[00:32:13]
          ANY MIDDLE GROUND. OKAY. 
          [Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance]
          [00:32:34]
THE REGULAR MEETING OF METRO COUNCIL NOVEMBER 13TH, 2025 
          [00:32:38]
WILL PLEASE COME TO ORDER. THE TIME IS CURRENTLY 6:01 P.M. PLEASE RISE FOR THE PLEDGE OF 
          [00:32:44]
ALLEGIANCE. PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE 
          [00:32:51]
REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS. ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND 
          [00:32:57]
JUSTICE FOR ALL. THIS MEETING WILL BE HELD PURSUANT TO KRS 61.826 AND COUNCIL RULE FIVE. A 
          [Member Roll Call]
          [00:33:04]
MADAM CLERK OF ROLL CALL, PLEASE. COUNCIL MEMBER. HAWKINS. COUNCIL MEMBER. SHANKLIN. 
          PRESENT. COUNCIL MEMBER. PARRISH. RIGHT. SHE'S ON PRESENT. COUNCIL MEMBER. 
          HEARNDON PRESENT. COUNCIL MEMBER. PERVIS. PRESENT. COUNCIL MEMBER. LINENGER. 
          COUNCIL MEMBER MCCRANEY HERE. COUNCIL MEMBER. WEBER. COUNCIL MEMBER. OWEN HERE. COUNCIL MEMBER. RAYMOND. COUNCIL MEMBER. KRAMER HERE. COUNCIL MEMBER. JOSEPH. COUNCIL MEMBER. SYME COUNCIL MEMBER. BASS COUNCIL MEMBER. CHAPPELL COUNCIL MEMBER. REED HERE. COUNCIL MEMBER. 
          WINKLER HERE. COUNCIL MEMBER. PARKER. COUNCIL MEMBER. PIACENTINI COUNCIL MEMBER. 
          BENSON PRESENT. COUNCIL MEMBER. RUIZ HERE. COUNCIL MEMBER. BRATCHER COUNCIL MEMBER HUDSON COUNCIL MEMBER. WOOLRIDGE COUNCIL MEMBER. BACHON. COUNCILMEMBER. PRESIDENT. 
          AKESSON. PRESENT. MR. PRESIDENT, YOU HAVE 19 AND A QUORUM. ALL RIGHT, COLLEAGUES, WE'RE GOING TO TAKE A MOMENT OF SILENCE IN LIGHT OF THE THIS COMMUNITY'S SUFFERING FROM THE UPS PLANE CRASH. KEVIN, WE'RE HAVING A MOMENT OF SILENCE FOR THE UPS PLANE CRASH, PLEASE. THANK YOU. 
          ALRIGHT. COUNCILMAN RUDY, I THINK I BELIEVE YOU'VE GOT A COUPLE SPECIAL GUESTS TONIGHT. 
          [2.
 ID 25-0697     Council Member Herndon will introduce Dr. Anne Kenworthy as the new President of Spalding University. ]
          [00:35:31]
COUNCILMAN HERNDON, I THINK YOU'VE GOT A GUEST TONIGHT. 
          IS IT COMING ON? IS IT WORKING OKAY? YES. THANK YOU. 
          COLLEAGUES, SPALDING UNIVERSITY HAS BEEN AN ANCHOR OF THE SOBRO NEIGHBORHOOD AND OF OUR GREATER COMMUNITY SINCE IT WAS ESTABLISHED BY THE SISTERS OF CHARITY OF NAZARETH IN 1814. 
          SPALDING HAS NEARLY 1600 STUDENTS, 70% OF WHOM RESIDE IN JEFFERSON COUNTY, WHO ARE PURSUING UP TO 66 DEGREES. I'M PROUD TO HAVE THE SPALDING CAMPUS IN METRO COUNCIL DISTRICT FOUR. I'M HONORED AND AM HONORED TO RECOGNIZE THE UNIVERSITY'S 11TH PRESIDENT HERE TONIGHT, DOCTOR ANNE KENWORTHY. I HAVE A PROCLAMATION. I'LL READ AND WE'LL HEAR A FEW TO ALL WHOM THESE LETTERS SHALL COME. GREETINGS. KNOW YE THAT THE LOUISVILLE METRO GOVERNMENT LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL HEREBY RECOGNIZES SPALDING UNIVERSITY PRESIDENT DOCTOR ANNE KENWORTHY, SPALDING UNIVERSITY'S 11TH PRESIDENT, DOCTOR KENWORTHY BRINGS TO LOUISVILLE'S DOWNTOWN UNIVERSITY BOLD LEADERSHIP BASED UPON EXTENSIVE EXPERIENCE AND SUCCESS, AND WHO EMBRACES THE UNIVERSITY'S VALUES BASED EDUCATION, WHICH IS ROOTED IN THE SISTERS OF CHARITY OF NAZARETH. LEGACY OF COMPASSION. WE HEREBY CONFER THIS HONOR WITH ALL THE RIGHTS, PRIVILEGES AND RESPONSIBILITIES THEREUNTO APPERTAINING, AND TESTIMONY WHEREOF WE HAVE CAUSED THESE LETTERS TO BE MADE, AND THE SEAL OF THE METRO GOVERNMENT TO BE HEREUNTO AFFIXED. DONE IN LOUISVILLE, KENTUCKY, THIS 13TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2025. WE WELCOME TO OUR COMMUNITY, DOCTOR ANNE KENWORTHY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN HERNDON AND ALSO THE ENTIRE METRO COUNCIL. I JUST WANT YOU TO KNOW, I MOVED TO LOUISVILLE JUST RIGHT AT A YEAR AGO. AND I HAVE TO TELL YOU, AND I'M A FORMER MEMPHIAN AND, YOU KNOW, THAT LOUISVILLE MEMPHIS THING. BUT I GOTTA TELL YOU, LOUISVILLE, I HAVE JUST BEEN IN AWE OF HOW GRACIOUS AND WELCOMING THIS COMMUNITY HAS BEEN. YOU KNOW, SPALDING UNIVERSITY, OUR MISSION IS MEETING THE NEEDS OF THE TIMES. 
          AND I JUST WANT YOU TO KNOW RIGHT NOW, THE THE NEEDS OF THE TIMES ARE FOR SPALDING TO TO BE COMMITTED AND STAY COMMITTED TO SERVING IN DOWNTOWN LOUISVILLE. WE ARE COMMITTED TO PROVIDING AN EXCEPTIONAL EDUCATIONAL EXPERIENCE RIGHT HERE IN DOWNTOWN LOUISVILLE AND PROVIDING THAT WORKFORCE THAT WE NEED, A WORKFORCE THAT IS PREPARED, THAT IS EXCEPTIONAL AND ALSO COMMITTED. AND AND THEY KNOW HOW TO SERVE THEIR OWN COMMUNITIES. SO THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THIS HONOR, THIS HONOR FOR ME, BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY, THIS HONOR FOR SPALDING UNIVERSITY AND OUR PLACE IN THIS COMMUNITY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. 
          [1.
 ID 25-0578     Council Member Ruhe will honor Officer Kenneth Allen and Officer Jeffrey Emerich for their heroic actions to thwart a kidnapping attempt on August 7, 2025.]
OKAY, FIRST OF ALL, APOLOGIES TO MY COLLEAGUES. I COULDN'T FIND A NOTE I WAS LOOKING FOR, BUT I HAVE FOUND IT AND I WOULD LIKE TO RECOGNIZE OFFICER KENNETH ALLEN AND OFFICER GEOFFREY EMERICK AND SERGEANT PAMELA OBERHAUSEN, WHO WAS NOT ABLE TO BE HERE TONIGHT. COME ON UP, GUYS. SO YOU MIGHT SAY WE GET BIGGER AND BETTER AROUND HERE. AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE FRAMES WE'VE GOT FOR PROCLAMATION, WE GOT BIG. SO WHEN THIS CAME BEFORE THE FOURTH DIVISION ADVISORY COUNCIL, WE KNEW IMMEDIATELY WHO WE WANTED TO RECOGNIZE AS THE OFFICERS OF THE MONTH. SO I WOULD LIKE TO READ THE LETTER DESCRIBING WHAT OFFICERS ALLEN AND EMERICK AND SERGEANT OBERHAUSEN DID ONE NIGHT. SO RECENTLY, I RECEIVED A LETTER COMMENDING YOU FOR YOUR EXCEPTIONAL BRAVERY, DECISIVE ACTION AND COORDINATED TEAMWORK DURING A LIFE THREATENING KIDNAPING EVENT INVOLVING THE STRANGULATION OF A MOTHER AND THE ABDUCTION OF HER FOUR MONTH OLD CHILD, SERGEANT OBERHAUSEN DEMONSTRATED IMMEDIATE 
          [00:40:04]
LEADERSHIP AND SITUATIONAL AWARENESS WHEN SHE REVIEWED THE DETAILS OF A HIGH PRIORITY CALL AND RECOGNIZED THE GRAVITY OF THE SITUATION WITHOUT HESITATION, SHE MADE DIRECT CONTACT WITH THE REPORTING PARTY AND ESTABLISHED A LINE OF COMMUNICATION WITH THE ADULT VICTIM, WHO WAS ACTIVELY BEING HELD AGAINST HER WILL IN A VEHICLE AND DRIVEN AROUND LOUISVILLE. THE VICTIM WAS SCREAMING OVER THE PHONE THAT THE SUSPECT WAS GOING TO KILL HER AND HER INFANT SON. SERGEANT OBERHAUSEN MAINTAINED CALM PROFESSIONALISM, GUIDING THE MOTHER TO PROVIDE CONTINUOUS UPDATES ON HER LOCAON AND THE EVOLVING THREAT. HER ABILITY TO KEEP THE VICTIM ENGAGED IN TALKING PROVIDED RESPONDING OFFICERS WITH REAL TIME INTELLIGENCE THAT WAS CRUCIAL TO THE SUCCESSFUL RESOLUTION OF THE INCIDENT. NOW, FOR OFFICERS EMERICK AND ALLEN SIMULTANEOUSLY, OFFICER ALLEN UTILIZED FLOCK. CAMERA TECHNOLOGY IS COMING INTO PLAY HERE. THAT'S WHY WE PAY FOR IT. 
          AND TO IDENTIFY THE SUSPECT VEHICLE AND QUICKLY DISTRIBUTE AN IMAGE OF IT TO FELLOW OFFICERS, OFFICER EMERICK, WHO HAD RECENTLY OBSERVED THE VEHICLE PASS BY, WAS ABLE TO USE THAT INFORMATION TO LOCK IN ON THE SUSPECT'S DIRECTION OF TRAVEL. THE SITUATION BECAME EVEN MORE CRITICAL WHEN SERGEANT OBERHAUSEN LEARNED THAT THE SUSPECT WAS TRANSPORTING THE VICTIMS TO A SPECIFIC LOCATION IN ORDER TO RETRIEVE A FIREARM, WHILE MAKING SPECIFIC THREATS THAT HE WAS GOING TO KILL THE VICTIMS. THIS DEVELOPMENT SIGNIFICANTLY ESCALATED THE DANGER TO THE MOTHER AND THE INFANT, WITH URGENCY HEIGHTENED, OFFICERS EMERICK AND ALLEN RESPONDED CODE THREE TO THE AREA. BASED ON THE MOST CURRENT INFORMATION PROVIDED BY SERGEANT OBERHAUSEN. UPON ARRIVAL, THEY ACTED SWIFTLY AND TACTICALLY, LOCATING THE SUSPECT VEHICLE, RESCUING BOTH VICTIMS, AND TAKING THE SUSPECT INTO CUSTODY WITHOUT FURTHER INCIDENT. THE LIST OF OFFICERS PERFORMED A HEROIC ACT THAT RESULTED IN SAVING THE LIVES OF A YOUNG MOTHER AND HER FOUR MONTH OLD CHILD, PREVENTING A HEINOUS CRIME, AND APPREHENDING THE SUSPECT. NOW, WHEN I TALKED TO MAJOR LEWIS OF THE FOURTH DIVISION, HE SAID, OH YEAH, THIS IS WHAT THEY DO EVERY DAY. SO THINK ABOUT THAT AS WE DISCUSS THE NEEDS OF LMPD AND THE SERVICE THAT THEY PROVIDE TO THEIR COMMUNITY. SO THANK YOU, GENTLEMEN. NOW I'M GOING TO READ ONE OF THESE. THEY'RE BIG. SO THIS IS OFFICER KENNETH ALLEN. AND THEN THE OTHER ONE GOES TO OFFICER EMERICK. TO ALL WHOM THESE LETTERS SHALL COME. 
          GREETINGS. KNOW YOU THAT THE LOUISVILLE METRO COUNCIL, IN SPIRIT OF DEEP GRATITUDE, HONORS OFFICER ALLEN KENNETH ALLEN. WHEREAS IN HONOR OF HIS EXCEPTIONAL LEADERSHIP, DEDICATION TO JUSTICE AND SERVITUDE AS AN OFFICER IN THE FOURTH DIVISION, LOUISVILLE METRO POLICE DEPARTMENT. WHEREAS OFFICER KENNETH ALLEN, THE LOUISVILLE METRO POLICE DEPARTMENT, DEMONSTRATED EXCEPTIONAL INITIATIVE, TECHNICAL SKILL AND DEDICATION DURING A LIFE THREATENING KIDNAPING EVENT ON AUGUST 7TH, 2025. WHEREAS OFFICER ALLEN UTILIZED ADVANCED FLOCK CAMERA TECHNOLOGY TO SWIFTLY IDENTIFY THE SUSPECT VEHICLE INVOLVED IN THE ABDUCTION OF A MOTHER AND HER FOUR MONTH OLD CHILD, PROVIDING CRITICAL INTELLIGENCE THAT ENABLED OFFICERS TO TRACK AND INTERCEPT THE SUSPECT. HIS RAPID RESPONSE AND COORDINATION WITH FELLOW OFFICERS DIRECTLY CONTRIBUTED TO THE SAFE RESCUE OF BOTH VICTIMS AND THE APPREHENSION OF THE SUSPECT WITHOUT FURTHER HARM. WHEREAS OFFICER ALLEN'S ACTIONS EXEMPLIFIED THE VALUES OF COURAGE, TEAMWORK, AND COMMITMENT TO PUBLIC SAFETY, REFLECTING GREAT CREDIT UPON HIMSELF AND LOUISVILLE METRO POLICE DEPARTMENT. WHEREAS FOR BEING A DEDICATED AND CIVIC MINDED COMMUNITY SERVANT WHO HAS DEMONSTRATED EXCEPTIONAL BRAVERY, STRENGTHENING HIS COMMUNITY AND EXEMPLIFYING COMPASSION AND SERVICE TO OTHERS, OFFICER KENNETH ALLEN IS DESERVING THE HIGHEST RECOGNITION OF PRAISE. WE HEREBY CONFER THE TITLE OF DISTINGUISHED CITIZEN. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, THAT WE, THE COMMUNITY OF METRO LOUISVILLE, HEREBY CONFER AND PAY TRIBUTE BY WAY OF THIS PROCLAMATION WITH ALL RIGHTS, PRIVILEGES, AND RESPONSIBILITIES THEREUNTO APPERTAINING IN TESTIMONY WE HAVE CAUSED THESE LETTERS TO BE MADE IN THE SEAL OF THE METRO GOVERNMENT TO BE HEREUNTO AFFIXED. DONE IN LOUISVILLE METRO CITY HALL WITHIN THE COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY. FORGIVE THE DATE THIS WAS DONE A WHILE BACK. WE'RE JUST NOW ABLE TO GET THEM IN HERE THIS 25TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2025. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. 
          AND DON'T WANT TO FORGET OFFICER EMERICH IN HERE TOO. BECAUSE OF HIS SWIFT ACTION, HE WAS ABLE TO PREVENT THIS HEINOUS ACT FROM OCCURRING ALSO. SO THANK YOU, OFFICER EMERICH. 
          THANK YOU. OKAY. NOW YOU GET TO COME OUT AND GET. 
          [Addresses to the Council]
          [00:45:30]
MADAM CLERK, ARE THERE ANY ADDRESSES TO THE COUNCIL? YES, SIR. THERE ARE. 
          LET ME REMIND THOSE ADDRESSING THE COUNCIL TO PLEASE REFRAIN FROM USING PROFANITY OR MAKING DEROGATORY STATEMENTS TOWARDS COUNCIL MEMBERS. ADDITIONALLY, THE COUNCIL RULES PROVIDE THAT NO MORE THAN THREE PEOPLE MAY SPEAK TO THE POSITION ON THE SAME TOPIC. I KNOW THAT WE'VE GOT AT LEAST THREE FOLKS LINED UP IN THE QUEUE THAT I SEE THAT WILL BE SPEAKING ABOUT OUR INSPECTOR GENERAL IN SUPPORT OF THAT REAPPOINTMENT, SO THOSE WILL BE THE ONLY THREE THAT WE WILL ALLOW REGARDING THAT PARTICULAR TOPIC. MADAM CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE SPEAKERS. 
          SANDRA LEE. MOTION. MY NAME IS SHONDA LEE AND I LIVE IN DISTRICT 14, CURRENTLY FIGHTING SOME CHARGES FOR DISORDERLY CONDUCT. WHEN MY MUSIC WAS PLAYING TOO LOUD. I'M GOING TO SAY THIS PLAIN BECAUSE I KNOW SOME OF Y'ALL DON'T LISTEN TOO WELL UNLESS YOUR POWER IS CHALLENGED. SO LET'S TALK ABOUT ACCOUNTABILITY. THIS VOTE SITS RIGHT HERE. METRO COUNCIL DECIDES THIS. THERE IS NO COMMITTEE OR OUTSIDE FORCE BEHIND IT. YOU DECIDE WHETHER THIS CITY KEEPS REAL OVERSIGHT, WHETHER OR WHETHER YOU WEAKEN IT. LET'S BE CLEAR ON THE FACTS. 
          YES, SUBPOENA POWER HAS TO COME FROM THE STATE LEGISLATOR. WE ALL KNOW THAT. BUT THIS COUNCIL NEVER MADE IT A PRIORITY TO DEMAND IT. YOU DIDN'T LOBBY FOR IT. YOU DIDN'T STAND PUBLICLY FOR IT. YOU DIDN'T HELP FIGHT THE YOU DIDN'T FIGHT FOR THE TOOLS THE ACCOUNTABILITY BOARD NEEDED FROM DAY ONE. YOU DIDN'T. SO I'M SORRY. SO EDITOR HARDNESS HAS ONLY NOT BEEN PERFECT BECAUSE YOU LEFT THE OFFICE ON UNDERPOWERED, ON THE PURPOSE, ON PURPOSE. MEANWHILE, Y'ALL PROVED MILLIONS OF DOLLARS FOR LMPD WITHOUT HESITATION. SO WHO EXACTLY IS SUPPOSED TO HOLD THEM ACCOUNTABLE? EDITOR HARNESS HAS DONE EVERYTHING THAT HE COULD WITH THE LITTLE SUPPORT HE WAS GIVEN, AND THAT LACK OF SUPPORT CAME FROM RIGHT HERE. SO SO TO DENY HIM THE TOOLS AND THEN TURN AROUND AND SAY HE WASN'T DONE, HE HASN'T DONE ENOUGH, IS MANUFACTURED FAILURE JUST IN CASE? THAT'S NOT CLEAR FOR ANYBODY IN HERE. THAT MEANS Y'ALL SET HIM UP TO FAIL. AND NOW Y'ALL TRYING TO USE THE STRUGGLE YOU CAUSED AS THE EXCUSE TO REMOVE HIM. AND WE SEE IT EVERY TIME SOMEONE IN THIS CITY GETS CLOSE TO REAL ACCOUNTABILITY. SUTTON. THERE'S CONCERNS, ISSUES AND PERSONALITY CONFLICTS. NO, THIS IS POWER PROTECTING ITSELF. AGAIN, THE COMMUNITY HAS BEEN CONSISTENT. WE WANT TRANSPARENCY. WE WANT OVERSIGHT. WE WANT REAL CONSEQUENCES WHEN THE HARM IS DONE. NO STATEMENTS, NO SYMBOLISMS, NOT NOT PRESS CONFERENCES RESULTS. SO IF YOU SAY BLACK LIVES MATTER, PROVE IT. IF YOU SAY JUSTICE MATTER, PROVE IT. IF YOU CLAIM TO SERVE THE PEOPLE, STAND ON IT RIGHT NOW WHEN THERE ARE NO CAMERAS CLAPPING FOR YOU. BECAUSE THIS VOTE IS NOT ABOUT ONE MAN. THIS VOTE IS ABOUT WHETHER YOUR PUBLIC WORDS MEAN ANYTHING WHEN IT'S TIME TO ACT. SO DO YOUR JOB. VOTE TO REAPPOINT EDITOR HARNESS NOT AS A FAVOR TO US, BUT BECAUSE IT IS THE ONLY VOTE THAT ALIGNS WITH FAIRNESS, TRANSPARENCY, AND THE CITY YOU CLAIM TO REPRESENT. THANK YOU, APRIL HEARN. GOOD EVENING. MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL. I STAND BEFORE YOU TONIGHT TO VOICE MY STRONG SUPPORT FOR THE REAPPOINTMENT OF EDITOR HARNESS AS THE INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR OUR CITY. THE WORK OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL IS FUNDAMENTALLY ABOUT PEOPLE POWER, THE WORK OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL. I'M SORRY. EVERY INVESTIGATION, EVERY FINDING AND EVERY RECOMMENDATION ISSUED BY THE OIG. IT IS A STEP TOWARDS MAKING OUR GOVERNMENT MORE RESPONSIVE AND MORE ACCOUNTABLE TO THE CITIZENS THAT IT SERVES. 
          WE WANT TO EMPOWER OUR CITIZENS, AND WHEN RESIDENTS SEE AN INDEPENDENT BODY ACTIVELY ROOTING OUT WASTE AND CORRUPTION, THEIR FAITH IN OUR GOVERNMENT IS STRENGTHENED. THE 
          [00:50:02]
OIG GIVES A VOICE TO CONCERNED CITIZENS, ENSURING THAT THEIR CONCERNS ABOUT HOW THEIR TAXES, THEIR TAX DOLLARS ARE SPENT, AND NOT ONLY JUST FEELING LIKE THEY ARE HEARD, BUT THAT THINGS ARE THOROUGHLY INVESTIGATED. METRO COUNCIL, YOU HAVE AN ACCOUNTABILITY TO TAXPAYERS. 
          REAPPOINTING EDITOR HARNESS ENSURES THAT WE MAINTAIN A STRONG AND A STRONG ACTIVE CHECK ON POWER, A CHECK THAT ENSURES EVERY PUBLIC DOLLAR IS SPENT WITH THE UTMOST CARE. BY SUPPORTING INSPECTOR GENERAL HARNESS, WE ARE NOT JUST SUPPORTING AN OFFICE, WE ARE UPHOLDING THE PRINCIPLE THAT THIS GOVERNMENT IS WORKING FOR ITS PEOPLE. EDITOR HARNESS IS A PROVEN LEADER. WE SEE HIS DEDICATION, INDEPENDENCE AND PROFESSIONAL DISCIPLINE IN HIS TRACK RECORD. IT SPEAKS FOR ITSELF. IN CONCLUSION, I AM URGING THAT THE METRO COUNCIL VOTE IN FAVOR OF REAPPOINTING EDITOR HARNESS AS OUR INSPECTOR GENERAL BECAUSE IT IS THE BEST PATH FORWARD FOR OUR CITY FOR UPHOLDING THE HIGHEST STANDARD OF ETHICS IN OUR CITY, AND SUPPORTING A PROVEN LEADER WHO HAS EARNED OUR TRUST. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, ROGER WHITTAKER. 
          ROGER WHITTAKER. BIANCA AUSTIN. GOOD EVENING, COUNCIL MEMBERS. EXCUSE ME, I HAVE TO READ FROM MY PHONE TONIGHT BECAUSE I REALLY WOULD LIKE TO STICK TO THE SUBJECT. MY NAME IS BIANCA AUSTIN. I'M THE CO-FOUNDER OF A NONPROFIT, FAMILIES UNITED. IT'S A NATIONAL NONPROFIT. WE TRAVEL ACROSS THE COUNTRY STANDING IN SOLIDARITY FOR IMPACTED FAMILIES OF POLICE BRUTALITY. I JOIN YOU HERE TONIGHT BECAUSE THIS CITY IS AT A CROSSROAD CROSSROADS. I'M SORRY. ONE WORD. TRUST. TRANSPARENCY AND TRANSFORMATION TRULY MATTERS. THE DECISION YOU MAKE TONIGHT TO REAPPOINT INSPECTOR ED HARNESS IS NOT JUST A PROCEDURAL VOTE. IT'S A VOTE. WHETHER LOUISVILLE KEEPS ITS PROMISE TO THE COMMUNITY, KEEPS ITS PROMISE TO THE COMMUNITY WHO'S BEEN DOING THE WORK TIRELESSLY. MR. HARNESS HAS WORKED TO BRING INTEGRITY, ACCOUNTABILITY INTO OUR SYSTEM, TO SHINE A LIGHT WHERE THERE IS TOO OFTEN DARKNESS. HE'S SHOWN UP FOR THE FAMILIES, FOR VICTIMS, FOR THE COMMUNITY MEMBERS WHO HAVE BEEN ASKING FOR FAIRNESS, JUST FAIRNESS, CONSISTENCY AND OVERSIGHT. THAT KIND LEADERSHIP TAKES COURAGE AND COMPASSION. REAPPOINTING EDITOR HARNESS SENDS A CLEAR MESSAGE THAT LOUISVILLE IS SERIOUS ABOUT JUSTICE. WE'RE SERIOUS ABOUT THE COMMUNITY VOICE, AND WE'RE SERIOUS ABOUT KEEPING OUR CITY SAFE FOR EVERYONE. WE TALK OFTEN ABOUT HEALING AND REBUILDING AND PUTTING TRUST BACK IN THE COMMUNITIES THAT WE SERVE AND BUILDING BUILDING THAT, THAT BRIDGE, THAT GAP, THAT MISINFORMATION BETWEEN THE COMMUNITY AND LAW ENFORCEMENT. 
