Council Work Session

Summary

Meeting Overview

The Lexington-Fayette Urban County Council convened on June 7, 2016, at 3:00 PM in the Council Chamber of the Urban County Government Center, with Mayor Gray presiding. The council addressed a comprehensive agenda of 10 items covering routine municipal business including zoning matters, budget amendments, and various administrative approvals. During the session, council members conducted 12 formal votes on motions and heard 1 public comment from citizens. The meeting followed a standard format with both continuing business and new business items, along with reports from council members and the mayor, before concluding with adjournment.

Attendance

The following members were present at the June 7, 2016 meeting:

Present: • Kay • Stinnett • Moloney • J. Brown • Akers • Gibbs • Lamb • Farmer • Evans • Scutchfield • F. Brown • Mossotti • Bledsoe • Hensley

Absent: • Henson

No members arrived late to the meeting. A total of 14 members were present and 1 member was absent.

Votes and Decisions

The council conducted twelve voice votes during the June 7, 2016 meeting, with all motions passing unanimously.

Administrative Approvals: • Farmer motioned to approve the docket for the May 26, 2016 Council Meeting, seconded by Kay - passed • Farmer motioned to approve the May 12, 2016 work session summary, seconded by Mossotti - passed • Kay motioned to approve budget amendments, seconded by Farmer - passed

Ordinance Scheduling: • Scutchfield motioned to place ordinance #25 on the May 26, 2016 docket without a public hearing, seconded by Stinnett - passed • Scutchfield motioned to place ordinance #22 on the May 26, 2016 docket with a public hearing scheduled for July 7, 2016, seconded by Farmer - passed

Program and Policy Decisions: • Scutchfield motioned to approve new business, seconded by Farmer - passed • Mossotti motioned to approve neighborhood development funds, seconded by Kay - passed • Farmer motioned to approve the proposed revisions to the Neighborhood Traffic Management Program, seconded by J. Brown - passed

Fee and Infrastructure Matters: • Farmer motioned to approve increasing the affiliate processing fees from $35 per ton to $50 per ton, seconded by Hensley - passed • Farmer motioned to accept the recommendation to group Consent Decree projects by watershed, seconded by Bledsoe - passed

Meeting Conclusion: • Bledsoe motioned to approve the Mayor's Report, seconded by Gibbs - passed • Bledsoe motioned to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Scutchfield - passed

All votes were conducted by voice vote with no recorded individual vote tallies or opposition. No transcript timestamps were available for the voting portions of the meeting.

Budget and Financial Actions

The meeting addressed multiple lease agreements, contracts, and grant awards totaling several million dollars in financial commitments.

Lease Agreements: • Blue Grass Community Action Partnership received two $0.00 lease agreements for the Senior Citizen's Center and Elder Nutrition Program (L0596-16) • West End Community Empowerment Project lease agreement for $12,795.48 (L0543-16) • NAMI Lexington (KY), Inc. lease agreement for $3,768.00 (L0549-16) • Central Business Systems mailing system lease for $164.97 (L0602-16)

Major Contracts: • Commonwealth of Kentucky State Board of Elections Memorandum of Agreement for $1,125,000 (L0603-16) • Strand Associates, Inc. contract for Town Branch WWTP Primary Digester Complex Improvements totaling $474,522.00 (L0615-16) • LFUCG Excess Property & Casualty Insurance Policies renewal with J SMITH LANIER & CO for $1,291,963.26 (L641-16) • KY Wired fiber ordering agreement for $270,000.00 (L0619-16) • Properties acquisition on Bryan Avenue and Oak Hill Drive easements for $210,000.00 (L0624-16)

Grant Awards: • Lexington-Fayette County Health Department awarded $485,742.00 for the Home Network Project (L0606-16) • U.S. Department of Homeland Security provided $367,912.00 in federal funds for fire stations (L0620-16) • Commonwealth of Kentucky Office of Highway Safety granted $5,000 for the Drive Sober or Get Pulled Over Enforcement Campaign (L0646-16)

Other Financial Items: • E.C. Mathews Company, Inc. Change Order No. 1 for $36,158.00 (L0601-16) • United States Geological Survey agreement for stream flow and rain gauges totaling $116,800.00 (L0618-16) • Thoroughbred Aviation sole source helicopter service agreement with no budgetary impact (L0600-16) • Personnel position changes in the Office of the Mayor resulted in $37,646.89 in savings (L0645-16)

Public Comment

During the public comment period, one speaker addressed the commission regarding local property matters.

Commissioner Reed spoke about updates to the Grants Park property 0:00. Reed discussed potential changes involving the movement and altered use of the building. The commissioner specifically noted concerns about how these changes would impact groups that currently use the basement space for meetings. Reed's comments focused on the practical implications of the proposed modifications to the property's function and accessibility for existing users.

No other public comments were recorded during this portion of the meeting.

Contested Items

The June 7, 2016 meeting featured two significant areas of disagreement that generated heated discussion among participants.

Diversity Officer Position

A contentious debate arose regarding the creation of a new diversity officer position. The discussion centered on fundamental questions about the necessity of establishing this role and concerns about the process being used to create it. Participants engaged in heated exchanges over whether such a position was needed and whether proper procedures were being followed in its development. The specific details of who supported or opposed the position, as well as the final outcome of this discussion, were not clearly documented in the available materials.

Bonding Capacity for Sports Complex

The second major point of contention involved the approval of bonding capacity for a sports complex project. Critics raised significant concerns about moving forward with this financial commitment without adequate public vetting and community discussion. The heated nature of this debate suggests there were strong disagreements about both the substance of the bonding proposal and the process being used to advance it. Participants appeared divided on whether sufficient public input had been gathered before considering such a substantial financial commitment.

