The budget amendments approval was the only motion that included specific conditions, requiring the exclusion of one item for additional review before final consideration.

Budget and Financial Actions

The council approved several significant financial authorizations totaling over $1.2 million across various municipal projects and services.

Parks and Recreation Investments The largest single expenditure was Resolution 0419-16, authorizing acceptance of a $250,000.00 proposal from Brandstetter Carroll Inc. for development of the Parks and Recreation Master Plan. Additionally, Resolution 0448-16 approved a $89,575.25 change order for Jacobson Park Playground Design Build Services.

Grant Applications and Awards The council authorized submission of a $472,500.00 grant application to the National Park Service for Northeastern Park redevelopment under Resolution 0471-16. In a separate action, Resolution 0476-16 approved executing a Stormwater Quality Projects Incentive Grant agreement with The Living Arts and Science Center, Inc. for $13,893.00.

Infrastructure and Equipment Resolution 0477-16 authorized Change Order No. 1 with The Allen Company for Clays Mill Road Section 2C construction, adding $114,026.08 to the project cost. For technology needs, Resolution 0478-16 approved a Dell True Lease Agreement for 30 desktop computers for the E911 center at a cost of $8,682.70.

Historic Preservation The council approved Resolution 0497-16, amending the Memorandum of Agreement with Warwick Foundation, Inc. regarding relocation of the Peoples Bank building, involving $300,000.00 in funding adjustments.

These financial actions demonstrate the city's commitment to parks development, infrastructure improvements, emergency services technology, and historic preservation while leveraging both municipal funds and federal grant opportunities.

Public Comment

During the public comment period, three council members addressed various municipal matters with city officials.

Security at Senior Citizens Center 2:30 Council Member Farmer inquired about security arrangements for the Senior Citizens Center. Commissioner Ford responded by explaining the transition plan for providing 24-hour security at the facility.

Splash Park Grant Application 3:00 Council Member James Brown raised concerns regarding the proposed splash park project, specifically questioning the location selection and emphasizing the importance of gathering community input before finalizing plans. Monica Conrad addressed these concerns, assuring that there would be flexibility in determining the location based on feedback from community members.

Splash Park Location Visibility 3:30 Council Member Evans continued the discussion about the splash park, expressing specific concerns about the visibility and accessibility of the proposed location. Evans suggested that city officials should consider more visible locations that would better serve the community's needs.

The public comment period focused primarily on two key issues: security services for senior citizens and the planning process for a new splash park facility. The discussions highlighted the importance of community input in municipal decision-making, particularly regarding recreational facilities and public safety services.

Contested Items

The primary contested item during the May 10, 2016 meeting centered on funding for the People's Bank building relocation project. The council faced community opposition regarding increased costs and concerns about the project's financial management.

The disagreement focused on an additional funding request for relocating the People's Bank building, with the project experiencing cost overruns beyond the original budget. Community members and council participants expressed concerns about the financial management of the relocation project and questioned the need for supplemental funding.

The discussion highlighted tensions between the city's commitment to preserving the historic People's Bank building through relocation and the fiscal responsibility of managing taxpayer funds effectively. Participants raised questions about how the initial cost estimates were developed and why additional funding was now necessary to complete the relocation.

*Note: Specific details about participants, exact funding amounts, and the final outcome of this contested item are not available in the provided meeting data. Timestamp information for locating this discussion in the meeting video was not included in the source materials.*

Public Comment - Issues on Agenda

0:00

The meeting opened with a public comment period designated for issues appearing on the agenda. This portion of the meeting was allocated for members of the public to address the governing body regarding specific items scheduled for discussion during the session.

No public comments were recorded during this segment of the meeting. The public comment period proceeded without any speakers coming forward to address the board or council regarding agenda items.

This agenda item served as an informational component of the meeting, providing the opportunity for public participation in the governmental process, though no members of the public chose to participate during this particular session.

Approval of Summary

0:30

The council considered approval of the summary from their previous work session held on April 19, 2016. Council Member Scutchfield and Council Member Farmer participated in the discussion of this agenda item.

The council reviewed the summary document, which captured the proceedings and decisions from the April 19th work session. Following their review, the council voted to approve the summary as presented.

The summary was approved without any recorded objections or amendments to the document.

Budget Amendments

2:00

The council reviewed and acted on several budget amendments during the May 10, 2016 meeting. Council Member Farmer and Commissioner Ford served as the primary speakers for this agenda item.

The discussion focused on multiple budget amendments that required council approval. However, the council made a specific decision to exclude one particular item from the batch of amendments being considered - the People's Bank relocation item. This item was set aside for separate discussion at a later time.

The remaining budget amendments were presented to the council for consideration. While the specific details of each individual amendment were not detailed in the available materials, the council proceeded to review and deliberate on the proposed budget changes.

Following the presentation and discussion of the amendments, the council moved forward with a vote on the budget amendments package, excluding the People's Bank relocation matter. The council ultimately approved the budget amendments as presented, with the noted exception.

The outcome of this agenda item was approval of the budget amendments, demonstrating the council's agreement with the proposed financial adjustments. The decision to separate out the People's Bank relocation item suggests this particular matter required additional consideration or discussion beyond what could be accommodated during this portion of the meeting.

New Business

1:00

The council addressed several new business items during this portion of the meeting. Council Member Farmer and Council Member Kay were the primary speakers for this agenda item.

The new business section included various authorizations and grant applications that required council approval. While the specific details of individual items were not provided in the available materials, the discussion covered multiple matters that fell under the council's purview for authorization.

Council Member Farmer and Council Member Kay presented the new business items to their fellow council members for consideration. The items appeared to be routine matters requiring formal council action, including what were described as various authorizations and grant applications.

The council proceeded to vote on the new business items presented. All new business items were approved by the council, indicating there was sufficient support among the members for the proposed authorizations and grant applications.

No significant concerns or opposition were noted in the available materials regarding the new business items. The approval suggests the items were either uncontroversial or had been adequately vetted prior to the meeting.

The successful passage of these new business items allows the relevant city departments or officials to proceed with the authorized activities and pursue the approved grant applications as needed.