          BUT TRUST CANNOT GROW WITH JUST ACCOUNTABILITY. WE NEED EDITOR HARNESS. HE REPRESENTS THE ACCOUNTABILITY MOVING FORWARD. FAILING TO REAPPOINT HIM WAS SET US BACK, AND WE ARE AT A TIME WHERE WE NEED HIM NOW. SO TONIGHT I ASK YOU, NOT JUST AS A COUNCIL MEMBER, BUT AS A STEWARD TO THE CITY'S MORAL DIRECTION, TO DO WHAT'S RIGHT, STAND WITH THE COMMUNITY, STAND FOR TRANSPARENCY AND VOTE YES TO REAPPOINT INSPECTOR ED HARNESS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, ANTONIO BROWN. HOW Y'ALL DOING? FATHER, MAY I? WHY IS THIS CITY SO SEGREGATED, SEGREGATED BY 
          [00:55:15]
CLASS, SEGREGATED BY RACE? AND BECAUSE OF THAT, WE SEGREGATED BY MIND. I REMEMBER GROWING UP AND HEARING, WHAT WOULD JESUS DO? BUT TODAY IT FEELS LIKE OUR METRO COUNCIL MEMBERS, MOST OF Y'ALL REPUBLICANS, IS ASKING, WHAT WOULD SATAN DO? OUR COUNTRY HAS TAKEN AMERICAN CITIZENS, LOCKING THEM UP. PUT THEM ACROSS THESE TAKING CITIZENS, IMMIGRANTS, EVEN FAMILIES, PUTTING THEM IN DYING SITUATIONS LIKE. ALLIGATOR, ALLIGATOR. ALCATRAZ, JUST SEARCHING FOR A BETTER WAY, I KNOW. THIS COUNTRY IS RECREATING THE SAME CONDITIONS OF SLAVERY AND CALLING IT GOOD POLICY. AND I KNOW THAT Y'ALL PROBABLY SAYING TO YOURSELF, AB, NOW I DON'T I DON'T GOT NOTHING TO DO WITH THAT. BUT OVERSTAND THIS, THE MINDSET OF LOCAL LEADERS SHAPED THIS STATE, THE STATE SHAPED THIS NATION RIGHT HERE IN THIS CITY. WE SEEN WHAT GOOD ORGANIZING LOOK LIKE. WE'VE SEEN WHAT THE PEOPLE SPEAK. AND THE MAYOR, WHO I DON'T CARE FOR, LISTEN AND REFER THE INSPECTOR GENERAL WHO THE PEOPLE CHOSE. THAT SOUND LIKE A STEP TO ACCOUNTABILITY. I'M NOT. I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT YOU. LET ME FINISH. YOU, METRO COUNCIL, YOU CONTROL THE OUTER LAYER LIKE THE EGG. YOU PROTECTING THE YOLK. I ASK Y'ALL THIS. HOW MANY OF Y'ALL MILLIONAIRES NOW CLOSE TO IT OFF THE BACKS OF TAXPAYERS? YEAH, I THINK YOU LOST YOUR EMPATHY. IF YOU EVER HAD ANY. FOR THE PEOPLE THAT Y'ALL SAY I REPRESENT. BECAUSE ONLY EMPATHY WE SEE IS THAT PROTECTING YOURSELF BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY. 
          IT'S LIKE WHEN THE HEAD OF THE POLICE UNION WALK IN HERE, HE DON'T ASK Y'ALL FOR ANYTHING. 
          HE TELLS Y'ALL, AND Y'ALL DO IT BECAUSE HE PROTECTS YOUR ACCESS, NOT THE COMMUNITY. THEY'RE NOT HERE. AT LEAST I FEEL LIKE THAT. THEY'RE NOT HERE TO PROTECT THE PEOPLE. THEY'RE HERE TO PROTECT PROPERTY. THIS IS WHY WE GO TO THE GROCERY STORES RIGHT NOW. YOU SEE HIM LINED UP ON GUARD, BUT YOU GO TO POLICE, GO TO BUS STOPS. WHERE THEY AT AFTER TWO BLACK WOMEN WAS KILLED. WE ALL KNOW THE GOVERNMENT. SPENT THE MONEY FOR A SNAP BENEFITS. WE LOOK THROUGH THE PAPER, RIGHT? WE THE PEOPLE IS HUNGRY AND GOT THREATEN THEM WITH JAIL BECAUSE THEY'RE TRYING TO FEED THEIR CHILDREN. YOU REMIND ME OF A STORY. SOMEONE TOLD ME HOW TO MAKE BUTTER. YOU GOTTA BEAT IT. 
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
          I'VE HAD TWO BOARD ATTORNEYS IN THE STATE OF KENTUCKY TELL ME THERE'S NO SUCH THING AS LEGISLATIVE INTENT. IF YOU ARE NOT PRECISE IN HOW YOU WRITE AN ORDINANCE OR A LAW, IT MAY BE INTERPRETED AND USED VERY DIFFERENTLY BY ANOTHER ATTORNEY OR ENFORCEMENT OFFICER. THIS ORDINANCE HAS A NUMBER OF ISSUES IN THAT AREA. MASSAGE THERAPISTS LICENSED BY THE KENTUCKY BOARD OF LICENSURE FOR MASSAGE THERAPY UNDERGO RIGOROUS TESTING, FINGERPRINTING, A THOROUGH BACKGROUND CHECK, A THOROUGH REVIEW OF THEIR TRANSCRIPTS, AND THE CREDENTIALS OF THE SCHOOL THEY ATTENDED FOR MASSAGE TRAINING BEFORE THEY'RE LICENSED WERE REQUIRED TO PRACTICE ACCORDING TO A VERY STRICT CODE OF ETHICS AND STANDARDS OF PRACTICE. VIOLATIONS CAN AND HAVE RESULTED IN THE LOSS OF LICENSE, 
          [01:00:02]
WHICH IS REPORTED TO A NATIONAL REGULATORY BOARD'S DATABASE FOR REFERENCE BY OTHER BOARDS, SEE YOUR HANDOUT AT THE BOTTOM OF IT FOR EXCERPTS FROM OUR CODE OF ETHICS AND THE STANDARDS OF PRACTICE. SO THIS MEANS WE'RE ALREADY HEAVILY REGULATED. LAST NIGHT A CLIENT, SOMEONE ELSE'S CLIENT RECORDED AND SENT TO ME, A COUNCIL MEMBER'S AIDE, TELLING HIM THAT AN LMT DOESN'T HAVE TO GET A DOCTOR'S REFERRAL TO WORK THE GLUTES BECAUSE IT'S ABOUT INTENT. HE SAID THAT AS LONG AS THE INTENT WAS NOT SEXUAL, THEY COULD WORK ON GLUTES, GENITALS, BREASTS, WHATEVER. THAT'S A QUOTE. ACCORDING TO OUR ETHICS CODE, THE LMT COULD LOSE THEIR LICENSE FOR TOUCHING CLIENT GENITALS. AND THIS AIDE IS ONE OF THE PEOPLE WHO HAS WATCHED THIS ORDINANCE FROM ITS INCEPTION. AND YET HE KNOWS NOTHING. NOTHING ABOUT THE REGULATIONS OF LEGITIMATE LMTS. HE JUST TOLD THIS LMT HOW TO LOSE HIS LICENSE. THERE ARE OTHER PITFALLS IN THIS LANGUAGE OF THIS ORDINANCE. TOO MANY TO TOUCH ON RIGHT NOW. SO PLEASE DO NOT ADOPT THIS ORDINANCE TONIGHT. IF YOU INSIST ON ADOPTING THIS ORDINANCE, PLEASE ADOPT THE EXEMPTION WORDING I SENT TO YOU ALL ON TUESDAY NIGHT. WEDNESDAY MORNING. 
          LICENSED MASSAGE THERAPISTS WHO ARE PROVIDING MASSAGE SERVICES IN ACCORDANCE WITH CRS 309 3643 50 TO 3 SIX FOUR AND 201KAR 42 0102 42 110. THESE OFFICES, SALONS AND CLINICS WHERE THEY LEGALLY PROVIDE SERVICES SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED MASSAGE FACILITIES. THE LAST SENTENCE IS NECESSARY BECAUSE THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE DEFINES MASSAGE FACILITY AS AN ESTABLISHMENT WHERE ANY PERSON PERFORMS OR PERMITS MASSAGE TO BE PERFORMED FOR COMPENSATION. 
          THAT CLEARLY DEFINES ANY SITE WHERE I'VE EVER WORKED. SO THE LEGITIMATE MASSAGE BUSINESS MUST BE EXEMPTED. REMEMBER, THE LMT WILL BE SUBJECT TO ACTION AGAINST THEIR LICENSE IF EVIDENCE OF VIOLATION OF OUR REGULATIONS ARE PROVIDED. I HOPE TO WORK WITH MR. HUDSON AND THE OTHER SPONSORS GOING FORWARD TO DEVELOP AN ORDINANCE THAT ACTUALLY ADDRESSES HUMAN TRAFFICKING, CRIMES, PROSTITUTION AND SOLICITATION. MORE CITIES ACROSS THE COUNTRY ARE ENACTING REAL PENALTIES FOR THE RAPISTS WHO PAY FOR THE TRAFFICKING OF WOMEN. YOUR THREE MINUTES HAS EXPIRED. PLEASE WRAP IT UP. MOST CITY ORDINANCES NOW ADDRESS THESE PROBLEMS WITHOUT USING THE WORD MASSAGE, CALLING THE CRIMES WHAT THEY ARE TRAFFICKING, PROSTITUTION, AND AND SOLICITATION. USE OF THE WORDS MASSAGE ENDANGERS THE LMT. WHEN A CONFUSED MAN DECIDES THAT WE WE APPRECIATE YOU COMING OUT MIGHT USE THE SAME WORD AND HE MIGHT GET SOME HERE. THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU. ELIZABETH. THAT'S NOT MY PHONE. RACKLEY. 
          RACKLEY. HI. MY NAME IS ELIZABETH RACKLEY. I'M A BUSINESS OWNER OF THE MASSAGE THERAPY BUSINESS. I'M A LICENSED MASSAGE THERAPIST. THERAPIST? SINCE 225, 2005, IT HAS BEEN 20 YEARS. I DO NOT TAKE THIS ORDINANCE LIGHTLY. I DID PROVIDE YOU A PACKET. YES. 
          THE FIRST PAGE IS AN ATTENTION GRABBER. IT'S ON PURPOSE BECAUSE THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A SEX WORKER LOOKING AT THE BODY AND A LICENSED MASSAGE THERAPIST IN THIS. TO ECHO WHAT DENISE HAS SAID, THERE IS A LOT OF ISSUES HERE. THERE'S A LOT OF CONTRADICTION, CONTRADICTIONS. THERE'S A LOT OF GRAY AREA. AGAIN, TO ECHO HER, THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS LEGISLATIVE INTENT. IT IS EITHER IN BLACK AND WHITE OR IT DOES NOT EXIST. 
          LAWS CANNOT BE ENFORCED. ORDINANCES CANNOT BE ENFORCED ON OPINION. THEY ARE ONLY ENFORCED ON WHAT IS WRITTEN. SO I JUST WANT TO GO AHEAD AND GIVE YOU A CHANCE TO STOP AND THINK ABOUT THIS. WE ARE BEING ASKED TO TRUST THAT THIS WILL BE AMENDED LATER. THE VERY PEOPLE THAT ARE ASKING US TO TRUST THIS HAVE GIVEN FOUR DIFFERENT STORIES AS TO WHO HAS HELPED WORK ON THIS. FIRST ONE, THE KENTUCKY BOARD WAS INVOLVED. THAT HAS BEEN DENIED BY THE BOARD. THE SECOND ONE, A BOARD MEMBER WAS MUST HAVE BEEN CONTACTED. THERE'S BEEN NO ONE PUT FORTH A LOCAL MASSAGE PERSON INVOLVED. THAT PERSON I SPOKE WITH THE OTHER DAY AND SAID THEY'VE NOT BEEN INVOLVED. THE LAST STORY HIT ME TONIGHT ON MY WAY HERE. THE FBI WAS INVOLVED IN WRITING THIS. NOW IMAGINE YOU'RE GOING TO GO MORTGAGE, GET A MORTGAGE FOR YOUR HOME. YOU'VE BEEN YOU ARE EXPECTING TO TRUST. YOU'RE EXPECTING TO BELIEVE WHAT THAT MORTGAGE BROKER IS TELLING YOU, BUT THEY WANT YOU TO GET AN ADJUSTABLE RATE. DO YOU WANT TO GET AN ADJUSTABLE RATE? TRUST ME, THE RATES WILL NEVER GO UP. ADJUSTABLE RATES ARE NOTHING BUT A PITFALL AND A WAY TO LOSE YOUR HOME. BUT WE ARE BEING EXPECTED TO BELIEVE IN ADJUSTABLE RATE WITH FOUR DIFFERENT STORIES BEING PROJECTED TO US. WHAT IS THE PROBLEM WITH THE DELAY? THAT IS ALL WE ARE ASKING. WHAT IS THE RUSH? WHY DO YOU HAVE TO RUSH 
          [01:05:05]
SOMETHING IF THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH IT? WE ARE IN FAVOR OF SHUTTING DOWN ALL THESE ILLICIT PRACTICES. WE WANT THEM GONE. WE MAKE THAT VERY CLEAR. WE WANT THEM GONE. I DO NOT WANT PEOPLE SHOWING UP TO MY BUSINESS ASKING FOR MORE THAN IS LEGAL. I DON'T WANT ANYTHING TO DO WITH IT. AND I DON'T WANT ANY OF MY THERAPISTS TO HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH IT. LET'S ENACT THINGS EXACTLY THE WAY MISS LOGSDON HAS PUT FORTH. LET'S TAKE A MOMENT, TAKE A BREATH. LET'S WORK TOGETHER WITH ACTUAL PEOPLE AND NOT IMAGINED STORIES. LET'S WORK TOGETHER. WE ARE NOT AT ODDS. YOU WANT WHAT'S BEST FOR OUR COMMUNITY. WE WANT WHAT'S BEST FOR OUR COMMUNITY. THIS IS NOT A FIGHT. THIS IS JUST A REQUEST TO TAKE A MOMENT. JUST A MOMENT AND LET'S DO IT RIGHT. LET'S NOT LEAVE IT OPEN FOR INTERPRETATION. LET'S NOT PUT OUR THERAPISTS AT RISK. LET'S WORK TOGETHER. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, JEFF YOCUM. THANK YOU ALL FOR SHOWING UP TONIGHT. HERE WE GO. I WEAR THIS HAT AND THE PUNISHER LOGO IN MEMORY OF CHRIS KYLE. THAT'S MY BROTHER AND MY HERO. I WILL NOT TAKE IT OFF FOR NO ONE OTHER THAN WHERE I DEEM NECESSARY. MEMBERS OF METRO COUNCIL, FELLOW LOUISVILLIANS AND PROUD PATRIOTS OF THIS GREAT CITY. TODAY I STAND BEFORE YOU, NOT AS A LIFELONG CITIZEN AND VETERAN, BUT AS A SERVANT OF WE, THE PEOPLE WHO BUILT THIS PLACE THAT WE CALL HOME. FIRST AND FOREMOST, I WANT TO SAY A THANK YOU, A HEARTFELT THANK YOU TO THE 50,000 VETERANS WHO CALL LOUISVILLE HOME, BRAVE MEN AND WOMEN WHO HAVE STOOD IN THE BREACH FOR THESE FREEDOMS, FROM THE FIELDS OF EUROPE TO THE JUNGLES OF VIETNAM AND THE SANDS OF THE MIDDLE EAST, THEIR SACRIFICES ECHO IN EVERY SINGLE DISTRICT OF THIS CITY. AND TO THOSE RIGHT HERE AMONG US ON THIS COUNCIL WHO HAVE DON THAT UNIFORM, KEVIN BRATCHER, BETSY ANTHONY. YEAH, I NAILED IT. I'M SORRY. LET ME GET BACK HERE. THANK YOU GUYS FOR YOUR SERVICE. YOU REMIND US THE TRUTH, THAT THE TRUTH STRENGTH IS. YOU REMIND US THAT TRUE STRENGTH IS FORGED IN DUTY, NOT DEBATES. 
          BUT MY GRATITUDE EXTENDS BEYOND THE WARS TO ALL OF THE PATRIOTS IN THE 26 DISTRICTS WHO SHOW UP FOR THE SMALLER COMMUNITIES, THE VOLUNTEERS THAT ARE STOCKING THE THE PANTRIES, THOSE MENTORING KIDS AND THE FAMILIES THAT FLY THE AMERICAN FLAG WITHOUT US. TOGETHER, WE ARE WEAKENED. WITH US UNITED. LOUISVILLE STANDS UNBREAKABLE. WE ARE THE GLUE, THE GRIT, THE GUARDIANS OF WHAT MAKES US MORE THAN A CITY. WE ARE A FAMILY. PROBLEMS DON'T SOLVE THEMSELVES BY POINTING THE FINGERS OF BLAME. IN MY OPINION, WE CAN STOP POINTING THE FINGERS OUTWARDS AND START POINTING THEM INWARDS. ASK YOURSELF, HOW CAN I IMPROVE? ONE MORE ACT OF KINDNESS CAN RIPPLE THROUGHOUT OUR ENTIRE NEIGHBORHOODS. THIS IS HOW WE RISE. NOT BY TEARING DOWN, BUT BY LIFTING UP. I LOOK FORWARD TO CONTINUING TO SERVE THE PEOPLE OF THIS GREAT CITY. 
          LOUISVILLE ISN'T PERFECT, BUT IT'S OURS. AND TOGETHER WITH THE SPIRIT OF OUR VETERANS AND PATRIOTS LEADING THE WAY, WE CAN MAKE IT EVEN A BETTER PLACE. A SPECIAL THANK YOU TO LMPD, THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE, AND OUR STATE TROOPERS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE. GOD BLESS ALL OF YOU. GOD BLESS THOSE SERVING AND PROTECTING US. MY FRIENDS THAT ARE DEPLOYED RIGHT NOW, TEN YEARS OF VFW SERVICE TO THIS COMMUNITY. PEOPLE SAY, WHO ARE YOU? WELL, NOW YOU KNOW. SO THANK YOU TO LMPD, THE SHERIFFS AND THE STATE TROOPERS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE. GOD BLESS ALL OF YOU AND GOD BLESS LOUISVILLE. THANK YOU. GALEN ZAVALA. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS GALEN ZAVALA. I LIVE, WORK AND WORSHIP IN DISTRICT 21. I'M HERE TO TALK TODAY ABOUT THE PROPOSED CHANGE TO THE THE ANTI MASKING ORDINANCE FROM COUNCILMAN JP LININGER. I'M HERE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF IT. WHEN I WAS A CHILD, I HAD THE PRIVILEGE OF GOING AND VISITING FAMILY IN HONDURAS DURING THE TIME OF THE JUAN ORLANDO HERNANDEZ DICTATORSHIP IN THAT COUNTRY. AND AT THAT TIME, THEY INSTITUTED A NATIONWIDE LAW THAT PERMITTED THEIR LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS, NATIONAL GUARDSMEN, AND THE MILITARY TO WEAR MASKS AND TO IDENTIFY, TO BASICALLY HIDE THEIR IDENTITIES. AND THIS CREATED A SITUATION VERY RAPIDLY IN THAT COUNTRY 
          [01:10:01]
WHERE THEY HAD SET UP MILITARY CHECKPOINTS AND WHATNOT. WERE ORGANIZED CRIME WAS ABLE TO SEIZE UPON THAT REALITY THAT WAS ESTABLISHED, THAT FEAR, AND START TO DRESS THEMSELVES UP IN WHATEVER WAY THEY NEEDED TO, TO BE ABLE TO EXTORT PEOPLE. SO THERE WAS ALWAYS THAT LITTLE HINT OF FEAR EVERY TIME YOU WOULD APPROACH ONE OF THESE CHECKPOINTS. SO WHY IS THIS RELEVANT TO US TODAY? WELL, WELL, WE'RE LOOKING AROUND THE COUNTRY RIGHT NOW IN PLACES LIKE LOS ANGELES, PLACES LIKE CHICAGO, WHERE WE HAVE ONCE AGAIN MASKED AGENTS OF THE STATE GOING AND GRABBING PEOPLE OFF OF THE STREET. WHEN YOU COMBINE THAT WITH THE PRECEDENT THAT'S BEEN ESTABLISHED BY THE SUPREME COURT, THAT JUST BECAUSE YOU ARE BROWN OR SPEAK WITH AN ACCENT, THAT IS ENOUGH CAUSE TO PULL YOU OFF THE STREET. IF YOU'RE STANDING IN FRONT OF A HOME DEPOT AND BRING YOU IN FOR QUESTIONING, IT CREATES A VERY VOLATILE, VERY, VERY BAD SITUATION. SO WHAT COUNCILMAN LINENGER HAS BROUGHT FORWARD IS A CHANGE TO THIS ORDINANCE THAT WILL JUST IT REALLY DOESN'T EVEN CHANGE IT. IT JUST SAYS SPECIFICALLY, WE'RE GOING TO MAKE SURE THAT IT IS FAIRLY IMPLEMENTED ALL ACROSS OUR CITY FOR ALL PEOPLE, ALL PEOPLE. AND THAT IS OF CRITICAL IMPORTANCE IF WE'RE NOT ABLE TO DO THAT EQUITABLY, IF WE HAVE ONE STANDARD FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC AND ANOTHER LESSER STANDARD FOR PUBLIC SERVANTS LIKE YOU ALL, I MEAN, IT WOULD BE OUTRAGEOUS FOR YOU ALL TO WANT TO SIT BEHIND A CURTAIN WIZARD OF OZ STYLE IN TOTAL ANONYMITY AND DO YOUR JOB. LAW ENFORCEMENT, ICE AGENTS, WHOEVER IT IS, ARE PUBLIC SERVANTS. AND YES, THAT MEANS SOMETIMES FACING PUBLIC ANGER THE WAY THAT YOU ALL DO. BUT THERE IS AN OBLIGATION TO FACE THAT ANGER AS A PUBLIC SERVANT. THAT IS THE REALITY THAT WE'RE CONFRONTED WITH TODAY. IF WE PERMIT MASKED AGENTS OF THE STATE HIDING THEIR IDENTITY TO DO WHAT IS BEING DONE IN OTHER CITIES IN OUR CITY, WE WILL BE IMPLEMENTING A CULTURE OF FEAR EVERYWHERE FOR EVERYONE IN THIS CITY. WHETHER YOU LOOK LIKE ME, WHETHER YOU WERE BORN IN ANOTHER COUNTRY OR NOT, EVERYONE WILL BE IMPACTED BY THIS. SO I STRONGLY URGE FOLKS TO TO SUPPORT THIS AND TO VOTE IN FAVOR OF IT WHEN THE TIME COMES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU, ALAN BAILEY. MY NAME IS ALAN BAILEY. I WAS A STAFF SERGEANT IN THE ARMY FOR ABOUT 11 YEARS. ABOUT TWO OF THOSE YEARS WERE SPENT IN AN ACTUAL WAR ZONE. AT ACTUAL WAR. I WORKED IN THE NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL AND WORKED WITH SOME OF THE MOST CLASSIFIED MATERIALS IN THE NATION. AND AT NO POINT IN MY CAREER DID I WEAR A MASK TO HIDE MY IDENTITY. I LEARNED A LOT DURING MY TIME IN THE MILITARY, AND TWO OF THE MOST IMPORTANT THINGS I LEARNED WERE DISCIPLINE AND ACCOUNTABILITY. 
          AT THIS POINT, WE HAVE HUNDREDS OF HOURS OF FOOTAGE PROVING THE LACK OF DISCIPLINE IN THE RANKS OF FEDERAL AGENCIES LIKE ICE, FROM ASSAULT TO DRUNK DRIVING TO PROPERTY DAMAGE, TO HARASSMENT, TO BRANDISHING FIREARMS ILLEGALLY TO MORE ASSAULT. WE'VE SEEN VIDEOS OF THESE MASS AGENTS INEPTITUDE AND WHAT QUALIFIES AS LEADERSHIP IN THESE AGENCIES SEEMS TO HAVE NO INTEREST IN INSTILLING DISCIPLINE WITHIN THEIR RANKS. IN THE ABSENCE OF DISCIPLINE, WE NEED ACCOUNTABILITY. WE NEED TO KNOW WHO THESE PEOPLE ARE. WE NEED TO KNOW WHAT THEY LOOK LIKE, AND WE NEED TO KNOW WHAT THEY'RE DOING AT ALL TIMES. 