The opposition centered on procedural concerns about transparency and public engagement rather than necessarily opposing the sports complex itself. However, the available documentation does not provide specific details about which individuals took particular positions or how these contested items were ultimately resolved during the meeting.

Both issues highlight broader themes around process, transparency, and public participation that appeared to be ongoing concerns for meeting participants during this session.

Public Comment - Issues on Agenda

The meeting included a designated period for public comment on issues listed on the agenda. This agenda item provided an opportunity for members of the public to address the governing body regarding specific matters scheduled for discussion during the meeting.

No specific speakers or comments were documented for this public comment period. The item was informational in nature, serving as a formal opportunity for public participation in the meeting process.

This public comment period is a standard component of government meetings, allowing community members to provide input, raise concerns, or offer perspectives on agenda items before official deliberations begin. The absence of recorded comments may indicate either that no members of the public chose to speak during this period or that specific comments were not documented in the available meeting materials.

Requested Rezonings/Docket Approval

The council discussed requested rezonings and docket approval for upcoming council meetings. The discussion involved key speakers Farmer and Kay, who presented matters related to zoning changes and the scheduling of items for future council consideration.

The agenda item focused on the administrative process of reviewing and approving rezoning requests that would be placed on the docket for subsequent council meetings. This procedural discussion ensures that zoning matters are properly scheduled and prepared for formal consideration by the full council.

Following the discussion between the speakers, the council approved the requested rezonings and docket items as presented. This approval allows the identified rezoning cases to move forward in the municipal review process and be scheduled for public hearings and final council action at future meetings.

The approval of the docket represents a routine but essential step in municipal governance, ensuring that property owners and developers can proceed with their rezoning applications through the established review process.

Approval of Summary

The council considered approval of the summary from the previous work session. Council members Farmer and Mossotti participated in the discussion of this agenda item.

The item involved reviewing and formally approving the written summary that documented the proceedings and decisions from a prior work session. This represents standard procedural practice for maintaining official records of council activities.

The summary was approved by the council, allowing it to become part of the official record of municipal proceedings.

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

Budget Amendments

The meeting addressed the approval of budget amendments as presented to the board. Kay and Farmer served as the key speakers during this agenda item discussion.

The item was presented as a standard approval matter for budget amendments, though specific details about the nature, scope, or dollar amounts of the proposed amendments were not provided in the available meeting materials.

Following the presentation and any discussion that may have occurred, the budget amendments were approved by the board.

*Note: Specific transcript timestamps and detailed discussion points are not available for this agenda item.*

New Business

The board considered approval of new business items during this portion of the meeting. Scutchfield and Farmer served as the key speakers for this agenda item.

The specific details of what new business items were presented for consideration were not detailed in the available meeting materials. The agenda item was structured as an approval item, indicating that the board was asked to formally approve the new business matters as they were presented.

Following discussion by the key speakers, the board voted to approve the new business items. No specific concerns or objections were noted in the available records.

The outcome was approval of the new business as presented.

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

Continuing Business/Presentations

The council addressed several ongoing matters during the continuing business and presentations portion of the meeting. The discussion focused primarily on neighborhood development funds and proposed revisions to the traffic management program.

Council members Mossotti and Farmer served as the key speakers during this segment, leading the discussion on the various items under consideration. The conversation covered administrative and policy matters that required ongoing attention from the council.

The agenda item encompassed multiple topics related to neighborhood development funding mechanisms and updates to existing traffic management protocols. These discussions represented continuation of previous council deliberations rather than new initiatives.

Following the presentations and discussion among council members, the matters addressed during this portion of the meeting received approval from the council. The outcome indicates that the council reached consensus on the continuing business items that were presented for their consideration.

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

Council Reports

During the Council Reports segment, council members provided updates on various municipal matters and committee activities.

Key Speakers: • Gibbs • Lamb

The reports covered topics including zoning changes and committee referrals, though specific details of the discussions were not captured in the available meeting documentation. This agenda item served an informational purpose, allowing council members to update their colleagues and the public on ongoing municipal business and committee work.

The session concluded without any formal actions taken, as is typical for council report segments which primarily serve to share information and maintain transparency about various municipal activities and committee proceedings.

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

Mayor's Report

The Mayor's Report was presented for approval during the June 7, 2016 meeting. The agenda item was structured as an approval item, requiring council action on the report as presented.

Key speakers during this agenda item included Bledsoe and Gibbs, though specific details of their remarks are not available in the provided materials. The discussion appears to have been straightforward, as the item was processed as a standard approval matter.

The council ultimately approved the Mayor's Report as presented, with no indication of significant debate or concerns raised during the discussion. The approval suggests the report met the council's expectations and contained the standard information typically included in such municipal reports.

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

Public Comment - Issues Not on Agenda

The meeting included a designated period for public comments on issues not listed on the agenda. This agenda item provided an opportunity for community members to address the governing body on matters of public concern outside of the scheduled discussion topics.

No specific speakers, comments, or issues were documented for this public comment period in the available meeting materials. The item was listed as informational in nature, consistent with standard public comment procedures that allow for community input without requiring formal action by the governing body.

Public comment periods on non-agenda items are typically structured to give residents and stakeholders a forum to bring forward concerns, suggestions, or information that may be relevant to future meetings or general municipal operations, even when those topics are not part of the current meeting's formal business.

The outcome of this agenda item was informational, meaning no formal decisions or actions were taken in response to any comments that may have been received during this portion of the meeting.

Adjournment

The meeting was brought to a close with participation from Bledsoe and Scutchfield. The adjournment motion was approved, formally ending the proceedings.

No additional details about the specific discussion or timing of the adjournment were provided in the available meeting materials.