          THAT MEANS TAKING THE MASKS OFF. IT WOULD SEEM TO ME THAT THESE SAME MASS BELLIGERENTS THAT NEED TO HIDE WHEN THEY ARE RUNNING AROUND ACTING AS IF LOUISVILLE, KENTUCKY, IN THESE UNITED STATES, IS WAR ZONE MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY, TERRORIZING OUR COMMUNITY AND THEN SPENDING WEEKENDS PARTYING ON WHISKEY ROW. BECAUSE LOUISVILLE, KENTUCKY IN THESE UNITED STATES IS IN FACT NOT A WAR ZONE. AND OUR IMMIGRANT COMMUNITY PRESENTS NO CREDIBLE THREAT. AND IN FACT, THE ONLY CREDIBLE THREAT THAT I'VE SEEN COMES FROM UNACCOUNTABLE PUBLIC SERVANTS WHO USE TAX DOLLARS TO TRY TO REENACT WHAT THEY'VE SEEN ON TV. A RECENT QUOTE IN THE COURIER JOURNAL SAID, LMPD OFFICERS SEE TIME AND TIME AGAIN WHEN ASSAILANTS, TRIGGER PULLERS ARE WEARING MASKS, CONCEAL THEIR IDENTITIES, AND WE SEE IT, TOO. THEY TRAVEL IN WHITE SUBURBANS ARMED TO THE TEETH TO HARASS OUR NEIGHBORS AND FRIENDS AND VIOLATE CITIZENS FOURTH AMENDMENT RIGHTS. IF THE ORIGINAL STATEMENT IS TRUE, THEN THE LAW MUST BE ENFORCED EVENLY ACROSS THE CITY. IF WE ARE SUBJECT TO THIS ORDINANCE, EVERYONE IS SUBJECT TO THIS ORDINANCE. AND IF ANY OF THESE PEOPLE WANT TO SEE WHAT AN ACTUAL WAR ZONE LOOKS LIKE, I'M MORE THAN HAPPY TO DRIVE DOWN WITH THEM TO OUTER LOOP AND WE CAN GET THEM SIGNED UP. IN THE ABSENCE OF DISCIPLINE, WE NEED ACCOUNTABILITY. EVERY CITY COUNCIL MEMBER SHOULD BE VOTING YES TO THE MASK ORDINANCE. TAKE THE MASKS OFF. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. THAT CONCLUDES THE ADDRESSES. THE COUNCIL. NEXT, WE HAVE THE 
          [Council Minutes]
APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 30TH, 2025. ARE THERE ANY CORRECTIONS OR DELETIONS? OKAY. THE ITEMS BROUGHT BEFORE US. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY 
          [01:15:03]
OPPOSITION? IN OPPOSITION. THOSE MINUTES ARE WRITTEN. APPROVED. NEXT, WE HAVE 
          [Committee Minutes]
          [5.
 ID 25-0674     Regular:  Committee of the Whole – October 30, 2025]
APPROVAL OF THE FOLLOWING COMMITTEE MINUTES, ALL IN 2025. THE REGULAR COMMITTEE OF THE 
          [6.
 ID 25-0678     Regular:  Planning and Zoning Committee – November 4, 2025]
WHOLE OCTOBER 30TH. THE REGULAR PLANNING AND ZONING OF NOVEMBER 4TH. THE REGULAR LABOR ECONOMIC 
          [7.
 ID 25-0679     Regular:  Labor and Economic Development Committee – November 4, 2025]
          [8.
 ID 25-0680     Regular:  Public Works Committee – November 4, 2025]
DEVELOPMENT. NOVEMBER 4TH. THE REGULAR PUBLIC WORKS. NOVEMBER 4TH, THE REGULAR GOVERNMENT 
          [9.
 ID 25-0681     Regular:  Government Oversight/Audit and Appointments Committee – November 4, 2025]
          [10.
 ID 25-0682     Regular:  Equity, Community Affairs, Housing, Health and Education Committee – November 5, 2025]
OVERSIGHT AUDIT APPOINTMENTS. NOVEMBER 4TH THE REGULAR EQUITY, COMMUNITY AFFAIRS, HOUSING, 
          [11.
 ID 25-0683     Regular:  Appropriations Committee – November 5, 2025]
          [12.
 ID 25-0684     Regular:  Public Safety Committee – November 5, 2025]
HEALTH AND EDUCATION. NOVEMBER 5TH THE REGULAR APPROPRIATIONS. NOVEMBER 5TH THE REGULAR PUBLIC 
          [13.
 ID 25-0685      Regular:  Ad Hoc Committee on Efficiency of Boards and Commissions – November 5, 2025]
SAFETY. NOVEMBER 5TH THE REGULAR AD HOC COMMITTEE ON EFFICIENCIES OF BOARDS AND 
          [14.
 ID 25-0686     Regular:  Parks and Sustainaility Committee – November 6, 2025]
          [15.
 ID 25-0687     Regular:  Budget Committee – November 6, 2025]
COMMISSIONS. NOVEMBER 5TH. THE REGULAR PARKS AND SUSTAINABILITY. NOVEMBER 6TH 
          [16.
 ID 25-0710     Special:  Ad Hoc Committee on Efficiency of Boards and Commissions – November 11, 2025]
THE REGULAR BUDGET. NOVEMBER 6TH THE SPECIAL AD HOC COMMTE ON EFFICIENCIES OF BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS, NOVEMBER 11TH AR THE CORRECTIONS OR DELETIONS, CORRECTIONS, DELETIONS? I'VE HEARD A MOTION. I'VE HEARD A SECOND. IT'S BEFORE US. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY IN OPPOSITION? THESE MINUTES ARE APPROVED AS WRITTEN. MADAM 
          [Communications to the Council]
CLERK, DO WE HAVE ANY COMMUNICATIONS TO THE COUNCIL? YES, SIR. WE DO. PLEASE READ 
          [17.
 ID 25-0700     Hazarous Materials Appeals and Overseers Board – Corinne Greenberg, Cheryl Fisher (Reappointments). Metro Council approval is not required.]
THOSE IN THE RECORD. DEAR PRESIDENT ATKINSON, AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ORDINANCE, APPEALS AND OVERSEERS BOARD, I AM REAPPOINTING THE FOLLOWING. 
          KAREEN GREENBURG REAPPOINTMENT TERM EXPIRES DECEMBER 31ST, 2029. CHERYL FISHER A REAPPOINTMENT TERM EXPIRES NOVEMBER 1ST, 2029. THIS WILL BE READ INTO THE RECORD. ONLY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF THESE APPOINTMENTS IS NOT REQUIRED. SINCERELY, CRAIG GREENBERG. 
          [18.
 ID 25-0703     Kentucky Science Center Board – David Tandy, Keith Curtis, Sandra Baker, William Compton, Kristin Cook, Ron Vonderhaar, Andrea Wilson (Reappointments) and Daniel Hawk, Brett Norton, Norman Seawright III, William Sutter, Ashley Taylor, Marty Walsh (New Appointments). Metro Council approval is not required.]
MAYOR. DEAR PRESIDENT, I AM APPOINTING AND REAPPOINTING THE FOLLOWING TO THE KENTUCKY SCIENCE CENTER. DAVID TANDY A REAPPOINTMENT TERM EXPIRES JUNE 30TH, 2026. KEITH CURTIS A REAPPOINTMENT TERM EXPIRES JUNE 30TH, 2027. SANDRA BAKER REAPPOINTMENT TERM EXPIRES JUNE 30TH, 2028. WILLIAM COMPTON A REAPPOINTMENT TERM EXPIRES JUNE 30TH, 2028. KRISTEN COOK A REAPPOINTMENT TERM EXPIRES JUNE 30TH, 2028. RON VONDERHAAR A REAPPOINTMENT TERM EXPIRES JUNE 30TH, 2028. ANDREA WILSON WILSON A REAPPOINTMENT TERM EXPIRES JUNE 30TH, 2028. DANIEL HAWK A NEW APPOINTMENT TERM EXPIRES JUNE 30TH, 2028. BRET NORTON A NEW APPOINTMENT TERM EXPIRES JUNE 30TH, 2028. NORMAN SEAWRIGHT THE THIRD NEW APPOINTMENT TERM EXPIRES JUNE 30TH, 2028. WILLIAM SUTTER A NEW APPOINTMENT TERM EXPIRES JUNE 30TH, 2028. ASHLEY TAYLOR A NEW APPOINTMENT TERM EXPIRES JUNE 30TH, 2028. MARTY WALSH A NEW APPOINTMENT TERM EXPIRES JUNE 30TH, 2028. THIS WILL BE READ INTO THE RECORD. ONLY METRO COUNCIL APPROVAL OF THESE 
          [19.
 ID 25-0705     Board of Health – Patricia Bautista-Cervera (Reappointment).]
APPOINTMENTS IS NOT REQUIRED. SINCERELY, CRAIG GREENBERG, MAYOR DEAR PRESIDENT AKESSON, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE HEALTH AND THE BOARD OF HEALTH ORDINANCE, I'M REAPPOINTING THE FOLLOWING PATRICIA BAUTISTA SAAVEDRA SAAVEDRA A REAPPOINTMENT TERM EXPIRES JULY 31ST, 2028. YOUR PROMPT ACTION ON THIS REAPPOINTMENT IS MOST APPRECIATED. SINCERELY, CRAIG 
          [20.
 ID 25-0706     Human Relations Advocacy Board – Yolanda Reed (Reappointment).]
WITTENBERG MAYOR, YOUR PRESENT AKESSON, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE HUMAN RELATIONS ADVOCACY BOARD ORDINANCE, I'M REAPPOINTING THE FOLLOWING YOLANDA READ A REAPPOINTMENT TERM EXPIRES SEPTEMBER 30TH, 2028. YOUR PROMPT ACTION ON THIS REAPPOINTMENT IS MOST 
          [21.
 ID 25-0702     Human Relations Commission Enforcement Board – Maurice Sweeney (Reappointment).]
APPRECIATED. SINCERELY, CRAIG GREENBERG. MAYOR. DEAR PRESIDENT AKESSON, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION ENFORCEMENT BOARD ORDINANCE, I AM REAPPOINTING THE FOLLOWING MAURICE SWEENEY A REAPPOINTMENT TERM EXPIRES SEPTEMBER 30TH, 
          [22.
 ID 25-0704     Planning Commission – Mark Benitez (Reappointment).]
2028. YOUR PROMPT ACTION ON THIS REAPPOINTMENT IS MOST APPRECIATED. SINCERELY, CRAIG GREENBERG MAYOR. DEAR PRESIDENT AKESSON, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ORDINANCE, I'M REAPPOINTING THE FOLLOWING TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION. MARC BENITEZ A REAPPOINTMENT TERM EXPIRES OCTOBER 1ST, 2028. YOUR PROMPT ACTION. THIS REAPPOINTMENT IS MOST APPRECIATED. SINCERELY, CRAIG RINGLER MAYOR READ IN FULL. THOSE APPOINTMENTS NEED COUNCIL APPROVAL BEFORE TO THE 
          [Consent Calendar]
GOVERNMENT OVERSIGHT AUDIT COMMITTEE. THE NEXT ORDER OF BUSINESS BE THE CONSENT CALENDAR. CONSENT CALENDAR COMPRISES OF ITEMS 2323 THROUGH 40. ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS? PRESIDENT ATKINSON I WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST THAT ITEM 47 BE MOVED FROM OLD BUSINESS TO THE CONSENT CALENDAR. IT WAS ON OLD BUSINESS BECAUSE IT CAME OUT OF PLANNING AND ZONING WITH A PRESENT VOTE. SO IT WAS PUT ON OLD BUSINESS. THE PERSON, THE COUNCIL MEMBER WHO VOTED PRESENT REQUESTED THAT WE MOVE IT TO THE CONSENT COUNCIL CALENDAR, AND I AGREED AND WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST THAT WE DO THAT. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANY OBJECTION TO THAT HEARING? NO OBJECTION. MADAM CLERK, WOULD YOU PLEASE DO THAT? YES, SIR. MADAM CLERK. SECOND 
          [Legislation forwarded from APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE]
READING OF THE OF THOSE ITEMS, THE FOLLOWING LEGISLATION WAS PORTED FROM THE APPROPRIATIONS 
          [23. O-265-25     AN ORDINANCE APPROPRIATING $10,000 FROM DISTRICT 9 NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT FUNDS, THROUGH THE OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET, TO TREESLOUISVILLE, INC. FOR TREE CANOPY IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS ALONG FRANKFORT AVENUE.
11/5/25 Appropriations Committee  Recommended for Approval
Action Required By: April 30, 2026
Sponsors: Andrew Owen (D-9) ]
COMMITTEE. ITEM 23, AN ORDINANCE APPROPRIATING $10,000 FROM DISTRICT NINE NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT FUNDS THROUGH THE OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET TO TREES LOUISVILLE, INC. FOR 
          [Legislation forwarded from BUDGET COMMITTEE]
          [24.
 O-258-25     AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 091, SERIES 2025, RELATING TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2025-2026 OPERATING BUDGET, BY CHANGING THE LANGUAGE ASSOCIATED WITH THE IMPROVEMENTS TO THE VALLEY STATION BASEBALL FIELD AND THE PRAIRIE VILLAGE BASEBALL FIELD.
11/6/25 Budget Committee  Recommended for Approval
Action Required By: April 30, 2026
Sponsors: Khalil Batshon (R-25) ]
TREE CANOPY IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS ALONG FRANKFORD AVENUE. THE FOLLOWING LEGISLATION WAS FORWARDED FROM THE BUDGET COMMITTEE. ITEM 24, AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER OH 91, SERIES 2025, RELATING TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2025 2026 OPERATING BUDGET BY CHANGING THE LANGUAGE ASSOCIATED WITH THE IMPROVEMENTS TO THE VALLEY 
          [25.
 O-269-25     AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 072, SERIES 2020, RELATING TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2020-2021 CAPITAL BUDGET, AND ORDINANCE NO. 092, SERIES 2025, RELATING TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2025-2026 CAPITAL BUDGET, BY TRANSFERRING FUNDS BETWEEN PROJECTS AND ESTABLISHING A NEW PROJECT.
11/6/25 Budget Committee  Recommended for Approval
Action Required By: April 30, 2026
Sponsors: Jonathan ”JJ” Joseph (R-12) ]
STATION, BASEBALL FIELD AND PRAIRIE VILLAGE BASEBALL FIELD. ITEM 25 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 072, SERIES 2020, RELATING TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2020 2021. CAPITAL BUDGET AND ORDINANCE NUMBER 092, SERIES 2025 RELATING TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2025 2026 CAPITAL 
          [26.
 O-271-25     AN ORDINANCE AMENDING LOUISVILLE METRO CODE OF ORDINANCES (“LMCO”) SECTIONS 32.129 AND 32.140 REGARDING THE LOUISVILLE POLICEMEN’S RETIREMENT FUND.
11/6/25 Budget Committee  Recommended for Approval
Action Required By: April 30, 2026
Sponsors: Ginny Mulvey-Woolridge (R-24), Josie Raymond (D-10)]
BUDGET BY TRANSFERRING FUNDS BETWEEN PROJECTS AND ESTABLISHING A NEW PROJECT. 
          ITEM 26 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING LOUISVILLE METRO CODE OF ORDINANCES, SECTION 32.129 AND 
          [27.
 O-273-25     AN ORDINANCE AMENDING LOUISVILLE METRO CODE OF ORDINANCES (“LMCO”) SECTIONS 32.168 AND 32.170 REGARDING THE LOUISVILLE FIREFIGHTER’S PENSION FUND.
11/6/25 Budget Committee  Recommended for Approval
Action Required By: April 30, 2026
Sponsors: Josie Raymond (D-10), Ginny Mulvey-Woolridge (R-24)]
32.140 REGARDING THE LOUISVILLE POLICE RETIREMENT FUND. ITEM 27, AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE LOUISVILLE METRO CODE OF ORDINANCES, SECTION 32.168 AND 32.170 REGARDING THE LOUISVILLE 
          [28.
 R-133-25     A RESOLUTION DETERMINING REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 209 NORTH ENGLISH STATION ROAD AS SURPLUS AND NOT NEEDED FOR THE GOVERNMENTAL PURPOSES OF METRO GOVERNMENT AND AUTHORIZING ITS TRANSFER.
11/6/25 Budget Committee  Recommended for Approval
Action Required By: April 30, 2026
Sponsors: Ben Reno-Weber (D-8), Anthony Piagentini (R-19)]
          [01:20:01]
FIREFIGHTERS PENSION FUND. ITEM 28 A RESOLUTION DETERMINING REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 209 NORTH STATION ROAD, A SURPLUS AND NOT NEEDED FOR THE GOVERNMENTAL PURPOSES OF METRO 
          [Legislation forwarded from EQUITY, COMMUNITY AFFAIRS, HOUSING, HEALTH AND EDUCATION COMMITTEE]
GOVERNMENT AUTHORIZING IT. TRANSFERS. THE FOLLOWING LEGISLATION WAS FORWARDED FROM 
          [29.
 R-132-25     A RESOLUTION HONORING MARY LEE AND GEORGE FISCHER BY RE-DEDICATING THE CORNER OF EAST WITHERSPOON STREET AND NORTH FLOYD STREET AS “MARY LEE AND GEORGE FISCHER WAY” IN THEIR HONOR.
11/5/25 Equity, Community Affairs, Housing, Health and Education Committee  Recommended for Approval
Action Required By April 30, 2026 
Sponsors: Ken Herndon (D-4) ]
THE EQUITY, COMMUNITY AFFAIRS, HOUSING, HEALTH AND EDUCATION COMMITTEE. ITEM 29 A RESOLUTION HONORING MARY LEE AND GEORGE FISHER BY REDEDICATING THE CORNER OF EAST WITHERSPOON STREET AND NORTH FLOYD STREET, AS MARY LEE AND GEORGE FISHER WAY IN THEIR HONOR. THE 
          [Legislation forwarded from GOVERNMENT OVERSIGHT/AUDIT AND APPOINTMENTS COMMITTEE]
          [30.
 RP110425JT     REAPPOINTMENT OF JASMINE TATE TO THE NULU REVIEW OVERLAY DISTRICT COMMITTEE. (TERM EXPIRES FEBRUARY 26, 2028)
11/4/25 Government Oversight/Audit and Appointments Committee  Recommended for Approval
Action Required By: April 30, 2026]
FOLLOWING LEGISLATION WAS FORWARDED FROM THE GOVERNMENT OVERSIGHT AND APPOINTMENTS COMMITTEE. ITEM 30 A REAPPOINTMENT OF JASMINE TATE TO THE NULU REVIEW OVERLAY 
          [31.
 AP110425KM     APPOINTMENT OF KAITLYN MEINHART TO THE NULU REVIEW OVERLAY DISTRICT COMMITTEE. (TERM EXPIRES FEBRUARY 26, 2028)
11/4/25 Government Oversight/Audit and Appointments Committee  Recommended for Approval
Action Required By: April 30, 2026]
DISTRICT COMMITTEE. TERM EXPIRES FEBRUARY 26TH, 2028. I'M 31 APPOINTMENT OF CAITLIN MAYNARD TO THE NULU REVIEW OVERLAY DISTRICT COMMITTEE TERM EXPIRES FEBRUARY 26TH, 2028. 
          [32.
 RP110425NP     REAPPOINTMENT OF NAOMIROSE PAULIN TO THE REVENUE COMMISSION. (TERM EXPIRES OCTOBER 1, 2028)
11/4/25 Government Oversight/Audit and Appointments Committee  Recommended for Approval
Action Required By: April 30, 2026]
ITEM 32 A REAPPOINTMENT OF NAOMI ROSE POLLEN TO THE PAULINE TO THE REVENUE 
          [33.
 AP110425SM     APPOINTMENT OF STEPHENY MINYARD TO THE REVENUE COMMISSION. (TERM EXPIRES OCTOBER 1, 2028)
11/4/25 Government Oversight/Audit and Appointments Committee  Recommended for Approval
Action Required By: April 30, 2026]
COMMISSION TERM EXPIRES OCTOBER 1ST, 2028. ITEM 33 APPOINTMENT OF STEPHANIE MINOR TO THE 
          [Legislation forwarded from LABOR AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE]
REVENUE COMMISSION. TERM EXPIRES OCTOBER 1ST, 2028. THE FOLLOWING LEGISLATION WAS 
          [34.
 R-128-25     A RESOLUTION DETERMINING CERTAIN PROPERTY AT 4711, 4713 AND 4715 PARK BOULEVARD AS SURPLUS AND NOT NEEDED FOR A GOVERNMENTAL PURPOSE AND AUTHORIZING ITS TRANSFER.
11/4/25 Labor and Economic Development Committee  Recommended for Approval
Action Required By: April 30, 2026
Sponsors: Betsy Ruhe (D-21) ]
REPORTED FROM THE LABOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE. ITEM 34 RESOLUTION DETERMINING CERTAIN PROPERTY AT 47, 11, 47, 13 AND 4715 PARK BOULEVARD AS SURPLUS AND NOT NEEDED FOR GOVERNMENTAL PURPOSE, AND AUTHORIZING THIS TRANSFER. ITEM 35 A RESOLUTION PURSUANT TO THE CAPITAL AND OPERATING BUDGET ORDINANCES. APPROVING THE APPROPRIATION TO FUND THE FOLLOWING NONCOMPETITIVELY NEGOTIATED SOLE SOURCE CONTRACT FOR LOUISVILLE METRO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, PUBLIC HEALTH AND WELLNESS TO PURCHASE, PACK AND PLAYS, SAFE SLEEP KITS CRIBS 
          [35.
 R-130-25     A RESOLUTION PURSUANT TO THE CAPITAL AND OPERATING BUDGET ORDINANCES APPROVING THE APPROPRIATION TO FUND THE FOLLOWING NONCOMPETITIVELY NEGOTIATED SOLE SOURCE CONTRACT FOR LOUISVILLE METRO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND WELLNESS TO PURCHASE PACK AND PLAYS AND SAFE SLEEP KITS - (CRIBS FOR KIDS- $55,000.00)
11/4/25 Labor and Economic Development Committee  Recommended for Approval
Action Required By: April 30, 2026
Sponsors: Ben Reno-Weber (D-8) ]
FOR KIDS $55,000. THE FOLLOWING LEGISLATION WAS FORWARDED FROM PARKS AND SUSTAINABILITY 
          [Legislation forwarded from PARKS AND SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE]
          [36.
 O-264-25     AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE LOUISVILLE/JEFFERSON COUNTY METRO GOVERNMENT CODE OF ORDINANCES (“LMCO”) SECTION 42.31 TO PROHIBIT OVERNIGHT PARKING IN METRO PARKS.
11/6/25 Parks and Sustainability Committee Recommended for Approval
Action Required By: April 30, 2026
Sponsors: Jeff Hudson (R-23) ]
COMMITTEE. ITEM 36, AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE LOUISVILLE JEFFERSON COUNTY METRO GOVERNMENT CODE OF ORDINANCES, SECTION 42.31 TO PROHIBIT OVERNIGHT PARKING IN 
          [37.
 R-137-25     A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO ACCEPT A CASH DONATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $211,581.35 AS BENEFICIARY OF TWO ANNUITIES BELONGING TO RONALD SCHAGENE TO BE ADMINISTERED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION.
11/6/25 Parks and Sustainability Committee Recommended for Approval
Action Required By: April 30, 2026
Sponsors: Dan Seum, Jr. (R-13) ]
METRO PARKS. ITEM 37 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO ACCEPT A CASH DONATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $211,581.35 AS BENEFICIARY TO TWO ANNUITIES BELONGING TO THE RONALD. O. TO 
          [Legislation forwarded from PLANNING AND ZONING COMMITTEE]
BE ADMINISTERED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION. THE FOLLOWING 
          [38.
 O-262-25     AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTIONS 1.2.2, 2.4.5, AND 4.2.29 OF THE LOUISVILLE METRO LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE REGARDING FREE STANDING BIRTHING FACILITIES (CASE NO. 25-LDC-0007).
11/4/25  Planning and Zoning Committee  Recommended for Approval
Action Required By April 30, 2026 
Sponsors: Andrew Owen (D-9) ]
LEGISLATION WAS FORWARDED FROM PLANNING AND ZONING COMMITTEE. ITEM 38. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTIONS 1.2.2, 2.4.5 AND 4.2.29 OF THE LOUISVILLE METRO LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE REGARDING FREESTANDING BIRTHING FACILITIES. CASE NUMBER 25 0007. ITEM 39 A RESOLUTION REQUESTING 
          [39.
 R-134-25     A RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW THE LOUISVILLE METRO LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE RELATING TO PACKAGE LIQUOR STORES.
11/4/25  Planning and Zoning Committee  Recommended for Approval
Action Required By April 30, 2026 
Sponsors: Jeff Hudson (R-23), Khalil Batshon (R-25), Andrew Owen (D-9)]
THE PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW. THE LOUISVILLE METRO DEVELOPMENT CODE, LAND 
          [40.
 R-135-25     A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO ACCEPT $750,000 FROM THE U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, THROUGH THE BROWNFIELDS REVOLVING LOAN FUND (“RLF”) COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT, TO BE ADMINISTERED THROUGH THE OFFICE OF PLANNING.
11/4/25  Planning and Zoning Committee  Recommended for Approval 
Action Required By April 30, 2026 
Sponsors: Andrew Owen (D-9) ]
DEVELOPMENT CODE RELATING TO PACKAGED LIQUOR STORES. ITEM 40, A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO ACCEPT $750,000 FROM THE US ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY THROUGH THE BROWNFIELDS REVOLVING LOAN FUND COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT, TO BE ADMINISTERED THROUGH THE OFFICE OF PLANNING AND ITEM 47, AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE SOUTH CENTRAL NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING OR PLAN, 
          [47.
 O-263-25     AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE SOUTH CENTRAL NEIGHBORHOODS PLAN AND APPROVING ITS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AS AN AMENDMENT TO THE PLAN 2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (CASE NO. 25-LDC-0010).
11/4/25  Planning and Zoning Committee  Recommended for Approval
Action Required By April 30, 2026 
Sponsors: Andrew Owen (D-9) ]
AND APPROVING ITS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AS AN AMENDMENT TO THE PLAN 2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CASE NUMBER 25 LDC 0010 READ IN FULL MOTION. BEFORE US. THE CONSENT CALENDAR REQUIRES A ROLL CALL VOTE. MADAM CLERK, OPEN THE ROLL. COUNCIL MEMBER. PARISH. RIGHT. YES. OH, SORRY. 
          LET ME OPEN IT FOR YOU ALL. ONE SECOND. CAN YOU? YES. ONE MOMENT. I'M GOING TO CALL YOU. 
          I NEED YOU TO PUT THEM IN. THERE. MOUNTAIN BIKING. I CAN'T GET THEIR VOTE. COUNCIL MEMBER RENA WEBER. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. LET'S SEE WHO'S NEXT. WINKLER. YES. THANK YOU. MY VOTE. YES. 
          THERE YOU GO. OKAY. ALL 26 PRESENT. THANKS. COUNCIL MEMBER READ. THANK YOU, SIR, AND PRESIDENT ACKERSON. YES. YES, THAT'S A YES. MR. PRESIDENT. YOU HAVE 26 YES VOTES. THE CONSENT CALENDAR IS ADOPTED. THE NEXT ITEM OF BUSINESS IS SPECIAL LEGISLATION PURSUANT TO 
          [Special Legislation]
METRO COUNCIL RULE 7.01 B, ITEM 41 IS AN ADMINISTRATIVE FUNCTION OF THE COUNCIL PERMITTING THIS ITEM TO BE INTRODUCED AND VOTED UPON AT THE SAME COUNCIL MEETING. IT'S OUR COUNCIL CALENDAR FOR NEXT YEAR, FOLKS. OKAY. THANK YOU, MADAM CLERK. A READING OF ITEM 
          [41. R-141-25     A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SCHEDULE OF THE REGULAR MEETINGS OF THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL OF THE LOUISVILLE/JEFFERSON COUNTY METRO GOVERNMENT (“COUNCIL”) FOR THE CALENDAR YEAR 2026.
Sponsors: Brent Ackerson (D-26) ]
41. THANK YOU. A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SCHEDULE OF THE REGULAR MEETINGS OF THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL OF THE LOUISVILLE JEFFERSON COUNTY METRO GOVERNMENT COUNCIL FOR THE CALENDAR YEAR 2026. READ IN FULL. AS PROPER BEFORE ANY DISCUSSION. HEARING NONE. THIS IS AN ITEM THAT REQUIRES A VOICE VOTE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSITION? IN OPPOSITION, THE RESOLUTION IS ADOPTED. THE NEXT ITEM OF BUSINESS WILL BE OLD BUSINESS. 
          [Old Business]
          [42.
 R-136-25     A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE REAPPOINTMENT OF EDWARD HARNESS AS THE INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR LOUISVILLE/JEFFERSON COUNTY METRO GOVERNMENT.
11/4/25 Government Oversight/Audit and Appointments Committee  Recommended for Disapproval
Action Required By: April 30, 2026
Sponsors: Brent Ackerson (D-26) ]
MADAM CLERK ARE READING ITEM NUMBER 42, PLEASE. A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE REAPPOINTMENT OF ED HARNESS AS THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF LOUISVILLE. JEFFERSON COUNTY METRO 
          [01:25:03]
GOVERNMENT. READING FOR. THAT IS BEFORE US. THIS CAME OUT OF COUNCILWOMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE, I BELIEVE. THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. IT WAS VOTED ON IN THE LAST GOVERNMENT OVERSIGHT ACCOUNTABILITY COMMITTEE MEETING, AND IT THE VOTES WERE 5 TO 4, WITH THE MAJORITY VOTING NO. TO REINSTATE MR. HARNESS. BECAUSE OF THAT, WE'VE SENT IT HERE TODAY TO BE PUT ON OLD BUSINESS FOR THE FULL COUNCIL TO WEIGH IN ON REINSTATING AND REAPPOINTING MR. ED HARNESS AS THE INSPECTOR GENERAL. ANYONE IN THE QUEUE? A QUEUE IS NOT. YOU ARE COUNCILMAN SANTINI. THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. I'LL MAKE THIS QUICK TO GIVE ALL MY COLLEAGUES AN OPPORTUNITY TO VOTE HERE. BUT I THINK IT'S WORTHWHILE TO SPELL OUT THE HANDFUL OF CONCERNS THAT THOSE, INCLUDING MYSELF, THAT WILL VOTE NO TONIGHT ON WHY WE'RE VOTING NO. 
          FIRST AND FOREMOST, IT IS NOT A PERSONAL COMMENTARY IN ANY WAY ON MR. HARNESS. HE'S A GOOD MAN. 
          I WISH HIM WELL IN HIS IN THE OUTCOME OF THE VOTE HERE, AND I ASSUME WE'LL CONTINUE TO WORK TOGETHER IF HE'S REELECTED OR REAPPOINTED. THE ISSUE IS ABOUT THE DECISIONS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE IN OUR CONCERNS WITH THOSE DECISIONS THAT ACTUALLY CAN REDUCE THE CREDIBILITY OF THE CRAB BOARD IF THEY CONTINUE. FOR EXAMPLE, IN ONE CASE, A RECOMMENDATION COMING OUT OF MR. HARNESS OFFICE AND THE CRAB BOARD, THERE WERE 13 DEMONSTRABLE ISSUES WITH IT, INCLUDING THE ACCUSATION OF, QUOTE, I'M NOT GOING TO QUOTE, BUT LIES ON A WARRANT WHICH WERE DEMONSTRABLY NOT TRUE, WHICH WAS ONE OF THE UNDERLYING ISSUES WITH THE CASE RELATED TO THE DEATH OF BREONNA TAYLOR, WHICH, IF WERE TRUE, WOULD BE QUITE EGREGIOUS BUT WAS NOT TRUE. AND BY MAKING THESE DEMONSTRABLY INCORRECT STATEMENTS AGAIN RISKS CONFUSION IN THE COMMUNITY ABOUT WHAT IS HAPPENING, THERE WAS ANOTHER INVESTIGATION THAT WAS INSTIGATED ON PURE HEARSAY, ON AN INCIDENT THAT HAPPENED FIVE YEARS PRIOR WITH NO OTHER EVIDENCE. THERE WAS ANOTHER CASE WHEN CRITICISM OF THE USE OF FORCE WAS GIVEN AGAINST AN OFFICER WHEN NOT JUST OUR CHIEF OF POLICE, BUT ALSO THE COMMONWEALTH ATTORNEY HERSELF AGREED THAT THE USE OF FORCE WAS COMPLETELY JUSTIFIED AND NO CHARGES OR COMPLAINTS WERE BROUGHT AGAINST THAT INDIVIDUAL. SO I'M JUST HIGHLIGHTING A FEW OF THE INSTANCES WHERE THERE WERE DEMONSTRABLE ERRORS THAT WE HAD CONCERNS WITH. AND AND THEN THE LAST THING I'M GOING TO SAY IS WE DID RECEIVE SOME CALLS FROM SOME COMMUNITY MEMBERS. IN MANY, I'M NOT GOING TO SAY ALL, BUT IN MANY OF THE CASES, THESE WERE FOLKS THAT WERE OPENLY ANTAGONISTIC TOWARD LAW ENFORCEMENT IN A PUBLIC MANNER, NOT FOLKS THAT SEEM TO WANT TO BRING TOGETHER BOTH THE COMMUNITY AND LAW ENFORCEMENT, WHICH AGAIN, GIVES US CONCERN ABOUT WHO IS SUPPORTING MR. HARNESS'S RENOMINATION. WITH THAT SAID, JUST WANTED TO VOICE THOSE CONCERNS. I DO WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYBODY HAS THE CHANCE TO VOTE. APPRECIATE THE TIME, MR. PRESIDENT. THANK YOU. 
          I'VE GOT NO ONE ELSE IN MY QUEUE. BUT FOLKS, THIS QUEUE, AS ALWAYS, IS CHAOTIC. SO YOU KNOW YOU'RE IN THE QUEUE, SO YOU'VE GOT THE FLOOR. MADAM, I JUST WANT TO SAY I WOULDN'T WANT TO SEE NO ONE ELSE IN THIS SEAT BESIDES THAT. HARNESS TRUST TRANSPARENCY MODE. AND IT'S WHAT THE COMMUNITY WOULD WANT TO SEE. I'M IN SUPPORT OF THIS. THANK YOU AGAIN. MY QUEUE IS NOT WORKING. ANYONE ELSE SEEING NO ONE ELSE IN THE QUEUE? THIS IS A NORMALLY REQUIRE A VOICE VOTE. HOWEVER, DUE TO THE IMPORTANCE OF THE ISSUE AND THAT EVERYONE'S VOTE GETS RECORDED, WE'RE GOING TO DO A ROLL CALL. MADAM CLERK, OPEN THE ROLL. COUNCIL MEMBER. 
          PERISH, RIGHT? YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. RINO WEBER. YES. AND COUNCIL MEMBER WINKLER. YES. 
          PRESIDENT. AKERSON. I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO VOTE ON HERE. I MEAN, YES, BUT AGAIN, MY SYSTEM IS NOT WORKING. BUT RECORD ME AS A YES. I'VE GOT YOU, SIR. MR. PRESIDENT, YOU HAVE 14 YES VOTES AND 12 NO VOTES. THE RESOLUTION IS ADOPTED AND MR. HARNESS REMAINS. 
          [43.
 O-270-25     AN ORDINANCE APPROPRIATING $2,000 FROM NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT FUNDS IN THE FOLLOWING MANNER: $1,000 EACH FROM DISTRICTS 4 AND 8; THROUGH THE OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET, TO YOUNG ADULT DEVELOPMENT IN ACTION, INC. FOR FUNDING A CULINARY INSTRUCTOR POSITION FOR ITS YOUTH BUILD CULINARY TRAINING PROGRAM BEGINNING JANUARY 2026 THROUGH MAY 2026.
11/5/25 Appropriations Committee  Recommended for Approval
Action Required By: April 30, 2026
Sponsors: Ben Reno-Weber (D-8), Ken Herndon (D-4)]
          [01:30:01]
MADAM CLERK, A READING ITEM NUMBER 43, AN ORDINANCE APPROPRIATING $2,000 DEVELOPMENT FUNDS IN THE FOLLOWING MANNER. $1,000 FROM DISTRICTS FOUR AND EIGHT. 
          INSTRUCTION POSITION FOR ITS YOUTH. BUILD CULINARY TRAINING PROGRAM BEGINNING JANUARY 2026 THROUGH MAY 2026. ITEM IS PROPERLY BEFORE US. COUNCILMAN PARKER, I BELIEVE THIS CAME OUT OF YOUR COMMITTEE. YOU HAVE THE FLOOR, MADAM. DRINK IT DOWN SO I CAN SEE IF THERE'S ANY. YES, I WILL DEFER TO. I BELIEVE THIS WAS COUNCILMAN. NO THANK YOU. YES. HERNAN. THANK YOU MA'AM. 
          THIS IS A GREAT PROGRAM. YOUTH BUILD HAS BEEN A GREAT SERVICE TO OUR COMMUNITY FOR MANY YEARS. 
          AND THIS THIS PROGRAM IS, IS LOCATED IN MY IN SMOKETOWN IN MY DISTRICT. BUT COUNCILMAN WEBER AND I WOULD LOVE TO GET YOUR SUPPORT IN ADDING TO WHAT WE HAVE PUT IN $1,000 APIECE. 
          BUT THIS PROGRAM IS OPEN TO ALL FOLKS FROM ACROSS THE COMMUNITY. IT PROVIDES EDUCATION IN THE CULINARY ARTS. IT THE STUDENTS THAT LEAD THIS PROGRAM COME OUT WITH CERTIFICATIONS THAT ARE INDUSTRY WIDE, INDUSTRY RECOGNIZED CERTIFICATIONS WITH PRACTICAL EXPERIENCE AND JOB AND PROGRAM ENSURES JOB PLACEMENT OR COLLEGE ENROLLMENT UPON COMPLETION. THE ASK IS $10,000. WE HAVE PUT UP $1,000 APIECE AND IF YOU FEEL SO MOVED, WE WOULD LOVE TO HAVE YOU JOIN US IN SUPPORTING OF THIS PROGRAM. THIS WOULD PAY FOR TEN STUDENTS $1,000 EACH. 
          COUNCILMAN OWEN, YOU'RE MY CUE. $1,000 FROM D9. PLEASE. COUNCILWOMAN CHAPEL, YOU'RE MCHUGH 300 FROM D15. I'VE GOT NO ONE ELSE IN MY QUEUE. MR. CHAIR, I WOULD LIKE TO. 
          CHAIRMAN. MADAM, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. 1300 FROM DISTRICT THREE, PLEASE. COUNCILMAN RAYMOND HERE. MCHUGH, 500 FROM DISTRICT TEN, PLEASE. COUNCILMAN SEAN, I'LL TAKE 500, MR. PRESIDENT. THANK YOU. COUNCILMAN RUI. 500 FROM D20 ONE. NOBODY ELSE IN THE QUEUE. ANYBODY ELSE? ALRIGHT. WE HAVE THE AMENDED ORDINANCE BEFORE US. CAN I GET A MOTION FOR THE AMENDED ORDINANCE? AND A SECOND, THE MOTION, THE AMENDED ORDERS TO AMEND IT. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ANY IN OPPOSITION HEARING NO OPPOSITION. WE NOW HAVE THE AMENDED VERSION BEFORE US. I HAVE NO ONE ELSE IN MY QUEUE. THIS REQUIRES A ROLL CALL. VOTE, MADAM CLERK, OPEN THE ROLL. COUNCIL MEMBER. PARISH RIGHT. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. WINKLER. 
          YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. BHAJAN. THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. YOU HAVE 25 YES VOTES. THE 
          [44.
 NDF110525LMPDm     APPROPRIATING $4,000 $4,250 FROM NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT FUNDS IN THE FOLLOWING MANNER: $1,000 EACH FROM DISTRICTS 12, 13, 14, AND 25, AND $250 FROM DISTRICT 18; TO LOUISVILLE METRO POLICE DEPARTMENT 3RD DIVISION FOR THEIR ANNUAL SHOP WITH A COP EVENT (AS AMENDED).
11/5/25 Appropriations Committee  Amended; Recommended for Approval
Sponsors: Dan Seum, Jr. (R-13), Jonathan ”JJ” Joseph (R-12), Crystal Bast (R-14), Khalil Batshon (R-25), Marilyn Parker (R-18)]
ORDINANCE IS ADOPTED. MADAM CLERK, READING ITEM NUMBER 44, APPROPRIATING $4,250 FROM NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT FUNDS IN THE FOLLOWING MANNER $1,000 EACH FROM DISTRICTS 12, 13, 14 AND 25, AND $250 FROM DISTRICT 18 THROUGH OR TWO LOUISVILLE METRO POLICE DEPARTMENT THIRD DIVISION FOR THEIR ANNUAL SHOP WITH A COP, AS AMENDED. READ IN FULL. ITEMS PROPERLY BEFORE US. 
          COUNCILMAN PARKER, THIS CAME OUT OF YOUR COMMITTEE AND YOU HAD THE FLOOR, MADAM. YES, THIS ONE IS ACTUALLY COUNCILMAN SYMES, AND I'LL LET HIM SPEAK TO IT. COUNCILMAN SAM, YOU GOT THE FLOOR. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. THE ITEM SPEAKS FOR ITSELF. SHOP WITH THE COP. IT'S BEEN GOING AROUND FOR A LONG TIME. AND IT DOES BUILD A BRIDGE BETWEEN OUR YOUTH AND OUR POLICE OFFICERS. AND I HOPE EVERYBODY WILL GET ON BOARD WITH THIS. I HAVE INCLUDED PARTS OF DISTRICT THREE, DIVISION THREE IN MY DISTRICT, AND I WOULD LIKE TO ADD $500. 
          WITH THAT BEING SAID, WE ARE 250 SHORT OF THE TOTAL ASK. DISTRICT ONE 250. THAT SHOULD COMPLETE THE ASK. SURE DOES. CAN I GET A MOTION FOR TO AMEND? I'M ALL IN FAVOR OF AMENDMENTS TO TO AMEND, SAY I ANY OPPOSITION HEARING NO OPPOSITION. NOW WE HAVE THE AMENDED ORDINANCE BEFORE US. MADAM CLERK, LET'S DO A ROLL CALL ON THIS. PLEASE OPEN THE ROLL. THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER. PARISH RIGHT. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. WINKLER. YES. 
          COUNCILMEMBER. OWEN. COUNCIL. OKAY. HE'S GONE. MR. PRESIDENT, YOU HAVE 22 YES VOTES AND TWO PRESENT VOTES. THE ITEM IS ADOPTED. MADAM CLERK, ITEM NUMBER 45. A RESOLUTION 
          [45.
 R-131-25     A RESOLUTION ENCOURAGING LOCAL BUSINESSES, SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT, AND STATE REGULATORS TO PROHIBIT THE USE OF SINGLE-USE PLASTIC BAGS WITHIN LOUISVILLE/JEFFERSON COUNTY METRO GOVERNMENT.
11/6/25 Parks and Sustainability Committee Recommended for Disapproval
Action Required By: April 30, 2026
Sponsors: JP Lyninger (D-6) ]
ENCOURAGING LOCAL BUSINESSES, SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT AND STATE REGULATORS TO PROHIBIT 
          [01:35:01]
THE USE OF SINGLE USE PLASTIC BAGS WITHIN LOCAL JEFFERSON COUNTY METRO GOVERNMENT. READ IN FULL MOTION THAT IS PROPERLY BEFORE US. LET'S HEAR. COUNCILMAN SEAN, THIS CAME OUT OF YOUR COMMITTEE. YOU'VE GOT THE FLOOR, SIR. THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. THIS IS A ENCOURAGEMENT TO BAN PLASTIC PLASTIC BAGS, SINGLE USE PLASTIC BAGS. THIS WAS A PIECE OF LEGISLATION BY COUNCILMAN JP LEININGER. I GUESS I'M GONNA TURN IT OVER TO HIM. AND THEN. 
          COUNCILMAN, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR, SIR. YES. THANK YOU, MISTER CHAIR. THANK YOU, MISTER PRESIDENT. THIS IS A RESOLUTION THAT ENCOURAGES THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE TO ENCOURAGE THEIR MEMBERS TO REDUCE THE WASTE OF PLASTIC BAGS, SINGLE USE PLASTIC BAGS, AND ENCOURAGES THE ONE ON NINE BOARD TO LOOK INTO REDUCING PLASTIC. SINGLE USE PLASTIC BAG WASTE IN LOUISVILLE MAKES THE SAME ASK OF A STATE BOARD. THIS DOES NOT HAVE ANY DIRECT EFFECT OF TEXT ON GOVERNMENT. NOTHING WILL BE ENACTED AFTER THIS VOTE. THIS IS INSTEAD AN ASK THAT THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE ASK THEIR MEMBERS TO REDUCE THE USE OF SINGLE USE PLASTIC BAGS WHERE POSSIBLE, AND THAT THE ONE ON NINE BOARD AND THE STATE REGULATORY AGENCY ALSO LOOK INTO REDUCTION OF THESE. THE USE OF THESE BAGS. THE REASON THAT I PUT THIS LEGISLATION FORWARD, ONE, THIS WAS A PIECE OF LEGISLATION WAS ASKED FOR BY A CONSTITUENT. WE WENT AND WE LOOKED AT WHAT HAS BEEN DONE IN OTHER PLACES IN TERMS OF LEGISLATION ON SINGLE USE PLASTIC BAGS. WE TOOK THAT TO THE COUNTY ATTORNEY. WE WERE INFORMED BY THE COUNTY ATTORNEY THAT WE CANNOT DIRECTLY REGULATE PLASTIC BAGS IN JEFFERSON COUNTY, BUT WE WERE GIVEN THESE REGULATORY PATHWAYS TO ASK THESE BOARDS TO LOOK INTO THE ISSUE. AND SO THAT'S WHY WE HAVE THIS AS A RESOLUTION, NOT AN ORDINANCE. I DO BELIEVE THAT THERE IS A COMPELLING PUBLIC INTEREST IN REGULATING AND REDUCING THE USE OF SINGLE USE PLASTIC BAGS HERE IN JEFFERSON COUNTY. THEY'RE A BIG PROBLEM IN TERMS OF PUBLIC WASTE IN OUR STREETS, OUR SIDEWALKS BLOWING INTO PEOPLE'S YARDS, ESPECIALLY IN OUR URBAN AREAS. IT'S ALSO A MAJOR PROBLEM FOR MSD CLOGGING UP OUR STORM DRAINS, CAUSING US TO HAVE TO PAY MORE AND MORE FOR MSD. I KNOW EVERYONE HERE IS WELL AWARE OF THE FACT THAT WE PAY A LOT FOR MSD UNDER THE CONSENT DECREE, AND THAT'S PASSED ON TO A LOT OF OUR CONSTITUENTS, ALL OF OUR CONSTITUENTS. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE HAVE TO PAY FOR IS THAT WE HAVE TO CLEAR OUT THESE STORM DRAINS THAT ARE CLOGGED UP WITH THINGS LIKE PLASTIC BAGS. IT'S A BIG PROBLEM. IT'S ALSO A BIG PROBLEM IN OUR RECYCLING FACILITY. WHEN DEPUTY MAYOR NICOLE GEORGE AND I TOURED OUR RECYCLING FACILITY, THEY TOLD US THAT THE BIGGEST PROBLEM THEY HAVE THERE IS SINGLE USE PLASTIC BAGS ARE GETTING CAUGHT IN THE MACHINERY OF THE TUMBLE CONVEYOR BELTS, AND IT'S CAUSING THEM TO HAVE TO SHUT THE FACILITY DOWN. IT'S BREAKING THE MACHINERY. THEY WERE VERY INTERESTED IN ANY WAY THAT WE COULD REDUCE THE NUMBER OF SINGLE USE PLASTIC BAGS. THE PROBLEM IS PRIMARILY DRIVEN BY OUR LARGE GROCERY STORE CHAINS. HERE IN LOUISVILLE, KROGER IS ALREADY LOOKING TO PHASE OUT PLASTIC BAGS. I WASN'T EVEN AWARE OF THIS UNTIL IT WAS BROUGHT UP TO BY ANOTHER MEMBER, SO I LOOKED INTO IT. IN FACT, KROGER HAD ALREADY SET THE GOAL OF 2025 AND HAD ALREADY REDUCED THE USE OF PLASTIC BAGS IN MANY OF THEIR STORES AND ELIMINATED THEM IN OTHER AREAS. THEY'RE JUST NOT THERE YET. BUT THEY DO PLAN TO ELIMINATE THE USE OF SINGLE USE PLASTIC BAGS AT KROGER'S. THIS IS ALREADY THE DIRECTION THE INDUSTRY IS GOING. 
          YOU KNOW THAT. I KNOW THAT THERE WERE CONCERNS VOICED DURING COMMITTEE ABOUT THE EFFECT ON SMALL BUSINESS. I AM OPEN TO AMENDMENT TO EXEMPT SMALL BUSINESSES FROM WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR HERE. BUT I DO URGE THE CONSIDERATION AND THE PASSAGE OF THIS ITEM. THANK YOU. 
          COUNCILMAN SEAN OR COUNCILWOMAN MCCRANEY, YOU'RE NEXT TO MY CUE. YOU'VE GOT THE FLOOR, MADAM. 
          THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. I AGREE IN PART WITH THE COUNCILMAN, ESPECIALLY WHEN HE SPOKE OF THE WASTE AND HOW IT DOES POSE A PROBLEM IN OUR COMMUNITY, PARTICULARLY FOR MSD. 
          AND WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT THE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS THAT THEY HAVE TO SPEND BECAUSE OF THEIR CONSENT DECREE, IT IS UNIMAGINABLE THAT WE AS RESIDENTS WON'T TAKE A LOOK AT HOW WE ARE USING PLASTICS. BUT WHAT I WANTED TO EXPRESS IS I DON'T BECAUSE WE CANNOT REGULATE IT. A RESOLUTION DOES NOTHING BUT RECOMMEND. AND SO MY VOTE TONIGHT WILL BE PRESENT BECAUSE I BELIEVE THAT WE DO, AS A SOCIETY, NEED TO LOOK AT HOW WE ARE USING PLASTIC AND HOW IT IS DAMAGING OUR COMMUNITY AND OUR OUR ENTIRE NATION. BUT FOR THAT REASON, I, 
          [01:40:02]
I WANT TO SUPPORT ENCOURAGING KROGER TO DO WHAT THEY'RE DOING AND ENCOURAGE OUR COMMUNITY RESIDENTS TO BE MINDFUL OF HOW PLASTICS RUIN OUR. NATION. BUT I'M GOING TO BE A PRESENT VOTE BECAUSE I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD BE PUTTING FORTH A RESOLUTION THAT HAS NO EFFECT WHATSOEVER. 
          SO THANK YOU FOR THE TIME, COUNCILMAN BATSHAW, ON YOUR NEXT IN MY QUEUE. YOU HAVE THE FLOOR, SIR. THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. I'M GOING TO JUST WANT TO SAY A FEW WORDS. I, I AM ALL FOR SUSTAINABILITY AND MAKING SURE THAT WE ARE, YOU KNOW, DOING RIGHT BY OUR EARTH AND IS AS IT IS DONE RIGHT BY US. AND I FIRST AND FOREMOST DO NOT BELIEVE THAT IT IS OUR PLACE TO REGULATE BUSINESSES ON HOW THEY SHOULD SERVE THEIR GUESTS IN, IN, IN THE RIM OF PLASTIC BAGS. AS WE HAVE NOTICED THAT KROGER IS AN INDUSTRY IS MOVING IN THAT DIRECTION. THERE'S NO SENSE IN US MOVING TRYING TO REGULATE THAT OR DO IT AS A POLICY, AS AS BANS ON PLASTIC USE GAIN TRACTION. THERE'S ONE THING IS CLEAR. THE COST IS SWITCHING TO PAPER OR REUSABLE WILL BE PASSED ON TO THE CONSUMERS. PAPER BAGS COST 2 TO 5 TIMES MORE TO PRODUCE THAN PLASTIC. REAL RETAILERS OFTEN OFFSET THIS BY CHARGING PER BAG OR ADJUSTING THE PRICES. CONSUMERS PAY 5 TO $0.25 PER PAPER BAG AT CHECKOUT, DEPENDING ON THE THE LOCAL POLICIES. REUSABLE BAGS HAVE A HIGHER UPFRONT COST AND ONLY BECOME COST EFFECTIVE AFTER REPEATED USE. OPERATIONAL COST INCREASES BUSINESSES. DUE TO THE INCREASES FOR BUSINESSES DUE TO THE BULKIER PACKAGING, HEAVIER SHIPPING AND SUPPLY CHAIN CHANGES, THIS SHIFT AFFECTS HOUSEHOLDS BUDGETS, ESPECIALLY TODAY IN A TIME OF NEED. SHOPPING HABITS. MANY BUSINESS MARGINS, WHETHER OR NOT A POLICY IS POPULAR, THE FINANCIAL IMPACT IS REAL AND IT LANDS DIRECTLY ON THE CONSUMER. THIS LEGISLATION RESOLUTION HITS WORKING FAMILIES FIRST AND HARDEST. IT DRIVES UP PRICES, STRIPS AWAY CONVENIENCE AND CREATES CONFUSION AT CHECKOUT WITHOUT OFFERING REAL ALTERNATIVES. IT SHIFTS THE BURDEN ONTO THE CONSUMERS WHO ARE ALREADY STRETCHED VERY, VERY THIN, FORCING THEM TO PAY MORE FOR LESS. AND THAT'S NOT REFORM. IT'S IT'S. IT'S DESIGNED AS A PENALTY FOR POLICY. WE OWE OUR RESIDENTS BETTER THAN A MANDATE THAT PUNISHES THEM FOR TRYING TO GET BY. THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING FOR YOUR SUPPORT ON VOTING NO ON THIS RESOLUTION. LET'S STAND WITH THE PEOPLE WHO FEEL THE IMPACT FIRST. THANK YOU. COUNCIL, YOU'RE NEXT IN MY QUEUE. YOU HAVE THE FLOOR, SIR. 
          THANK YOU. ECHO. WHAT MY COLLEAGUE SAID. I JUST WANT TO ADD A FEW POINTS. NUMBER ONE, THERE ARE REQUESTED MANDATES IN HERE. THIS IS NOT SIMPLY A. WE REQUEST THAT BUSINESSES LOOK TOWARD MORE SUSTAINABILITY IN ALL OF THAT. AND WE'VE APPROVED ORDINANCES OR RESOLUTIONS LIKE THAT IN THE PAST. I WILL READ SECTION TWO, ENCOURAGES THE THE WASTE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT BOARD TO IMPLEMENT A PROGRAM TO REDUCE THE WASTE TO SINGLE USE PLASTIC BAGS BY BANNING THEIR USE. WE ARE ASKING THE 109 BOARD TO ACTUALLY BAN IT. PERIOD. THEY MAKE THAT DECISION. 
          THAT'S IT. AND ALL THESE BUSINESSES HAVE TO IMPLEMENT IT WITHOUT A PLAN. I HAVE FIRMLY VOTED AGAINST IT. I ENCOURAGE MY COLLEAGUES TO CONTINUE TO VOTE AGAINST WAYS TO THAT, YOU KNOW, RESOLUTIONS OR ORDINANCES THAT CREATE THESE REQUIREMENTS WITHOUT ANY PLAN OF WHAT THE COST LOOKS LIKE, WHAT THE TRANSITION LOOKS LIKE, THE ISSUES THAT MY COLLEAGUE POINTED OUT, AND IT'S NOT JUST THE ONE ON ON BOARD FOR THE KENTUCKY CABINET FOR ENERGY, ENVIRONMENT, DIVISION OF WASTE MANAGEMENT, IT SAYS, QUOTE, TO PROPAGATE REGULATIONS AND RULES THAT BAN THE USE OF SINGLE USE PLASTIC BAGS. IT DOES NOT SAY TO PLAN FOR HOW TO PHASE THEM OUT. IT DOES NOT SAY ANYTHING LIKE THAT. IT SAYS THEY SHOULD CREATE RULES TO BAN IT. AND THERE'S NO WAY I CAN COME BY AND SUPPORT THAT. AND AND I WANT TO BE CLEAR ABOUT WHO THIS IS GOING TO IMPACT. THE FIRST PUBLIX WENT UP IN MY COMMUNITY. IT'S NOT A BIG SURPRISE THAT PUBLIX PICKED AN AREA THAT HAD HIGHER THAN AVERAGE INCOMES. EVEN WITHIN MY DISTRICT, THEY PICKED A HIGHER INCOME AREA TO START THE FIRST STORE. OKAY, THEY'LL EXPAND OUT FROM THERE. 
          I SEE TONS OF PEOPLE WALKING IN AND OUT OF THAT STORE WITH REUSABLE PUBLIX BAGS. THEY PAID FOR THEM. I MYSELF USE THAT STORE. I USE THEM ALL THE TIME. IT IS THE SOUP KITCHEN THAT I VOLUNTEER AT DOWNTOWN WITH THE KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS. IT IS THE BRAND NEW RESTAURANT OR OR 
          [01:45:03]
CATERING BUSINESS OR FOOD TRUCK. OR I COULD GO ON AND ON, AND EVEN IF WE TRIED TO IMPLEMENT SOME MINOR EXEMPTIONS FOR A SMALL BUSINESS OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, HOW DO YOU DEFINE IT? WHAT OTHER EXEMPTIONS NEED TO EXIST? THE LIST OF EXEMPTIONS WOULD BE SO CRAZY AS TO AS TO ELIMINATE THE ACTUAL IMPACT THAT IS DESIRED. FOR HERE I DO ENCOURAGE THE CITY TO WORK WITH LOCAL GROCERY STORES TO SEE ABOUT INCREASING SUSTAINABILITY AND REDUCING THE AND REDUCING WASTE. THAT'S A LAUDABLE GOAL, JUST LIKE ENERGY SUSTAINABILITY, BUT CREATING ARTIFICIAL GOALS AND ARTIFICIAL MANDATES DO NOTHING BUT ARTIFICIALLY INCREASE COST TO WORKING CLASS AND POORER FAMILIES IN OUR COMMUNITY. AND I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO VOTE AGAINST IT BECAUSE OF THAT. THANK YOU, COUNCILWOMAN RUBY, YOUR NEXT IN MY QUEUE. YOU HAVE THE FLOOR, MADAM. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SO I WILL ALWAYS STAND FOR PROTECTING OUR ENVIRONMENT FIRST. AND I CAN SAY THAT ALDI'S DOES NOT GIVE OUT PLASTIC BAGS. COSTCO DOESN'T. I DON'T THINK SAM'S CLUBS DOES. YOU'RE EXPECTED TO BAG YOUR OWN STUFF. YOU BRING YOUR OWN BAG AND PEOPLE DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT. IT IS A CHANGE IN OUR BEHAVIOR. IT'S NOT THE WAY WE'VE ALWAYS DONE IT, BUT IT IS SOMETHING THAT PEOPLE ARE WILLING TO DO IF THEY ARE GIVEN THE APPROPRIATE NUDGE TO DO THAT. I WOULD RATHER NOT USE REGULATION, BUT I HAVE NOT SEEN US MOVING ANYWHERE TOWARDS WHERE WE NEED TO BE WITH THIS, AND I AM IN SUPPORT OF THE RESOLUTION AND I KNOW WE NEED TO SEE SOMETHING DONE. I'VE SPENT TOO MANY DAYS PICKING UP PLASTIC BAGS ON THE GROUND. THEY ALL WIND UP IN OUR WATERWAYS, THEY WIND UP IN OUR SEWER SYSTEMS. THEY WIND UP IN OUR OCEANS. THERE IS NO AWAY. THEY'RE STILL OUT THERE. WE NEED TO PUT A STOP TO IT. THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN PURVIS, YOUR NEXT TO MY CUE. YOU HAVE THE FLOOR, MADAM. THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO CALL THE QUESTION, PLEASE, IF I MAY, JUST BECAUSE I'M THE NEXT ONE. I JUST NEED TO CLARIFY A MISSTATEMENT THAT I MADE. EXCUSE ME? I RECALL ABOUT A MONTH OR TWO AGO YOU WOULDN'T LET ME CLARIFY MY VOTE. 
          FAIR ENOUGH. IT'S A MOTION. I WOULD SAY THAT IT'S GOING TO TAKE A MOTION. I'M NOT IN THE QUEUE, BUT I WAS GOING TO RELIEVE THE THE CHAIR AND SPEAK TO THIS. BUT, YOU KNOW, DOES SOMEONE WANT TO SECOND HER MOTION TO CALL THE QUESTION SECOND. OKAY, WE'VE GOT A MOTION TO CALL THE QUESTION THAT'S GOING TO TAKE 18 VOTES. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. 
          ALL THOSE OPPOSED? NO. AND THE OPINION OF THE CHAIR. THE NOES HAVE IT. COUNCILMAN PICCINI, YOU'RE IN MY QUEUE AND YOU'VE GOT THE FLOOR. THANK YOU. MY COLLEAGUES INFORMED ME THAT I MAY HAVE MISSPOKEN AT THE END OF MY COMMENTS AND ENCOURAGED PASSAGE OF RESOLUTION. IF I SAID THAT, MY APOLOGIES. I, I'M ENCOURAGING PEOPLE TO VOTE NO ON THE RESOLUTION. I WASN'T SURE IF I WAS CLEAR. THANK YOU FOR BRINGING TO MY ATTENTION. SORRY IF I MISSPOKE. MY APOLOGIES, MADAM CLERK. FOR THE RECORD, I AM RELIEVED THE CHAIR TO THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM SO NOTED. COLLEAGUES, LET'S BE CLEAR. OFTEN WE'VE TALKED ABOUT RESOLUTIONS BEING POM POMS OR, YOU KNOW, LIP SERVICE THAT HAVE NO ACTUAL AUTHORITY. MY COLLEAGUE FROM DISTRICT SEVEN HAS POINTED OUT THIS IS ANOTHER ONE OF THOSE CASES THAT THERE IS NO AUTHORITY HERE. LET'S BE REAL. THE 109 BOARD, WE DON'T TELL THEM WHAT TO DO, OKAY? THEY DO WHATEVER THEY WANT. SO TWO THINGS ARE TRUE ABOUT THIS SITUATION. YOU KNOW, WE CAN'T FORCE THEM TO DO ANYTHING BY US PASSING THIS. AND NUMBER TWO, SO EVEN IF WE DID PASS THIS, THEY'VE GOT THE AUTHORITY TO SAY THE HECK WITH IT. I DON'T CARE WHAT METRO COUNCIL SAID, WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO IT. LET'S SAY WE DON'T PASS THIS. OR IF IT NEVER CAME BEFORE THIS BODY, THE 109, HAS THE AUTHORITY TO STILL DO THIS. THAT'S THE REALITY OF THE SITUATION. SO WE CAN DEBATE THIS ALL NIGHT LONG AND TALK ABOUT HOW WE'RE PRO-ENVIRONMENT OR PRO-BUSINESS OR WHATEVER ELSE. BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, OUR WORD MEANS NOTHING. OUR SAY MEANS NOTHING. ON THIS ISSUE, 109 WILL DO WHATEVER IT WANTS TO DO WITHOUT BEING FORCED OTHERWISE. SO I'LL BE A NO VOTE. BECAUSE FRANKLY, I THINK THAT THESE SORT OF RESOLUTIONS NEED TO STOP. THANK YOU. I'M KICKING THE CHAIR BACK. 
          SO NOTED. COUNCILMAN, YOU'RE NEXT TO MY CUE. YOU'VE GOT THE FLOOR, SIR. THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT I WAS REALLY DISAPPOINTED TO LEARN THAT I HAD LOST THE SUPPORT OF COUNCILMAN PIACENTINI ON THIS MATTER. I WAS REALLY, REALLY HEARTENED TO HEAR HIM CHANGE HIS MIND OVER THE COURSE OF DEBATE. BUT MOVING FORWARD, WITHOUT THAT 
          [01:50:01]
SUPPORT, I DO WANT TO CLARIFY ON SOMETHING THAT COUNCILMAN ARGENTINI HAD RAISED TALKING ABOUT, THAT WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING IN THIS RESOLUTION TALKING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, DEFRAYING COSTS, TALKING ABOUT WHAT SORT OF, YOU KNOW, AMENDMENTS MIGHT BE MADE TO PROTECT CONSUMERS. ANY PLAN FOR IMPLEMENTATION, PHASING THESE OUT. WE CAN'T DO THAT AGAIN. 
          WOULD THAT I COULD I WOULD INTRODUCE LEGISLATION HERE AT THIS BODY TO PROHIBIT THE USE OF PLASTIC BAGS. I WOULD DO THAT. I CAN'T I TRIED TO I CAN'T, BUT WHAT I ALSO AM NOT ABLE TO DO IS TO SET ANY OF THE FURTHER POLICY IN THIS ASK. WE ARE, AS MENTIONED BY THE PRESIDENT AT THE MERCY OF THE 109 BOARD. AND IF THIS WERE TO PASS, I WOULD ENCOURAGE THE 109 BOARD TO HAVE A THOROUGH AND DETAILED PLAN THAT LOOKED AT WHAT THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS PLAN WAS GOING TO BE, YOU KNOW, WHAT SORT OF TIMELINE TO ALLOW FOR A REASONABLE TRANSITION. 
          I'D BE IN FAVOR OF ALL OF THOSE THINGS. WE DON'T HAVE THAT REGULATORY POWER. ALL I HAVE IS THE ASK, SO PLEASE VOTE ACCORDINGLY. SEEING NO ONE ELSE IN MY QUEUE. THIS IS A RESOLUTION THAT WOULD NORMALLY REQUIRE A VOICE VOTE. BUT COUNCIL, I WANTED TO BE ADDED TO THE QUEUE. I TRIED TO TEXT MADAM, I APOLOGIZE. YOU HAVE THE FLOOR. YOU JUST HOLLER AT ME IF YOU'RE IF YOU'RE ON SCREEN OR WHATEVER ELSE. OKAY MADAM. ALRIGHT, I APPRECIATE IT. 
          I JUST WANT TO SAY I, I COUNCILWOMAN RUIZ MENTIONED SOME OF WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY ABOUT. WE HAVE PEOPLE WHO USE ALDI WHO ARE VERY SMART, WHO ARE NOT USING PLASTIC BAGS. AS MANY OF US TRAVEL, WE SEE OTHER CITIES WHO HAVE IMPLEMENTED ALL KINDS OF CHANGES. AND THERE IS TRUTH THAT SOME OF THOSE CHANGES PUT COSTS ON THE CONSUMER, WHICH HAPPENS A LOT. 
          BUT THEY BUT THEY'RE SMART WAYS THAT HAVE BEEN FIGURED OUT. AND I ACTUALLY TRUST THE PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY TO UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO. WE ALSO DON'T DO ENOUGH WHEN IT COMES TO CLIMATE CHANGE AND CLIMATE CHANGE ACTIONS. THEY TAKE SO LONG. WE HAVE ALL THESE 20, 30, 20, 40, 20, 50 PLANS AND WE'RE NOT DOING ANYTHING. BUT RIGHT NOW MSD IS DEALING WITH THOSE BAGS. THOSE BAGS ARE IN PEOPLE'S YARD. BUT WHERE I COME FROM, WE SAY THOSE SINGLE USE BAGS, WE CALL THEM KROGER BAGS. YOU KNOW, I'M FROM CINCINNATI. KROGER GREW UP THERE. BUT WE WE CALL THEM KROGER BAGS. AND WE SAVE THEM IN OUR CABINETS. WE SAVE THEM IN OUR JARS AND WE USE THOSE THINGS FOR EVERYTHING FROM SENDING SOMETHING WITH SOMEONE TO WHATEVER, TAKING THEM TO THE STORE, WHATEVER. SO THERE ARE A LOT OF LOUISVILLIANS. AND I'M NOT JUST SPEAKING FOR MY HOUSEHOLD WHO SAVED THOSE SINGLE USE BAGS TO USE THEM AS MUCH AS THEY CAN. THERE ARE ACTUALLY UNHOUSED PEOPLE WHO USE THOSE BAGS. I EVEN HAVE EARRINGS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE FROM THOSE BAGS. SO IT'S NOT THE COMMUNITY THAT CAN'T GET WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO PUT DOWN. IT'S OUR JOB TO USE THE POWER OF OUR INFLUENCE AND OUR OFFICE. 
          AND WHAT, WHAT, WHAT INTERESTS ME IS WHEN WE TALK ABOUT RESOLUTIONS, EVERYBODY SAYS THIS AND THAT UNTIL IT'S THEIR RESOLUTION TO FOR A DOG THAT SAVES SOMEBODY OR, OR SOMETHING, I MEAN, THE RESOLUTIONS ARE IMPORTANT TO WHO THEY ARE IMPORTANT TO, AND THEY'RE LEGAL AND THEY'RE WHAT OUR BODY IS ABLE TO DO. SO I DON'T LIKE WHEN WE DOWNPLAY RESOLUTIONS, WHEN IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'RE NOT INTERESTED IN. WE HAVE A BODY THAT IS SUPPOSED TO USE THE POWER OF OUR OFFICE TO IMPROVE AND SAVE LIVES. IT MAY NOT BE YOUR LIFE. YOU MAY NEVER HAVE TO USE A SINGLE USE PLASTIC BAG, OR YOU MAY BE LIKE ME AND YOU SAVE THEM AND USE THEM LATER. THE REALITY IS THEY ARE A PROBLEM TO OUR ENVIRONMENT. THEY ARE COSTING US IN MANY WAYS THAN PEOPLE ARE USING THEM, AND PEOPLE ARE SMART ENOUGH TO FIGURE IT OUT. 
          DON'T DISCREDIT PEOPLE. PEOPLE WILL FIND A WAY TO GET THEIR GROCERIES HOME. THEY DO IT AT ALDI'S. THEY DO IT AT SAVE LIVES. THEY DO IT AT JFS. I KNOW ALL THE STORES, SO I'M JUST SAYING I'M I'M VOTING YES FOR THIS AND I ASK FOR PEOPLE TO SUPPORT THIS. IT IS NOT MAKING THE 109 BOARD DO ANYTHING. IT IS A SUGGESTION. IT IS ASKING THE COUNCIL, ASKING THEM TO LOOK AT THIS AND TO CONSIDER IT. AND YES, A PLAN SHOULD HAVE A PLAN OF ACTION, NOT ARTIFICIAL NUMBERS, NOT MADE UP THINGS. IF IT'S ARTIFICIAL, THEN IT'S NOT REAL. 
          THIS IS JUST ASKING THEM TO CONSIDER TALKING TO PEOPLE AND TALKING TO THESE GROCERS. I REMEMBER KROGER'S PLAN TO TO REDUCE AND ELIMINATE THAT. THEY'RE WORKING ON THAT. ALL THE GROCERS SHOULD BE WORKING ON THAT. AND BIGGER CITIES. THERE'S ALREADY LEGISLATION AROUND THESE KINDS OF THINGS. IF WE WE GOT TO MAKE UP OUR MIND, IF WE WANT TO BE AMALL TOWN OR AN EMERGING CITY, WE CONTINUE TO GROW. BIGGER CITIES HAVE BIGGER ISSUES, AND CLIMATE CHANGE AND ENVIRONMENTAL AND SUSTAINABILITY IS ONE OF THOSE THINGS. SO WHAT WE DO NOW, WHILE IT'S OUR TERMS, WHILE IT'S OUR TIME, IT MATTERS TO THE PEOPLE THAT IT MATTERS TO. 
          [01:55:02]
SO I APPRECIATE COUNCILMAN LEININGER PUTTING THIS FORWARD, DEALING WITH ALL THE STUFF THAT COMES WITH THIS, BECAUSE IT IS IMPORTANT THAT THE PEOPLE SEE WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE. PEOPLE ARE SMARTER THAN WE'RE GIVING THEM CREDIT FOR. THEY WILL FIGURE IT OUT, JUST LIKE THEY DO WITH KEEPING THE BAGS AND USING THEM FOR OTHER THINGS. THANK YOU, COUNCILWOMAN SHANKLIN, YOU'RE NEXT TO MCCUE. THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. YOU KNOW, I LOOK AT THIS AND WE TALK ABOUT THESE BAGS, AND I, TOO, SAVED THE BAGS BECAUSE I HAVE A ENTRY IN ON IN ON MONDAYS, JUST LIKE MONDAY PAST. WE HAVE SO MANY VEGETABLES AND STUFF. WE PUT IN THESE BAGS AND GIVE IT TO THE, THE LOW INCOME. IF WE DIDN'T HAVE THESE BAGS AND I HAD 175 PEOPLE THIS WEEK AND I GET THE BAGS TO PUT THEIR VEGETABLES AND THINGS IN, I MEAN, IT WOULD COST US MORE THAN WHAT IT'S COSTING ME TO BUY THE MEAT FOR THEM, TO BUY THE BAGS, TO PUT THE FOOD IN. I MEAN, I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING JP IS SAYING, BUT RIGHT NOW IT'S JUST NOT A GOOD TIME FOR US AND I KNOW THIS WILL COME UP LATER ON DOWN THE ROAD, SO I'LL WAIT UNTIL THE NEXT TIME AROUND AND VOTE FOR IT. BUT RIGHT NOW WE NEED THE BAGS. AND LIKE I SAID, IN A LOW INCOME AREA, SOMETIMES PEOPLE CAN'T AFFORD TO BUY BAGS. AND AND ONE THING I SAY ALL THE TIME IS WE ALWAYS PUTTING THESE RESOLUTIONS AND THINGS OF FORTH BEFORE US, AND WE CAN'T ENFORCE NONE OF THEM, AND WE JUST WASTE OUR TIME GOING BACK AND FORTH ARGUING ABOUT SOMETHING THAT WE CAN'T DO ANYTHING ABOUT. SO THAT'S WHAT I HAVE TO SAY, AND I WILL CONTINUE TO SAY IT AS LONG AS I'M HERE, THAT ALL WE DO IS ARGUE AND FUSS ABOUT THINGS THAT WE CANNOT CONTROL. 
          THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. SEEING NO ONE ELSE IN MY QUEUE, THIS IS A RESOLUTION THAT WOULD NORMALLY REQUIRE A VOICE VOTE. HOWEVER, DUE TO THE CONTENTIOUS NATURE. WE'LL DO A ROLL CALL. VOTE. 
          MADAM CLERK, OPEN THE ROLL. COUNCIL MEMBER. PARISH RIGHT. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. WINKLER. 
          PRESENT. I THINK I'VE GOT IT RIGHT, MR. PRESIDENT, YOU HAVE EIGHT YES VOTES, 14 NO VOTES AND THREE PRESENT VOTES. THE RESOLUTION FAILS, MADAM CLERK, A READING OF ITEM NUMBER 46, AN 
          [46.
 O-267-25     AN ORDINANCE REPEALING THE LOUISVILLE METRO CODE OF ORDINANCES (“LMCO”), SECTIONS 115.170 TO 115.182, AND REPLACING THEM WITH SECTIONS 115.170 TO 115.196 REGARDING MASSAGE FACILITIES (AS AMENDED).
11/5/25 Public Safety Committee  Amended; Recommended for Approval
Action Required By: April 30, 2026
Sponsors: Jeff Hudson (R-23), Marilyn Parker (R-18), Khalil Batshon (R-25), Ginny Mulvey-Woolridge (R-24), Jonathan “JJ” Joseph (R-12)]
ORDINANCE REPEALING THE LOUISVILLE METRO CODE OF ORDINANCES, SECTION 115 .17021 15 .182 AND REPLACING THEM WITH SECTIONS 115 .17021 15 .196. REGARDING MASSAGE FACILITIES, AS AMENDED. READ IN FULL. SECOND. OKAY, LET'S SEE HERE ITEM 46 THAT CAME OUT OF COUNCILMAN SIMS COMMITTEE. COUNCILMAN SAM, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. 
          THIS IS ITEM 46. CORRECT. AND THIS IS PRODUCED BY COUNCILMAN HUDSON. I'D LIKE TO GIVE HIM THE FLOOR, PLEASE. COUNCILMAN HUDSON, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR, SIR. THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. SO, OVER A YEAR AGO, TWO MASSAGE FACILITIES OPENED IN MY DISTRICT WITHIN A QUARTER MILE OF A CHURCH, A SCHOOL, DAYCARE CENTER, AND EACH OTHER IMMEDIATELY STARTED GETTING CALLS FROM MY CONSTITUENTS ASKING ABOUT HOW THEY WERE ALLOWED TO OPEN. AFTER A SHORT INVESTIGATION, I LEARNED THAT LOUISVILLE HAS HAD A REQUIREMENT ON THE BOOKS FOR MASSAGE FACILITIES TO BE LICENSED BY E DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND WELLNESS SINCE 1974, YET NEITHER  THESE FACILITIES ISSUING LICENSES. THE ORDINANCE WASN'T CHANGED. THE CITY JUST STOPPED ISSUING THE LICENSE. THIS LACK OF OVERSIGHT AND LACK OF ACCOUNTABILITY MADE LOUISVILLE AN ATTRACTIVE PLACE FOR ILLICIT BUSINESSES TO COME, BECAUSE THEY KNEW NO ONE WAS GOING TO LOOK AT THEM. THESE ILLEGITIMATE BUSINESSES ARE HEAVILY INVOLVED IN HUMAN TRAFFICKING, SO IN COOPERATION WITH THE MAYOR'S OFFICE OVER THE PAST 13 MONTHS, I'VE LED A TASK FORCE COMPRISED OF OVER 40 PEOPLE FROM VARIOUS BACKGROUNDS, INCLUDING LOCAL, STATE AND FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT, INDUSTRY, COMMUNITY, LOCAL AND STATE GOVERNMENT. THE KENTUCKY 
          [02:00:02]
ATTORNEY GENERAL, THE JEFFERSON COUNTY ATTORNEY, AND MANY MORE. AS WE BEGIN THE DISCUSSION TONIGHT, IT'S IMPORTANT TO KEEP THIS ONE THING IN MIND. THIS ORDINANCE IS SINGULARLY FOCUSED ON STOPPING HUMAN TRAFFICKING. PERIOD. FULL STOP. I KNOW THAT THERE ARE PEOPLE IN THE LEGITIMATE MASSAGE INDUSTRY THAT HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THIS ORDINANCE AND WANT AN EXEMPTION OR AN AMENDMENT, OR FOR IT TO BE HELD. LET ME REMIND YOU THAT THIS ORDINANCE DOES NOT, I REPEAT, DOES NOT INTRODUCE NEW REQUIREMENTS FOR A FACILITY LICENSE. EXISTING BUSINESSES HAVE BEEN GETTING A FREE PASS FOR 15 YEARS. THAT LAW HAS NOT CHANGED. THIS ORDINANCE SIMPLY MAKES IT TOUGHER FOR THE ILLEGITIMATE BUSINESSES TO OPERATE IN METRO LOUISVILLE. 
          AND LET'S NOT LOOK OVER THE FACT THAT THIS ORDINANCE IF IF THIS ORDINANCE GETS VOTED DOWN TONIGHT OR HELD THE EXISTING LEGISLATION IS STILL IN EFFECT. BLESS YOU. LICENSES FOR FACILITIES ARE REQUIRED. HAVING SAID THAT, I AM SYMPATHETIC TO THE CONCERNS OF THE LEGITIMATE BUSINESS OWNERS I'VE MET WITH OR ATTEMPTED TO MEET WITH EVERY PERSON THAT HAS REACHED OUT. I MET WITH THE ONE PERSON THAT EVERYONE IN THE INDUSTRY CONSIDERS TO BE THE SUBJECT MATTER EXPERT. SHE SPOKE TONIGHT AT THE BEGINNING OF COUNCIL MEETING. THEIR LOBBYIST CONSIDERS HER TO BE THE SUBJECT MATTER EXPERT. I HAVE INVITED HER TO JOIN THE TASK FORCE GOING FORWARD, AND SHE HAS GRACIOUSLY ACCEPTED TO DO SO, AND I THANK HER FOR THAT. I'VE SPENT MY ENTIRE ADULT LIFE COACHING TEAMS AND CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT, AND I WILL APPLY THAT PRACTICE TO THIS ORDINANCE AS WE BECOME SMARTER, COME UP WITH AMENDMENTS TO IMPROVE THIS ORDINANCE. I'LL BE THE FIRST IN LINE TO SUPPORT THOSE AND SPONSOR THEM. IT'S THE IN. THIS IS INTENDED TO BE A LIVING DOCUMENT. I RESPECTFULLY ASK THIS BODY THAT ANY AMENDMENTS BEING SUBMITTED TO THE THAT THOSE AMENDMENTS BE SUBMITTED TO THE TASK FORCE SO THAT THEY CAN COME BACK WITH RECOMMENDATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS TO THIS COUNCIL AND WE CAN ADDRESS THEM AT THAT TIME FOR FINAL CONSIDERATION. CRAFTING AMENDMENT LANGUAGE ON THE FLY, IN MY OPINION, IS A RECIPE FOR DISASTER. IT DID NOT, AND IT DENIES US THE OPPORTUNITY TO TAP INTO THE BODY OF EXPERTISE AVAILABLE TO US. THIS ORDINANCE IS NOT AIMED AT THE LEGITIMATE BUSINESSES. IT IS UNIQUELY DESIGNED TO PROVIDE CODE ENFORCEMENT AND LAW ENFORCEMENT WITH THE NECESSARY TOOLS TO EFFECTIVELY GO AFTER THE HUMAN TRAFFICKING THATHT IN METRO LOU, HUMAN TRAFFICKING IS THE TERM WE USE IN POLITE SOCIETY TO DESCRIBE THIS ABOMINATION. 
          BECAUSE IT IS JUST TOO DISGUSTING TO CALL IT BY ITS REAL NAME. THIS IS MODERN DAY SLAVERY, PURE AND SIMPLE. IF IT MEANS THAT THE 15 YEAR PERIOD OF MASSAGE FACILITIES GETTING A FREE PASS MUST COME TO AN END, SO BE IT. AGAIN, THE LAW REQUIRING A LICENSE IS NOT NEW. 
          WE JUST HAVEN'T BEEN ENFORCING IT FOR 15 YEARS. TONIGHT, THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND WELLNESS IS ON NOTICE TO BEGIN ENFORCING THE CURRENT LAWS. REGARDLESS OF IF THIS ORDINANCE PASSES TONIGHT OR NOT. AND BY THE WAY, THE EXISTING ORDINANCE THAT'S ON THE BOOK AND HAS BEEN FOR OVER 50 YEARS IS WAY MORE RESTRICTIVE THAN THIS PROPOSED ORDINANCE. THIS. SEVERAL PEOPLE HAVE CLAIMED THAT THIS ORDINANCE PUNISHES THE LEGITIMATE BUSINESSES. IT DOESN'T. IT SIMPLY BRINGS THEM INTO COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAW THAT'S BEEN ON THE BOOKS SINCE 1974. THANKS FOR COMING UP. IN THE GRAND SCHEME OF THINGS, WHEN IT COMES TO WEIGHING A $200 LICENSE FEE THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN ASSESSED OVER THE PAST 15 YEARS AND HASN'T BEEN AGAINST RESCUING WOMEN AND CHILDREN FROM THE BONDAGE OF MODERN DAY SLAVERY. I KNOW WHICH SIDE I'M GOING TO LAND ON EVERY SINGLE TIME. AND MAKE NO MISTAKE, EVERY SINGLE METRO COUNCIL DISTRICT IS AFFECTED BY THIS. WE'VE ALL IMAGINED WHAT WE WOULD HAVE DONE HAD WE BEEN 
          [02:05:09]
AROUND DURING SOME OF THE MOST PIVOTAL TIMES IN HISTORY. THIS IS ONE OF THOSE TIMES. WE ARE LITERALLY DEALING WITH MODERN DAY SLAVERY OCCURRING IN LOUISVILLE, KENTUCKY IN 2025. 
          WE CAN EITHER IGNORE IT, DENY IT, OR DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. A YES VOTE ON THIS ORDINANCE MEANS YOU'RE WILLING TO TAKE A STAND AGAINST THIS ATROCITY. A NO VOTE MEANS THAT YOU'RE OKAY WITH HUMANS BEING BOUGHT AND SOLD LIKE SO MUCH CHATTEL. DON'T GET DISTRACTED BY THE NOISE BEING GENERATED AROUND THIS ISSUE. THE STAKES ARE JUST TOO, TOO IMPORTANT. LET YOUR YES BE YES AND YOUR NO BE NO. I FOR ONE, WILL BE AN EMPHATIC YES, AND I HOPE THAT MY COLLEAGUES WILL BE AS WELL. THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. I'D BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS. WELL, THE FIRST IN MY QUEUE IS COUNCILMAN CHAPPELL. YOU HAVE THE FLOOR, MADAM. 
          REMEMBER WHEN I COULDN'T FIND MYSELF EARLIER IN THE QUEUE? I FOUND MYSELF BUT HAPPY TO SPEAK ON IT. I WASN'T PLANNING ON GOING FIRST, BUT I THINK THAT MAYBE IT'S NATURAL THAT I'M GOING IN THE QUEUE RIGHT NOW BECAUSE THIS WAS AN ISSUE THAT WAS CALLED THE QUESTION IN COMMITTEE, AND THE CONVERSATION ON IT WAS ENDED, AND I WAS ACTUALLY NEXT IN THE QUEUE. AND I'VE HEARD SO MANY TIMES IN THIS BODY, WELL, IF YOU HAD QUESTIONS, WHY ARE YOU ASKING IT A COUNCIL? YOU SHOULD HAVE ASKED IT AT COMMITTEE. AND I DIDN'T WRITE NEW NOTES. I'M JUST GOING TO GO OFF OF THE NOTES THAT I HAD FROM THAT PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MEETING OF OF WHICH I'M ALSO NOT A MEMBER. BUT I SHOWED UP WITH MY QUESTIONS. IT WAS PREPARED BUT DENIED THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK ON THEM. SO IF THIS IS AN EXISTING LAW AND IT JUST HASN'T BEEN ENFORCED FOR 15 YEARS, WHY NOT JUST ENFORCE THE EXISTING LAW? I THINK THAT THERE'S PRETTY STRENUOUS LICENSING REQUIREMENTS FOR MASSAGE THERAPISTS, WHICH WE HAVE SEEN AND BEEN PRESENTED WITH TONIGHT. IT'S BEEN MENTIONED NUMEROUS TIMES THAT THERE'S 30 TO 40 KNOWN PROBLEMATIC MASSAGE FACILITIES IN LOUISVILLE. IT SEEMS LIKE IF WE HAVE THAT NUMBER, WE CAN HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE TARGETED APPROACH. OR MAYBE WE COULD JUST START ENACTING THE LAW THAT WE HAVE ON THE BOOKS. I'VE ALSO ASKED NUMEROUS TIMES FOR A NUMBER OF HOW MANY MASSAGE FACILITIES THERE ARE IN LOUISVILLE. I HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO RECEIVE THAT ANSWER FROM ANYONE, NOR HAVE I BEEN ABLE TO FIND THE ANSWER ONLINE. ALSO, WITH THE HELP OF AI, I'VE COME UP WITH NO ANSWERS. I'M QUESTIONING IF THERE'S BEEN AN A FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT DONE FOR THIS LEGISLATION. IT CAN'T BE CALLED ON TONIGHT, BUT I, I WONDER IF THAT HAS BEEN DONE. I'VE BEEN TOLD THAT IT HAS, BUT ONLY FOR THE ABC PORTION OF THIS LEGISLATION, WHICH WOULD BE ABOUT $320,000. THE THING IS, THIS IS A NEW LICENSE OR A LICENSE THEY WILL HAVE TO START OVERSEEING. AND WHEN WE I TRIED TO ADD A LICENSE, I WAS TOLD IT WAS GOING TO BE ABOUT $2 MILLION. AND A LOT OF THAT WAS JUST BECAUSE WE HAVE AN OVERBURDENED AND OVERWORKED ABC STAFF. AND SO I THINK THAT THIS LEGISLATION, WE WILL BY ALL MEANS NEED TO HIRE MORE PEOPLE TO MANAGE THAT DATABASE, BUT ALSO ENFORCE THIS LAW. BUT THIS LAW DOESN'T JUST INCLUDE ABC. IT ALSO INCLUDES CODES AND REGS, PUBLIC HEALTH AND PLANNING AND THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. AND IT ALSO INCLUDES LMPD, OF WHICH WOULD BE DOING BACKGROUND CHECKS. AND INTERESTINGLY ENOUGH, THERE'S $75,000 SUGGESTED IN THE MID-YEAR BUDGET ADJUSTMENT FOR THE SHERIFF TO DO BACKGROUND CHECKS BECAUSE THE SHERIFF HAS FOUND LMPD TO BE TOO SLOW IN RETURNING ANY BACKGROUND CHECKS. I HAVE A LOT OF ISSUES WITH THE LEGISLATION ON PAGE FIVE, ITEM 12 THE NAMES, RESIDENTIAL ADDRESSES AND SIGNED WRITTEN STATEMENTS OF AT LEAST THREE BONA FIDE PERMANENT RESIDENTS OF THE UNITED STATES THAT THE APPLICANT IS OF GOOD MORAL CHARACTER. I DON'T KNOW WHAT GOOD MORAL CHARACTER. I THINK THAT A LOT OF YOU WOULD HAVE A STRUGGLE TO SAY THAT I HAVE GOOD MORAL CHARACTER, SO I DON'T SEE WHY WE ARE ASKING THIS OF OUR MASSAGE THERAPISTS WHEN WE DON'T ASK THIS OF LIQUOR STORE OWNERS, WE DON'T ASK THIS OF POLICE. WE DON'T ASK THIS OF POLITICIANS. ON PAGE TEN, THERE'S SECTION C, AND IT'S TALKING ABOUT ACCESS TO LOCKED DOORS. IF YOU'VE EVER HAD A MASSAGE, YOU HAVE TO GET UNDRESSED IF THAT IS YOUR CHOICE. AND I KNOW A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT LIKE TO BE BEHIND A LOCKED DOOR WHEN THEY ARE DOING SO FOR THEIR OWN SAFETY. ON PAGE TEN, THERE'S ALSO VISIBILITY ABOUT NOT HAVING ANY CURTAINS, CLOSED BLINDS, TINTS, 
          [02:10:06]
OR ANY OTHER MATERIAL THAT OBSTRUCTS, BLURS OR DARKENS THE VIEW INTO THE PREMISES. AND I FIND THAT TO BE ALSO PROBLEMATIC. LANGUAGE. ON PAGE 11 IT TALKS ABOUT A REGISTER OF PATRONS. THE MASSAGE FACILITY SHALL MAINTAIN A REGISTER OF ALL PATRONS OF THE MASSAGE FACILITY. THAT INCLUDES THE FIRST AND LAST NAME OF PATRON, THE FIRST AND LAST NAME OF MASSAGE THERAPIST, DATE AND TIME OF SERVICE. TYPE OF SERVICE RECEIVED. AND I AM ONE THAT BELIEVES THAT HEALTHCARE IS MASSAGE IS HEALTHCARE. AND I THINK THAT A LOT OF THE PEOPLE THAT ARE TRAINED IN THIS ROOM AND ACROSS OUR CITY WHO ARE LICENSED TO GIVE MASSAGES, WOULD ALSO AGREE THAT IT IS HEALTHCARE. AND SO GIVEN THAT INFORMATION, I THINK THAT IT IS A VIOLATION OF PEOPLE'S PRIVACY TO NOT ONLY REQUIRE THAT TO BE REPORTED TO THE GOVERNMENT, BUT I ALSO QUESTION WHO IS GOING TO BE STORING THE INFORMATION THAT'S GATHERED. IS THERE A TIME THAT IT'S GOING TO BE DESTROYED UPON RETRIEVAL? HOW SECURE IS THIS? BECAUSE IF I GET A MASSAGE, I DON'T NEED THE WHOLE WORLD TO KNOW WHAT MY SERVICES WERE. IF I DISLOCATED A MUSCLE IN MY HIP AND I HAD MY BUTT OR MY BUTTOCKS MASSAGED, I DON'T SEE WHY. THAT'S THE BUSINESS OF ANYONE. AND SINCE WE HAVE NOT IDENTIFIED WHO IS GOING TO BE SECURELY HOLDING THIS INFORMATION, I THINK THAT'S REALLY PROBLEMATIC. ALSO ON PAGE 11, SECTION 115.183, IT SAYS THAT THERE NEEDS TO BE CAMERAS. EACH FACILITY, EACH MASSAGE FACILITY IS ALLOWED UP TO TWO FIXED SECURITY CAMERAS, PROVIDED THAT ONE SECURITY CAMERA MUST FACE THE MAIN ENTRY LOBBY OR RECEPTION DESK IN THE SECOND CAMERA MUST FACE ANY ALTERNATIVE ENTRANCE OR EXIT. I FIND THIS TO BE SLOPPY LANGUAGE BECAUSE I DON'T UNDERSTAND IF THAT THOSE TWO ARE REQUIRED. 
          WHAT IF I HAVE ONE? WHAT IF I HAVE THREE? IT DOESN'T REALLY EXPLAIN WHAT THE REQUIREMENTS ARE, JUST THAT TWO BE POINTED AT THESE VERY SPECIFIC AREAS. I'M VOTING AGAINST THIS, AND JUST BECAUSE I'M VOTING AGAINST THIS, IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT I'M IN SUPPORT OF SEX TRAFFICKING. 
          IT'S QUITE OPPOSITE. I DON'T THINK THAT THIS SOLVES THE PROBLEM, AND I DO THINK IT PENALIZES THE GOOD PLAYERS. AND I WISH THAT WE WOULD TRY TO NOT INVENT, REINVENT THE WHEEL ON THIS, AND WE WOULD GO AHEAD AND ENFORCE THE LAWS THAT WE ALREADY HAVE ON THE BOOKS AND LOOK AT CREATIVE WAYS. AND LAST THAT I CHECKED, THIS 40 PERSON TASK FORCE HAS NEVER PRESENTED ITS FINDINGS TO THIS BODY. AND SO WITHOUT HAVING THE INFORMATION ON WHAT THEY HAVE BEEN INVESTIGATING AND WHAT THEY HAVE FOUND, I CAN'T SAY THAT I WOULD SUPPORT LEGISLATION THAT THESE ANONYMOUS PEOPLE HAVE CREATED. SO THAT IS MY PIECE. THAT'S ALL I'LL BE VOTING. NO, THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN OWEN, YOUR NEXT MY QUEUE. YOU HAVE THE FLOOR, SIR. 
          THANK YOU, PRESIDENT ATKINSON. I FEEL LIKE I HAVE TO POINT THINGS OUT THAT ARE STRANGE FOR ME TO BE THE ONE POINTING THEM OUT, BUT WHEN WE WERE TALKING ABOUT PLASTIC BAGS, IT WAS VERY CLEARLY SAID THAT IT'S NOT OUR JOB TO REGULATE BUSINESS. THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT WE DO. THAT'S WHAT WE DO WHEN WE PASS THE RESOLUTION RECENTLY THAT I THINK WAS EXCELLENT, EXCELLENT LAW THAT REGULATED CHECK CASHING IN A WAY THAT WOULD BENEFIT OUR COMMUNITIES. WE JUST SUGGESTED THAT WE HAVE THE PLANNING COMMISSION LOOK INTO TO LIQUOR LICENSES AND HOW THEY HOW THOSE ARE PASSED. AND I THINK THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT WE SHOULD BE DOING, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, THAT'S THE WAY WE PROTECT OUR COMMUNITY. SO I JUST WHEN IT BENEFITS, YOU KNOW, YOUR YOUR STORYLINE AND SAY WE SHOULDN'T REGULATE BUSINESS, OKAY. THAT'S ONE THING. BUT I JUST THINK I WANT TO POINT THAT OUT BECAUSE THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT WE DO. AND WE DO IT TO BENEFIT OUR CONSTITUENTS. SO I THINK A COUPLE OF THINGS FOR ME, I THINK I AGREE THAT WE'RE WE'RE TAKING WHAT I FEEL LIKE IS A GOVERNMENT SLEDGEHAMMER TO A PROBLEM THAT COULD PROBABLY USE A SCALPEL. AND I THINK THE, THE TESTIMONY PREVIOUSLY OF THE, THE EXPERT WHO ASKED US TO HOLD OFF FOR A FEW MINUTES, I THINK WAS VERY COMPELLING. I KIND OF THOUGHT THAT PREVIOUS TO COMING INTO THIS MEETING ANYWAY, BUT I THOUGHT THE TESTIMONY WAS PARTICULARLY COMPELLING. AND I DO THINK AS A BODY, ESPECIALLY ON BUDGET COMMITTEE, WE TRY TO GET OURSELVES TO 18, 20 VOTES. 
          AND I THINK THAT'S A REALLY GOOD PRACTICE. AND I THINK THIS PARTICULAR LEGISLATION, EVEN 
          [02:15:01]
THOUGH I THINK IT'S RIGHT NOW A LITTLE HEAVY HANDED, I THINK WE COULD GET TO LEGISLATION THAT WAS BETTER LEGISLATION THAN WHAT'S IN FRONT OF US, AND WE COULD GET TO 18 OR 20 VOTES. 
          AND THAT'S WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO TRY TO DO HERE. SO I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO SEND IT BACK TO COMMITTEE SO WE CAN HAVE THAT CONVERSATION AND TRY TO IMPROVE THE LEGISLATION TO MAKE IT A LITTLE BIT MORE OF A SCALPEL INSTEAD OF A HAMMER. AND LISTEN, I KNOW THERE'S URGENCY HERE, BUT WE HAVE BEEN WE HAVE SPENT, YOU KNOW, 13 MONTHS ON THIS AND ANOTHER COUPLE OF WEEKS TO TRY TO INCORPORATE SOME OF THE THINGS THAT THE TESTIMONY THAT WAS SAID HERE TONIGHT AND TO INCORPORATE SOME OF THAT INTO THE LEGISLATION RATHER THAN JUST ASKING, YOU KNOW, THE GOOD PLAYERS IN THE BUSINESS TO TRUST US THAT WE'LL BE ABLE TO FIGURE IT OUT GOING FORWARD. LISTEN, I DON'T THINK THAT I, I'M NOT SAYING THEY SHOULDN'T TRUST US, BUT I JUST THINK THAT'S A THAT'S A TALL ASK WHEN WE'RE AFFECTING THEIR BUSINESS IN THE WAY THAT WE ARE. SO AGAIN, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO, TO SEND IT BACK TO COMMITTEE. SECOND, WE'VE GOT A MOTION TO SEND IT BACK TO COMMITTEE BEFORE US. I BELIEVE THAT IS A NON DEBATABLE ISSUE. AND SO AS SUCH LET'S DO A ROLL CALL ON THIS ONE. MADAM CLERK OPEN THE ROLL. COUNCIL MEMBER OH, PARISH RIGHT. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER RENO WEBER. YES. HOWEVER YOU SAY. THANK YOU. AND COUNCIL MEMBER WINKLER. YES. EVERYONE, I THINK IT IS. MR. PRESIDENT, YOU HAVE 13 YES VOTES AND 13 NO VOTES. THE MOTION FAILS. NEXT. THE NEXT PERSON IN MY QUEUE IS COUNCILMAN RUBY. YOU HAVE THE FLOOR, MADAM. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. LIKE TO SPEAK TO THE URGENCY OF THIS. YOU'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS LEGISLATION FOR A YEAR. YOU'VE HAD A TASK FORCE, AND NOW YOU ARE ASKING US TO PASS THIS WITH NO CHANGES TO IT. AND I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT THE URGENCY IS AT THIS POINT. WHEN YOU HAVE A YEAR AND YOU WAIT TWO WEEKS, YOU CALL YOUR TASK FORCE TOGETHER AND WE PRESENT OUR CONCERNS AND YOU GIVE YOUR TASK FORCE A CHANCE TO ADDRESS THEM. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT THE URGENCY IS THAT WE HAVE TO PASS THIS NOW. THIS HAS BEEN NOTED BY MANY OF OUR MANY CONSTITUENTS. THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT PROBLEMS WITH THIS. 
          ONE OF THE ONES IS THE IN-HOME STUDIOS, WHICH, AS THIS LEGISLATION IS CURRENTLY WRITTEN, WILL NOT BE ALLOWED. AND THAT'S GOING TO PUT A LOT OF PERSONAL MASSAGE THERAPIST STUDIOS OUT OF BUSINESS. IN ADDITION, THE AREAS THAT YOU'RE ALLOWED TO MASSAGE ONCE AGAIN, OKAY, SO I RECENTLY HAD TO HAVE A MUSCLE SPASM IN MY HIP, WAS FINALLY DIAGNOSED AFTER THREE MONTHS AND I WAS TOLD, JUST GO GET A MASSAGE. AS IT STANDS RIGHT NOW, I WOULD HAVE TO GET A PERMISSION SLIP FROM MY DOCTOR TO GO SEE MY MASSAGE THERAPIST, TO GO HAVE HER WORK ON A MUSCLE SPASM IN MY BUTT. I DON'T KNOW WHY I NEED TO GO THROUGH THAT EXTRA, THAT EXTRA STEP WHEN THIS IS A TRUSTED PERSON THAT I'VE WORKED WITH FOR YEARS, IT SEEMS LIKE A LOT OF THIS IS COMING FROM A POINT OF MISTRUST. AS WAS NOTED, YOU HAVE TO HAVE CHARACTER WITNESSES FROM THREE DIFFERENT PEOPLE. WE DON'T ASK FOR CHARACTER WITNESSES FROM PEOPLE WHO OPERATE LIQUOR STORES, WHICH CAN BE VERY DETRIMENTAL TO A NEIGHBOR WHO WE DON'T ASK FOR CHARACTER WITNESSES, FOR SOMEBODY OPENING UP A VAPE SHOP OR ANYTHING ELSE FOR THAT MATTER. AND IT JUST IT'S INSULTING TO PEOPLE WHO ARE TRYING TO OPERATE A LEGITIMATE BUSINESS. AND AS I STARTED, THIS IS SOMETHING YOU'VE BEEN WORKING ON FOR OVER A YEAR. I DO NOT SEE THE URGENCY, AND I ASK THAT WE HOLD THIS AND COME BACK TO IT AFTER YOU'VE HAD A CHANCE TO PRESENT OUR CONCERNS TO YOUR TASK FORCE. SO I'M GOING TO ASK ONCE AGAIN THAT I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THIS TABLED. AND WE MEET. WE MEET WITH YOUR TASK FORCE. IS THERE A SECOND OR IS THAT A MOTION, MADAM? THAT WAS A MOTION. THAT WAS A MOTION. IS THERE A SECOND TO TABLE. SECOND, SECOND. YES. I THINK THE FIRST VOTE WAS TO SEND IT BACK TO COMMITTEE. BACK TO COMMITTEE. SO THIS IS A SEPARATE A SEPARATE VOTE AND THUS BONA FIDE. ALRIGHT. I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THAT TABLING IS DEBATABLE. AND AS SUCH, WHAT'S THAT. SO THIS IS NOT A DEBATABLE. LET'S OPEN THE ROLL CALL SO WE CAN BE PRECISE. COUNCIL MEMBER PERISH RIGHT? YES. COUNCIL MEMBER RENO WEBER. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. WINKLER. YES. MISTER PRESIDENT, YOU HAVE 13 YES VOTES AND 13 NO VOTES. THE MOTION FAILS. THE NEXT IN MY QUEUE IS COUNCILMAN ANTHONY. 
          [02:20:02]
THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. SO, FIRST OF ALL, I KNOW I DIDN'T SAY THAT WE SHOULD NEVER REGULATE BUSINESS, SO I'M NOT SURE WHO DID. MAYBE SOMEBODY DID. IT WASN'T ME. BECAUSE WE DO. YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. MY COLLEAGUE IS RIGHT. WE DO REGULATE BUSINESS. I WAS SIMPLY SAYING THAT IN THAT PARTICULAR CASE, IT WOULD MAKE LIFE MORE EXPENSIVE FOR POOR PEOPLE. AND THERE WAS NO PLAN HERE. THERE IS A YEAR LONG DEVELOPED PLAN WITH JUST ABOUT EVERY STAKEHOLDER THAT YOU CAN MUSTER TO DEVELOP THAT PLAN. THERE'S NO SUCH THING. AT LEAST I'VE NEVER SEEN IT. AND SOMEBODY POINT TO IT. WHEN YOU DO A PERFECT LEGISLATION, THAT WILL NEVER HAPPEN. OKAY, THIS IS VERY GOOD LEGISLATION TO THOSE THAT WANT TO IMPLEMENT THE CURRENT REGULATIONS, FEEL FREE. EVERY OPERATOR THAT CAME UP HERE AND AS CONCERNED WITH THIS WILL BE SHUT DOWN ALMOST OVERNIGHT. THE CURRENT REGULATION, THE CURRENT LAW IS FAR MORE EGREGIOUS. ZERO EXEMPTIONS. IT WILL BE DEVASTATING TO THE INDUSTRY IF IT WERE IMPLEMENTED TODAY, AND IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN IMPLEMENTED 15 YEARS AGO. SO THERE WOULD BE A MASSIVE FALLOUT IF WE DIDN'T MOVE ON THIS. AND THIS GROUP STARTED MOVING ON REGULATING THESE BUSINESSES. ACCORDING TO CURRENT LAW. I'M HONESTLY TO SOME DEGREE A LITTLE CONFUSED BY THE VOCAL AND AGGRESSIVE MANNER IN WHICH SOME WANT TO STOP OR SLOW THIS DOWN. AND YET WE HAVE A COLLEAGUE WHO HAS DEDICATED AN INCREDIBLE AMOUNT OF TIME AND EFFORT, HAS NOT BEEN VERY SECRETIVE ABOUT IT. WE'VE HAD PRESS CONFERENCES ON THIS, SO IT'S NOT AS THOUGH WE'RE HIDING THE BALL. ANYBODY COULD HAVE APPROACHED HIM ABOUT IT. I KNOW WE'VE TALKED AT OUR CAUCUS ABOUT IT, THIS ABOUT THIS FOR FOR A VERY LONG TIME. AND NOW WANTS TO SAY, WELL, LET'S LET'S PUT ON THE BRAKES, LET'S SLOW DOWN. WHERE WERE ALL THESE FOLKS WHO PURPORT TO BE MAD AND UPSET, INCLUDING, YOU KNOW, EXPERTS IN THE INDUSTRY WHO ARE UPSET ABOUT HUMAN TRAFFICKING, HAVING TAKEN OVER THEIR INDUSTRY, SULLIED THEIR INDUSTRY, BUT THEY DIDN'T COME WITH THE SOLUTION. COUNCILMAN HUDSON AND THIS AND THIS GROUP OF PEOPLE THAT HAVE BEEN PUT TOGETHER HAVE COME UP WITH A SOLUTION. I AM, I AM I COULDN'T BE MORE COMPLIMENTARY. I DON'T EVEN KNOW EXACTLY WHAT TO SAY ON HOW TO EXPRESS MY COMPLIMENTS FOR COUNCILMAN HUDSON. AND NOT ONLY THE WORK HE DID. I'VE DONE COMPLEX LEGISLATION BEFORE WHERE YOU HAVE MULTIPLE STAKEHOLDERS. IT'S VERY HARD TO KEEP THAT COALITION WORKING AND TO GET TO A SOLUTION AND TO GET TO SOMETHING THAT YOU CAN PUT FORWARD, KNOWING IT WILL NEVER BE PERFECT, KNOWING IT WILL NEVER SATISFY EVERYBODY, BUT KNOWING IT IS A MASSIVE STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION TO SOLVE THIS ABSOLUTE SCOURGE IN OUR SOCIETY. THIS IS A PART OF THE SAFER LOUISVILLE PLAN THAT I KNOW MY CAUCUS HAS PUSHED FOR. I COULDN'T BE POSSIBLY BE MORE PROUD OF HIS EFFORTS, AND QUITE FRANKLY, I WOULD BE HARD PRESSED TO REMEMBER ANY PIECE OF LEGISLATION THAT WE VOTED ON THAT IS THAT EVEN HOLDS A CANDLE TO HOW IMPORTANT THIS IS. 
          AND THIS EFFORT IS IN CORRECTING THIS HORRIBLE SITUATION IN OUR COMMUNITY. 
          PERSONALLY, I'M NOT GOING TO WAIT ANOTHER DAY. IT LOOKS LIKE ALL EFFORTS TO SIDELINE THIS ARE DONE PROCEDURALLY. SO WE'RE GOING TO VOTE ON SOMETHING TONIGHT. AND I'M NOT GOING TO WAIT ANOTHER DAY TO VOTE ON THIS AND VOTE YES. LET'S VOTE ON THIS START PUT AN END TO THIS DISGUSTING CRIME. THIS WILL NOT BE THE LAST CONVERSATION. IT WILL NOT BE THE LAST AMENDMENT. SO KEEP WORKING WITH THE GROUP THAT'S BEEN PUT TOGETHER. LET'S KEEP THE INPUT COMING FROM THE COMMUNITY. BUT THIS IS A MASSIVE STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION, A MASSIVE STEP TOWARD JUSTICE AND GOOD. AND I'M NOT GOING TO WAIT ANOTHER DAY FOR IT. I ENCOURAGE EVERYBODY TO VOTE ON THIS. I CANNOT REMEMBER SOMETHING THAT'S THIS IMPORTANT. I CAN'T, AND, YOU KNOW, SOMEBODY CAN TELL ME WHAT WAS. BUT STOPPING HUMAN TRAFFICKING, YOUNG WOMEN, PARTICULARLY IN MANY CASES CHILDREN WHO ARE STOLEN FROM ALL ACROSS THIS WORLD AND SHUTTLED INTO OUR COMMUNITY AND THEN USED FOR SEXUAL SLAVERY, IT'S COMPLETELY UNTHINKABLE. I'M GOING TO BE A YES VOTE. I HOPE AS MANY PEOPLE AS POSSIBLE WILL BE A YES VOTE. WHILE ENCOURAGING FOR IMPROVEMENTS DOWN THE ROAD. THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. COUNCILMAN WINKLER, YOU'RE NEXT IN MY QUEUE. AND YOU HAVE THE FLOOR, SIR. THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, AS WE THINK ABOUT THE DISCUSSION ON THIS ISSUE, I THINK WE'D BE HARD PRESSED TO SAY THERE AREN'T 26 PEOPLE HERE THAT ARE ABSOLUTELY COMMITTED TO VOTING AGAINST HUMAN TRAFFICKING. SO I DON'T THINK THERE'S A SINGLE PERSON HERE 
          [02:25:03]
THAT IS PRO HUMAN TRAFFICKING. AND I THINK THAT THE THE CAUSE HERE IS LAUDABLE AND ONE THAT EVERYBODY SUPPORTS. HOWEVER, I THINK THERE IS A DESIRE BY PEOPLE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE AREN'T UNNECESSARILY IMPACTING LEGITIMATE OPERATORS. AND I THINK WE'VE HEARD FROM THE INDUSTRY OVER THE COURSE OF LAST WEEK. AND, YOU KNOW, I UNDERSTAND, COUNCILMAN SANTINI'S POINT, THAT THIS TASK FORCE HAS BEEN WORKING FOR 13 MONTHS. I, I HOWEVER, I'M NOT SURPRISED THAT IT'S ONLY NOW CATCHING PEOPLE'S ATTENTION BECAUSE IT'S BEEN IN THE MEDIA THIS WEEK. AND SO, YOU KNOW, THAT IS NOT ATYPICAL. IT IS ATYPICAL, HOWEVER, FOR US TO SAY WE'RE GOING TO PASS LEGISLATION THAT WE KNOW HAS SIGNIFICANT FLAWS, AND THEN WE'LL JUST WORK ON THOSE LATER. I CAN'T THINK OF ANY TIME WHERE WE'VE DONE THAT INTENTIONALLY PASSED LEGISLATION WHERE WE KNOW THAT THERE ARE ISSUES. SO I UNDERSTAND THAT THE ATTEMPT TO TABLE AND TO SEND TO COMMITTEE HAS FAILED. AND SO I KNOW COUNCILMAN HUDSON ASKED, THAT WE DON'T MAKE AMENDMENTS ON THE FLOOR. UNFORTUNATELY, THAT'S THE ONLY CHOICE THAT WE HAVE REMAINING. SO I'D LIKE TO GO THROUGH A COUPLE OF AMENDMENTS THAT I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE. AND THE FIRST THAT I WOULD JUST PREFACE IS I THINK THAT WHAT WE HAVE HERE IS AN AMALGAM OF OF TWO PIECES OF REGULATION. ONE DEALS WITH THE FACILITY AND THE OTHER DEALS WITH THE ACTUAL MASSAGES, WHICH I THINK ARE ALREADY REGULATED UNDER CRZ STATUTE. AND SO ANY REGULATION ON TOP OF WHAT CCR'S ALREADY REGULATES TO ME SEEMS STRIKES ME AS WRONG AND UNNECESSARY. I THINK IN I DID GO TO COMMITTEE, I DID GET A CHANCE TO SPEAK AT COMMITTEE. I DID OFFER AN AMENDMENT AT COMMITTEE, AND SOMEBODY REACHED OUT TO ME AND THAT AMENDMENT WAS WAS INTRODUCED BY COUNCILMAN PIACENTINI ON MY BEHALF AND WAS ADOPTED. AND THAT HAD TO DEAL WITH BASICALLY MASSAGING OF THE BREASTS AND BUTTOCKS. IF IF YOU HAVE A PRESCRIPTION. THE NEXT DAY, MASSAGE THERAPIST REACHED OUT TO ME AND SAID, MY GOSH, THIS IS CRAZY. LIKE, HAVE YOU EVER GOTTEN A MASSAGE? LIKE, BUTTOCKS IS A MAJOR MUSCLE GROUP. IT'S NOT. THERE'S NOTHING SEXUAL ABOUT MASSAGING THE BUTTOCKS. AND SO THE FIRST AMENDMENT THAT I WOULD MAKE IS FROM THE DEFINITIONS WHERE IT IS THE DEFINITION OF GENITALS, I WOULD STRIKE THE WORDS BUTTOCKS AND BREASTS AND MAKE THAT IN THE FORM OF A MOTION. 
          WE'VE GOT A MOTION MADE. AND A SECOND, IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THE AMENDMENT TO STRIKE THE WORDS BUTTOCKS AND BREAST FROM THE DEFINITION SECTION? ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT BESIDES WHAT'S IN MY QUEUE? BECAUSE I GOT, YOU KNOW, WITH THESE AMENDMENTS, I'M GOING TO KEEP THE GENERAL QUEUE HERE WHEN IT COMES TO AMENDMENTS. I'M GOING TO LOOK AROUND THE ROOM. IT'LL BE A RAISED HAND. OR IF YOU'RE ON THE ON THE VIRTUAL, JUST CLICK IN AND YELL AT ME, OKAY, ANY DISCUSSION ON THIS PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO REMOVE BUTTOCKS AND BREAST SEEING NONE. 
          COUNCILMAN HUDSON, SO I APPRECIATE THE INTENT HERE, BUT YOU'RE MAKING MY ARGUMENT. THE AMENDMENT THAT WAS OFFERED IN COMMITTEE ON THE FLY. WHAT? OH, THE AMENDMENT THAT WAS SUBMITTED IN COMMITTEE ON THE FLY DIDN'T LAST A DAY BEFORE IT WAS POINTED OUT AS BEING A DISASTER BY THE INDUSTRY. WHEN WE MAKE AMENDMENTS ON A COMPLEX PIECE OF LEGISLATION LIKE THIS, THAT EVERY SINGLE WORD IN IT WAS GONE OVER BY A LARGE GROUP OF PEOPLE THAT KNOW ABOUT THE SUBJECT MATTER AND PULLED IN FROM BEST PRACTICES FROM OTHER STATES AND OTHER CITIES. WE OWE IT TO GO THROUGH THAT SAME PROCESS AND ALLOW THE COUNTY ATTORNEY TO TAKE A LOOK AT IT, ALLOW THE TASK FORCE TO TAKE A LOOK AT IT AND COME BACK AND WE GET THE FINAL VOTE. BUT AT LEAST ALLOW SOME INPUT FROM PEOPLE THAT KNOW, BECAUSE WE DON'T. THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. 
          AND JUST A SECOND. I'M GOING TO BE CALLING COUNCILMAN WINKLER. BUT I JUST WANT TO POINT THIS OUT PROCEDURALLY. THIS SHIP HAS LEFT PORT PROCEDURALLY. YOU KNOW, IF THERE WAS GOING TO BE DISCUSSION, IT HAD TO GO BACK TO COMMITTEE OR BE TABLED. THOSE BOTH GOT VOTED DOWN. AND SO AT THIS POINT, WE WILL BE PROCEEDING WITH THE DISCUSSION. AS COUNCILMAN WINKLER HAS POINTED OUT, WITH DISCUSSIONS ON AMENDMENTS, WHETHER WE LIKE IT OR NOT. COUNCILMAN WINKLER, YOU'VE GOT THE FLOOR. YEAH. THANK YOU. AND, COUNCILMAN HUDSON, I WOULD SAY YOU'VE MADE THE POINT EXACTLY OF WHY THIS SHOULD BE HELD AND WHY THE COMMITTEE SHOULD HAVE HAD THE DISCUSSION. YOU KNOW, I GUESS IF I MAY, I WOULD ASK A QUESTION WHICH IS PRIOR TO THE AMENDMENT FOR THE PRESCRIPTION, WHICH, AS YOU JUST SAID, IT WAS A PROBLEMATIC AMENDMENT 
          [02:30:01]
ACCORDING TO THE TASK FORCE, IF SOMEBODY PULLS THEIR GLUTE AND NEEDS A MASSAGE ON THEIR GLUTE, AM I CORRECT THAT THEY WOULD NOT HAVE RECEIVED THAT THAT SERVICE WAS OUTLAWED UNDER EVERY. IT WAS NOT POSSIBLE TO GET TREATMENT ON YOUR GLUTES. NO, RESPOND, MR. PRESIDENT. 
          THANK YOU SIR. YES, YOU ARE INCORRECT. UNLESS UNLESS THE INTENT OF THAT MASSAGE OF THAT PART OF THE BODY WAS FOR SEXUAL GRATIFICATION, WHICH, THE WAY YOU HAVE FRAMED IT IS NOT SO IT'S ALLOWED. YEAH. RESPECT. MAY I RESPOND? YOU MAY, SIR? YEAH. RESPECTFULLY, COUNCILMAN HUDSON, THAT'S NOT WHAT THE ORDINANCE SAYS THOUGH, BECAUSE IN AND I NEED TO FIND THE SECTION IN THE SECTION THAT WE AMENDED, IT EXPLICITLY SAID, REGARDLESS OF INTENT, THAT NO CONTACT WITH THE SEXUAL AREAS WAS PERMITTED, PERIOD. INDEPENDENT OF INTENT. SO YOU HAD TWO YOU HAD THE INTENT CLAUSE EARLIER, BUT THEN YOU HAD A SUPERSEDING CLAUSE LATER ON THAT COMPLETELY OUTLAWED. AND THAT TO ME IS THE PROBLEM. AGAIN, I THINK WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE, I DON'T THINK ANYBODY DISAGREES. RIGHT. I'VE SAID THAT. I MEAN, I DON'T THINK ANYBODY DISAGREES. I DO WORRY ABOUT IMPACTING LEGITIMATE OPERATORS WHO HAVE A STATE REGULATED LICENSE THAT TELLS THEM HOW TO OPERATE AND THAT WE ARE LAYERING ON TOP OF THAT, THAT THAT'S MY PRIMARY CONCERN, AND THAT'S WHY I WILL HAVE A HARD TIME BEING YES, VOTE WITHOUT THESE AMENDMENTS. AND AGAIN, I GOT THE AMENDMENT BEFORE US. I THINK THAT THERE IS A DISCONNECT IN THE ORDINANCE, HOW IT'S WRITTEN. AND SO I WOULD ASK FOR THE SUPPORT OF MY AMENDMENT. TO RESPOND. SO, COUNCILMAN WINKLER, YOU AND I ARE JUST GOING TO AGREE TO DISAGREE ON THIS ONE, I THINK. BUT WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO DO IS ASK COUNTY ATTORNEY TO WEIGH IN ON THAT AMENDMENT. THE THE ONE THAT WAS OFFERED IN COMMITTEE, THE ONE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. SURE. NATALIE JOHNSON WITH THE JEFFERSON COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. SO THE ORDINANCE AS WRITTEN RIGHT NOW IN FRONT OF COUNCIL, DOES PROHIBIT CONTACT WITH THE SEXUAL OR GENITAL AREAS AS DEFINED BY THE ORDINANCE, UNLESS UNDER THE DIRECT ORDERS OF A LICENSED MEDICAL PROFESSIONAL. FOR CLARITY, REGARDLESS OF INTENT. CORRECT. 
          THAT IS CORRECT. ANYONE ELSE ON THIS AMENDMENT? I'M SEEING NO HANDS IN THE AIR. THIS IS AN AMENDMENT THAT WOULD NORMALLY REQUIRE VOTES BY VOICE VOTE. HOWEVER, BASED UPON THE NATURE OF THIS PARTICULAR PIECE, I'M GOING TO SAY IT'S GOING TO BE A ROLL CALL. MADAM CLERK, OPEN THE ROLL FOR A VOTE ON THIS AMENDMENT TO REMOVE BUTTOCKS AND BREASTS FROM THE DEFINITION SECTION. COUNCIL MEMBER. PARISH. RIGHT. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. WINKLER. YES. RENAL. WEATHER'S GONE. COUNCIL MEMBER. BASS. NOW I HAVE YOU AS A NO. I'VE GOT EVERYONE ELSE. MR. PRESIDENT, YOU HAVE 13 YES VOTES AND 12 NO VOTES. THE AMENDMENT PASSES. ALL RIGHT. SO NOW WE HAVE THE AMENDED VERSION WHERE WE'VE REMOVED THOSE TWO TERMS FROM THE DEFINITION PURSUANT TO COUNCILMAN WINKLER'S REQUEST. AGAIN, MY PROBLEM IS, IS MY CUE IS BASED UPON THE OVERALL DISCUSSION OF THE ORDINANCE. ARE WE GOING TO GO BACK TO THE OVERALL DISCUSSION OR OR MORE MINUTES? GO BACK TO THE OVERALL. OKAY, COUNCILMAN, YOU'RE NEXT TO MY CUE. YOU HAVE THE FLOOR, SIR. RESPECTFULLY, MR. PRESIDENT, I BELIEVE THAT COUNCILMAN WINKLER SAID HE HAD A SERIES OF AMENDMENTS HE WANTED TO OFFER AND HASN'T YIELDED THE FLOOR. HE DOESN'T HAVE THE FLOOR. OKAY, COUNCILMEMBER, YOU GOT ANOTHER AMENDMENT THAT YOU WANT TO PUT FORWARD? I DO, BUT I WILL YIELD THE FLOOR FOR NOW AND I'LL COME BACK TO THEM. PLEASE. 
          COUNCILMAN WINKLER YIELDS. YOU HAVE THE FLOOR, SIR. THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. JUST TRYING TO WATCH OUT FOR MY OTHER MEMBERS. SO I, I ALSO HAVE PROBLEMS WITH THIS LEGISLATION AS WRITTEN. I LIKE COUNCILMAN WINKLER. I THINK THAT THERE IS NO ONE IN THIS BODY THAT'S IN FAVOR OF HUMAN TRAFFICKING, WHICH IS ABHORRENT. AND WE SHOULD BE LOOKING TO DO EVERYTHING THAT WE CAN TO COMBAT IT IN OUR COMMUNITIES. I THINK WE HEARD THE SAME FROM THE MEMBERS OF 
          [02:35:05]
THE LICENSED COMMUNITY OF MASSAGE THERAPISTS. THIS IS SOMETHING THEY ARE ALSO INTERESTED IN. IT IS FOR THEIR PROTECTION. IN ADDITION TO THE PEOPLE WHO ARE HARMED DIRECTLY BY HUMAN TRAFFICKING. THEY DON'T WANT HUMAN TRAFFICKING. THEY DON'T WANT PROSTITUTION. 
          THEY DON'T WANT THESE THINGS IN THEIR PRACTICES. THEY DON'T WANT THEIR PRACTICE ASSOCIATED WITH THESE IDEAS. THEY ARE ALSO OPPOSED TO THESE THINGS. BUT WE HAVE LEGISLATION BEFORE US WHICH IS NOT READY. AND WE HAD MEMBERS WHO WERE CUT OFF AT THE COMMITTEE LEVEL WHEN THEY HAD QUESTIONS, WHEN THEY WANTED TO OFFER AMENDMENTS. WE'RE TOLD THAT'S NOT APPROPRIATE. WE'RE TOLD WE CAN'T HAVE IT ON THE WE CAN'T SEND IT BACK. SO YES, WE DO HAVE TO DO SOME LEGISLATING ON THE FLY. AND I AND I THINK THAT'S UNFORTUNATE BECAUSE I THINK IT WOULD HAVE BEEN BETTER TO DO IT WITH THE PEOPLE THAT YOU'VE GOT IN YOUR TASK FORCE, BECAUSE I THINK YOU'VE DONE A LOT OF WORK ON THAT. AND I THINK THAT YOU ARE DOING SOMETHING IMPORTANT FOR OUR COMMUNITY. I WANT US TO GET TO A PLACE THAT WE CAN ALL SUPPORT IT. I WOULD LIKE TO OFFER AN AMENDMENT TODAY TO HAVE A BLANKET EXEMPTION FROM SOLE PROPRIETORS DUE TO THE FACT THAT THIS THIS LEGISLATION, AS WRITTEN, POSES GREAT DEAL UNDUE UNDUE HARDSHIP TO SOLE PROPRIETORS. IT HAS A LOT OF PROBLEMS IN TERMS OF THEIR ABILITY TO CONTINUE TO PRACTICE. 
          THEY WOULD IMMEDIATELY BE IN VIOLATION OF THE LAW WITH NO WAY TO REDRESS. I THINK THAT WE NEED TO EXEMPT SOLE PROPRIETORS AND COME BACK AND LOOK AT HOW WE WANT TO SPECIFICALLY TARGET SOLE PROPRIETORS AND MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE TAKING CARE OF MEMBERS OF OUR COMMUNITY. I WILL POINT OUT THAT IF THE CONCERN OF THIS LEGISLATION IS HUMAN TRAFFICKING, THEN SOLE PROPRIETORS ARE NOT A PROBLEM. SOLE PROPRIETORS, PEOPLE WHO ARE IN PRACTICE FOR THEMSELVES ARE NOT TRAFFICKING THEMSELVES. SO I AM MOVING THAT WE EXEMPT SOLE PROPRIETORS. SECOND, WE HAVE A PROPER AMENDMENT. AND SECOND, BEFORE US AGAIN, IN THE FIRST HAND, I SEE. COUNCILMAN HUDSON. YOU HAVE THE FLOOR, SIR. ANYONE ELSE? AFTER HE SPEAKS, LET ME SEE SOME HANDS. AND I'M NOT JUST TALKING LITTLE FINGERS. I NEED TO SEE A HAND IN THE AIR. OKAY. THANK YOU. I'LL PUT MY HAND UP. THAT'S RIGHT. YOU WERE FINGERING. NEXT TIME, HAND. SO I WOULD DIRECT YOUR ATTENTION TO SECTION 115 .185 ON PAGE 13. THAT SPECIFICALLY EXEMPTS SOLE PROPRIETORS. THE LAST SENTENCE SAYS THIS PROVISION DOES NOT PRECLUDE THE LOCATION OF A MASSAGE FACILITY IN SEPARATE QUARTERS OF A BUILDING THAT HOUSES A HOTEL OR SEPARATE BUSINESS CLUB OR RESIDENCE, IF PERMITTED BY THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. SO IF SOMEBODY HAS A IF A SOLE PROPRIETOR HAS A MASSAGE BUSINESS FROM A ROOM DEDICATED IN THEIR HOUSE, THEY ARE ALREADY EXEMPT FROM THIS. THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. OKAY. ANYONE ELSE ANY DISCUSSION ON THIS PROPOSED AMENDMENT? I'M NOT SEEING ANY HANDS. HERE WE GO. COULD COULD WE, THE COUNTY ATTORNEY, WEIGH IN ON THAT AS WELL, JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT GETTING CROSSWISE. 
          NATALIE JOHNSON OF THE JEFFERSON COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AGAIN. SO THE ORDINANCE AS WRITTEN, EXCLUDES LICENSED MASSAGE THERAPY THERAPISTS WHO ARE NOT RUNNING A MASSAGE FACILITY. SO THAT'S THAT'S A GIVEN, RIGHT? THAT'S THAT'S A FULL EXCLUSION THERE. AND THEN THERE'S ASPECTS OF THE ORDINANCE WHERE SOLE PROPRIETORS WHO ARE RUNNING MASSAGE FACILITY ARE EXEMPT FROM CERTAIN ASPECTS. SO FOR THE ACCESS PROVISION, THEY DON'T HAVE TO KEEP THEIR DOOR UNLOCKED. IF THEY'RE A SOLE PROPRIETOR, THEY DON'T HAVE ANY EMPLOYEES OR INDEPENDENT CONTRACTORS. THEY'RE ALSO THE PROHIBITION AGAINST RESIDENTS THAT DOES NOT APPLY TO THEM AS WELL, SO LONG AS THEY ARE ZONED PROPERLY FOR HOME OCCUPATION. 
          AND I SPOKE WITH ZONING ABOUT THAT. MASSAGE IS CONSIDERED A HOME OCCUPATION UNDER THE ZONING CODE. SO AS LONG AS THEY'RE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE ZONING CODE, THEY CAN LIVE IN THEIR HOME. THERE'S NO ISSUE THERE. ARE THEY FULLY EXEMPT FROM THE ORDINANCE? NO. IF THEY ARE RUNNING A MASSAGE FACILITY. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS PROPOSED AMENDMENT? I'M NOT SEEING ANY HANDS. THIS AMENDMENT WOULD REQUIRE A VOICE VOTE. HOWEVER, IN THE INTEREST OF WHERE WE'RE AT, WE'RE GOING TO DO A ROLL CALL. MADAM CLERK, OPEN THE ROLL. COUNCIL MEMBER. 
          PARISH. RIGHT. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. WINKLER. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. BASS I'LL GET SOMEONE TO HELP YOU, BUT I HAVE YOU FOR. NO. MR. PRESIDENT, YOU HAVE 12 YES VOTES AND 13 NO VOTES. YEAH. 
          THANK YOU. WHAT WAS THAT? YOU HAVE 12 YES VOTES AND 13 NO VOTES. THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT FAILS. ALRIGHT. THE QUESTION NOW IS, DOES SOMEONE ELSE WANT TO PROPOSE AMENDMENT OR DO YOU 
          [02:40:07]
WANT TO GO BACK TO THE QUEUE? I'M NOT SEEING ANY HANDS, SO I'M GOING BACK TO THE QUEUE. 
          COUNCILMEMBER SEAN, YOU'RE NEXT. MY QUEUE. YOU HAVE THE FLOOR. THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. I WANT TO GO BACK TO A REMARK THAT ANOTHER COLLEAGUE MADE EARLIER. AND IN MY EARLIER REMARKS, I SAID WE SHOULDN'T REGULATE BUSINESSES. BUT TO BE CLEAR, I LED TO BE CLEAR AND AGREE WITH YOU. I LED RESPONSIBLE REGULATIONS AND PASSED RESOLUTIONS ADDRESSING OVER CONCENTRATION OF SMOKE SHOPS, LIQUOR STORES, CHECK CASHING BUSINESS AND VULNERABLE NEIGHBORHOODS. WHAT I MEANT TO SAY IS THIS WE SHOULDN'T WE SHOULDN'T BE USING NON-BINDING RESOLUTIONS AS A BACKDOOR TO REGULATE BUSINESS BEHAVIOR. IF WE WANT TO CHANGE POLICY, LET'S DO IT WITH REAL LEGISLATION, WITH TRANSPARENCY, ACCOUNTABILITY, ENFORCEMENT STANDARDS, SYMBOLIC PRESSURE WITHOUT LEGAL WEIGHT. THIS SENDS THAT SENDS MIXED MESSAGES AND UNDERMINES THE SERIOUSNESS OF THE WORK. COUNCILMAN HUDSON HAS PUT TIRELESS EFFORT TOWARDS THIS LEGISLATION AND IS COMMITTED TO DOING THE RIGHT THING FOR THIS COMMUNITY. I SINCERELY SUPPORT THIS LEGISLATION, AND I HOPE WE CAN MOVE PAST THIS AND GET THIS MOVED TODAY. THANK YOU. COUNCILMAN RAYMOND, YOU ARE NEXT IN THE QUEUE AND YOU HAVE THE FLOOR, MADAM. THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. HOW DO I ASK QUESTIONS OF THE SPONSOR? KEVIN? ALL I CAN THINK IS SPEAKER. WILL THE SPONSOR YIELD TO A QUESTION? TECHNICALLY, YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO ASK ME, AND THEN HE HEARS THEM. THAT'S A THAT'S THAT'S SORT OF HOCUS POCUS. 
          JUST ASKING THE QUESTION. OKAY, OKAY. SPONSOR. IF I'M UNDERSTANDING IT CORRECTLY, I DIDN'T KNOW THE TASK FORCE WAS OPERATING. AND I'M LOOKING FOR THESE PRESS CONFERENCES THAT HAVE HAPPENED. ALL I SEE IS NEWS ARTICLES FROM TWO WEEKS AGO ANNOUNCING A NEW TASK FORCE. 
          THAT'S ALL I CAN FIND. SO I'M ASSUMING THAT'S ALL THE PUBLIC CAN FIND TO. I DIDN'T KNOW THE TASK FORCE WAS OPERATING. AM I CORRECT THAT IT INCLUDED? IT INCLUDES LMPD, ABC CODES AND REGULATIONS, THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT AND OTHERS. YES. WHERE CAN I FIND A PUBLIC LIST OF ALL THE MEMBERS OF THE TASK FORCE? I CAN PROVIDE THAT TO YOU. THERE'S NOT A PUBLIC LIST. 
          I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE IS A PUBLIC LIST. I MEAN, YOU COULD DO AN OPEN RECORDS REQUEST AND GET IT, BUT I'LL FREELY GIVE IT TO YOU. THANK YOU. GENERLY, A TASK FCE LIKE THIS WOULD PRESENT DATA, AS COUNCILWOMAN CHAPEL SAID, AND OFFER A RECOMMENDATION WHICH THEN THE COUNCIL WOULD WORK INTO AN ORDINANCE. WHY DIDN'T THEY FOLLOW THAT PROCESS? SOME OF THE NATURE OF THE BUSINESS DOESN'T LEND ITSELF TO OF PUBLIC DISCLOSURE BECAUSE OF THE INVESTIGATIONS THAT ARE ONGOING. TO ANSWER. SOME OF THE QUESTIONS THAT HAVE BEEN ASKED IS HOW MANY? HOW MANY MASSAGE FACILITIES ARE OUT THERE, BOTH LEGITIMATE AND ILLEGITIMATE, AND THE CURRENT COUNT IS 347. I WOULD SUGGEST THAT THIS ORDINANCE IS THE REPORT OUT OF OF THE COMMITTEE OR THE TASK FORCE. I WASN'T AT THE COMMITTEE. WERE YOU PRESENTED THIS? WHO ELSE TESTIFIED ABOUT THIS ORDINANCE IN THAT COMMITTEE BESIDES YOURSELF? WE HAD THE MAYOR'S OFFICE HERE. WE HAD THE HEADS OF ALL OF THE DEPARTMENTS, CODES AND REGS, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH. WE HAD REPRESENTATIVES FROM LAW ENFORCEMENT. I'M TRYING TO TRYING TO REMEMBER. THERE WAS. IF IF I CAN INFER WHERE YOU'RE GOING WITH THIS, THERE WAS NO ONE THAT WAS EXCLUDED FROM TESTIFYING. LET ME ASK THIS. HOW MANY MORE QUESTIONS DO YOU HAVE? BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO TURN THIS INTO I HAVE MANY QUESTIONS. BUT THE POINT IS, THIS IS I'M NOT GOING TO TURN THIS INTO A, YOU KNOW, HALF HOUR OF YOUR INQUISITION. HOW ABOUT A LEGISLATIVE HEARING? HOW ABOUT YOU GET BACK IN THE QUEUE? OKAY. ASK ONE MORE QUESTION AND THEN YOU CAN GET BACK IN THE QUEUE ON TASK FORCES THAT I'VE BEEN ON AT THE CONCLUSION. WHEN RECOMMENDATIONS ARE DETERMINED, EVEN INTERNALLY, THERE'S SOME DOCUMENT THAT'S PRODUCED THAT MEMBERS OF THE TASK FORCE SIGN ON TO. DID THAT PROCESS HAPPEN IN THIS CASE? AGAIN, I WOULD SUBMIT TO YOU THAT THAT DOCUMENT IS THIS ORDINANCE. 
          COUNCILWOMAN MCCRANEY, YOUR NEXT IN QUEUE. YOU HAVE THE FLOOR, MADAM. THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT, I DECLINE. COUNCILWOMAN CHAPEL, YOU'RE NEXT TO MY QUEUE. YOU HAVE THE 
          [02:45:02]
FLOOR, MADAM. SURE. I'LL OFFER TWO AMENDMENTS. FIRST ONE, I WOULD LIKE TO STRIKE SECTION 115 .172. ITEM 12. CAN YOU TELL US WHAT PATCH? YES, THAT'S ON PAGE FIVE. THE NAMES, RESIDENTIAL ADDRESSES AND SIGNED WRITTEN STATEMENTS OF AT LEAST THREE BONAFIDE PERMANENT RESIDENTS OF THE UNITED STATES THAT THE APPLICANT IS OF GOOD MORAL CHARACTER. THE STATEMENT MUST BE FIRST FURNISHED FROM RESIDENTS OF LOUISVILLE, KENTUCKY, THAN JEFFERSON COUNTY, KENTUCKY, THAN THE STATE OF KENTUCKY. AND LASTLY FROM THE REST OF THE UNITED STATES. 
          THESE REFERENCES MUST BE PERSONS OTHER THAN RELATIVES AND BUSINESS ASSOCIATES. YEP. 
          THAT WHOLE THING. SECOND, WE'VE GOT A PROPERLY MOVED MOTION AND A SECOND BEFORE US. ALL RIGHT. 
          WE'RE GOING BACK TO THE RAISING OF THE HANDS. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THIS AMENDMENT? NOT SEEING ANY HANDS IN THE AIR? COUNCILMAN WINKLER, IS THAT A HAND? I WASN'T GOING TO I DO I GUESS I DO HAVE A QUESTION BECAUSE AND AGAIN, NOT TO DIRECT THIS TO COUNCILMAN HUDSON, BUT MAYBE HE CAN ANSWER. WAS THIS IN THE PREVIOUS REGULATION ALREADY JUST OUT OF CURIOSITY, OR IS THIS A NEW ADDITION IN THE PREVIOUS LICENSING REQUIREMENT THAT WE WEREN'T ENFORCING? I'M NOT AS FAMILIAR WITH THE CURRENT ORDINANCE, BUT I WOULD ASK THE COUNTY ATTORNEY IF SHE COULD WEIGH IN ON THAT. SURE. NATALIE JOHNSON WITH THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, IT WAS NOT IN THE ORIGINAL ORDINANCE OR THE ORDINANCE THAT'S ON THE BOOKS RIGHT NOW. OKAY. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WITH ON THIS AMENDMENT? I SEE NO HANDS IN THE AIR. THEREFORE, AGAIN, WE'RE GOING TO GO WITH A ROLL CALL FOR THIS AMENDMENT. MADAM CLERK, OPEN THE ROLL. COUNCIL MEMBER. PARISH RIGHT. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. RINO WEBER. YES. 
          COUNCIL MEMBER. WINKLER. YES. MR. PRESIDENT, YOU HAVE 14 YES VOTES AND 12 NO VOTES. THE AMENDMENT PASSES. SO ITEM 12 ON PAGE FIVE IS STRICKEN. ALL RIGHT, BUT I BELIEVE WE SAID YOU HAD ONE MORE AMENDMENT RIGHT. I'VE GOT THREE. AND I THOUGHT, OKAY, BY SOME UNWRITTEN RULE IT'S LIKE THREE. AND THEN YOU GOT TO GET BACK IN THE QUEUE. GO AHEAD. OKAY. 
          UNLESS THAT IS A REAL RULE I DON'T KNOW. PAGE 11 VIDEO SURVEILLANCE I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THAT LANGUAGE MORE CLEAR. SO WAIT. YES PAGE 11. WE'RE GOING TO BE ON PAGE 11 FOR BOTH MY THINGS. VIDEO SURVEILLANCE. I THINK THAT THIS SHOULD BE CHANGED FROM EACH MASSAGE FACILITY IS ALLOWED UP TO TWO FIXED SECURITY CAMERAS, PROVIDED THAT ONE SECURITY CAMERA MUST FACE THE MAIN ENTRY AREA, LOBBY OR RECEPTION DESK, AND THE SECOND CAMERA MUST FACE ANY ALTERNATIVE ENTRANCE OR EXIT. SINCE IT IS UNCLEAR ON HOW MANY CAMERAS NEED TO BE REQUIRED, I WOULD LIKE TO CHANGE THE LANGUAGE TO. EACH MASSAGE FACILITY IS REQUIRED TO HAVE VIDEO SURVEILLANCE AT ALL EXTERIOR ENTRANCES EXITS. CAN YOU REPEAT THAT PLEASE? FOR THOSE OF US WHO ARE TRYING TO READ ALONG THE THE WHAT'S IN THERE OR WHAT I'M PROPOSING, WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING. OH. VIDEO EACH MASSAGE FACILITY IS REQUIRED TO HAVE VIDEO SURVEILLANCE AT ALL EXTERIOR ENTRANCES EXITS. AGAIN, IT SAYS ALLOWED UP TO TWO. WHAT IF YOU ONLY HAVE ONE ENTRANCE OR EXIT? I DON'T KNOW, WOULD THAT. YOU SHOULD HAVE THREE. WHAT IF YOU HAVE THREE? YEAH. WHAT IF YOU HAVE THREE? IS THAT AGAINST THE LAW TO HAVE THREE BECAUSE IT SAYS YOU'RE ALLOWED UP TO TWO. SO I THINK IT JUST NEEDS TO BE CLARIFIED. OKAY. SO YOUR CLARIFICATION THOUGH IS REQUIRING I DIDN'T PUT A NUMBER TO IT. I JUST SAID REQUIRED AT ALL ENTRANCES EXITS. OKAY. EXTERIOR ENTRANCES EXITS. OKAY. SO THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT JUST WOULD BE TO TAKE IT FROM SAYING THEY'RE ALLOWED TO HAVE TWO FIXED CAMERAS. AND IN SAYING ONE AT THE ENTRANCE AND ONE IN THE THROUGH THE LOBBY AREA, YOU'RE SAYING YOUR AMENDMENT IS THAT THEY HAVE VIDEO SURVEILLANCE CAMERAS AT ALL ENTRANCES AND EXITS? YES. AND 
          [02:50:04]
SO, OKAY. ANY QUESTIONS OR DEBATE ON THAT PROPOSED AMENDMENT? COUNCILMAN HUDSON, I SEE THE HAND UP THIS TIME. I THOUGHT I HEARD A SECOND, ANY SECOND, THAT FIRST ONE. OKAY. 
          DO WE HAVE A SECOND ON THAT? SECOND? THERE'S A SECOND. COUNCILMAN HUDSON, WE NOW HAVE THE AMENDMENT PROPOSED AMENDMENT BEFORE US. THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. ON ON ITS SURFACE, I'M NOT I DON'T HAVE A LOT OF HEARTBURN WITH WITH THIS AMENDMENT, BUT I WOULD JUST LIKE TO ADD SOME COLOR AND MAYBE ASK THE COUNCILWOMAN IF SHE WOULD ENTERTAIN AN ADJUSTMENT TO SAY NO CAMERAS INSIDE THE MASSAGE FACILITY FOR THIS REASON. HERE'S THE REASON. 
          IT SAYS UP TO TWO FIXED SECURITY CAMERAS IN THE PRACTICE OF THE AGAIN, ILLEGITIMATE BUSINESSES. GUY COMES IN, IS SHOWN TO A ROOM, GIRL IS BROUGHT TO THE ROOM, THEY NEGOTIATE SERVICES. GUY PAYS FOR SERVICES, HAS TO COME OUTSIDE AND THERE'S A CAMERA IN THE HALLWAY. SHE HAS TO HOLD THE MONEY UP AND SHOW IT TO THE CAMERA, AND THEN GO AND PUT IT INTO A SLOT AND THEN GO BACK INTO THE ROOM. THAT'S WHAT THAT'S WHAT THE INTENT OF THIS PARAGRAPH WAS, WAS TO GET RID OF THAT PRACTICE. SO IF IF THE COUNCILWOMAN WOULD ENTERTAIN WITH THE EXCLUSION OF INTERIOR CAMERAS. SURE. I DON'T EVEN LIKE WHEN PEOPLE HAVE THOSE IN THEIR RESIDENTIAL HOMES. OKAY. SO THAT'S THAT'S BUT WHO WHO SECONDED I THINK JOSEPH, DID YOU SECOND IT? JP YOU SECONDED. ARE YOU GOING TO SECOND THIS CLARIFICATION HERE? I THINK THAT'S. I. HAVE A MOTION. BUT IF I CAN I THEN WITHDRAW MY INITIAL ONE AND JUST REPHRASE IT WITH COUNCILMAN HUDSON'S. OKAY. ALRIGHT. VIDEO SURVEILLANCE. EACH MASSAGE FACILITY IS REQUIRED TO HAVE CAMERAS AT ALL EXTERIOR EXITS, ENTRANCES AND EXITS, AND ARE PROHIBITED FROM HAVING INTERIOR CAMERAS. OKAY, IS THERE A SECOND? WE HAVE THE AMENDMENT BEFORE US. IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS PROPOSED AMENDMENT? COUNCILWOMAN CRANE, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. IF YOU'RE SAYING INTERIOR, THAT COULD MEAN INSIDE THE BUILDING, THE FACILITY. SO COULD WE MORE CLARIFY WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE LOBBY? I THOUGHT THE INTENT WAS NOT TO HAVE A CAMERA IN THE ROOM WHERE THEY'RE GETTING THE SERVICES. NO. I BELIEVE I BELIEVE THE INTENT WAS TO NOT HAVE A CAMERA IN THE IN IN THE INTERIOR OF THE FACILITY. NOWHERE INSIDE THE BUSINESS. IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE. MAY I WHAT? MAY I SPEAK ON? YOU FOR A MINUTE, PLEASE? IT'S KIND OF DIFFICULT BECAUSE I HEAR COUNCILMAN HUDSON'S CONCERN ABOUT THIS MONEY IN THE HALLWAY TRICK. APOLOGIES. I'VE NEVER BEEN INSIDE THESE FACILITIES, SO I DON'T KNOW HOW THEY OPERATE, BUT THAT, THEREFORE, WOULD BE AN INTERIOR CAMERA THAT WOULD PICK UP ON THAT NEFARIOUS ACTIVITY. AND I BELIEVE THAT'S WHAT THEY WANT TO PROHIBIT. JUST A RESTATE YOUR AMENDMENT AND MAYBE I CAN HEAR IT DIFFERENTLY. SURE. EACH EACH MASSAGE FACILITY IS REQUIRED TO HAVE A FIXED CAMERA AT ALL EXTERIOR ENTRANCES AND EXITS. AND ALL INTERIOR CAMERAS ARE NOT ALLOWED. SO ARE INTERIOR CAMERAS ARE PROHIBITED THERE. YES, YOU ARE. AND YEAH. IN THAT CASE, MADAM CLERK, 
          [02:55:11]
PLEASE READ WHAT YOU HAVE IN THE RECORD. EACH MASSAGE FACILITY IS REQUIRED TO HAVE VIDEO SURVEILLANCE AT ALL EXTERIOR EXITS, AND ARE PROHIBITED FROM HAVING INTERIOR CAMERAS. YOU'RE WELCOME. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR DEBATE ON THIS PROPOSED AMENDMENT? I'M NOT SEEING ANY HANDS IN THE AIR. THIS IS A THIS IS AN AMENDMENT TO THANK YOU, SIR, BUT THAT ONE DOESN'T COUNT. THE END RESULT IS THIS. LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL VOTE ON THIS AMENDMENT. COUNCIL MEMBER PERISH. RIGHT? YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. RENA WEBBER. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. WINKLER. 
          YES. MR. PRESIDENT, YOU HAVE 22 YES VOTES, THREE NO VOTES AND ONE PRESENT VOTE. THAT AMENDMENT PASSES, COUNCILWOMAN CHAPEL, I BELIEVE. GET ANOTHER AMENDMENT. YES. AND LAST ONE. I WOULD LIKE TO STRIKE SECTION 115.181 REGISTER OF PATRONS IN ITS ENTIRETY. CAN YOU TELL US WHAT PAGE, PLEASE? SORRY. PAGE 11. SO THE MASSAGE FACILITY SHALL MAINTAIN A REGISTER OF ALL PATRONS OF THE MASSAGE FACILITY. THAT INCLUDES THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION. FIRST AND LAST NAME OF PATRON. FIRST LAST NAME OF MASSAGE THERAPIST. DATE AND TIME OF SERVICE. TYPE OF SERVICE RECEIVED. MASSAGE FACILITIES ARE REQUIRED TO VERIFY THE FIRST AND LAST NAME OF THE PATRON, USING A GOVERNMENT ID, AND THE REGISTERED PATRONS MAY BE INSPECTED BY AN AUTHORIZED CODE OFFICER PURSUANT TO ADMINISTRATIVE, JUDICIAL, OR JUDICIAL WARRANT. IS THERE A SECOND? AND FIRST IN MY QUEUE TO DISCUSS? THIS IS COUNCILMAN PICCININI. THANK YOU. LOOK, I I'M I'VE OBVIOUSLY BEEN AGAINST THE AMENDMENTS HERE. I'M IN FAVOR OF, OF MY COLLEAGUE'S BILL, BUT BUT THIS ONE I HAVE TO SPEAK ON THIS MIGHT AS WELL BE CALLED THE. LET'S JUST GO BACK TO THE WAY IT IS AND LET ILLEGAL OPERATIONS REIGN. 
          AMENDMENT. IF YOU ARE TRULY A THERAPEUTIC BUSINESS, IF YOU ARE DOING THERAPY, IF THIS IS IF THIS IS, LET'S CALL IT MEDICAL ADJACENT AT BEST, OKAY. AT THE LOWEST POSSIBLE LEVEL, WHICH ANYBODY THAT'S LEGITIMATELY IN THE INDUSTRY WOULD SAY THEY ARE. IF YOU ARE NOT RECORDING ANY INFORMATION WHATSOEVER ABOUT THE PEOPLE THAT YOU'RE SERVING, THEN I'M SORRY. YOU ARE SIMPLY NOT OPERATING ANYTHING THAT IS LEGITIMATE BUSINESS OR IS THERAPEUTIC IN ANY POSSIBLE WAY. ALL OF THE THERAPY OFFICES THAT YOU ALL GO TO RECORD THIS INFORMATION, THE ONLY BUSINESSES THAT DON'T RELATED TO HEALTHCARE ARE BUSINESSES THAT ARE OPERATING ILLEGALLY. SO THE OTHER ONES, YOU KNOW, LOOK, PROBABLY, YOU KNOW, CAMERAS HERE, TWO CAMERAS IN THE DOOR, OKAY. YOU KNOW, SOME AMENDMENTS. ALL RIGHT. THIS ONE WOULD BE TO SAY FULL STOP. THAT THAT THERAPY FACILITIES ARE NOT LEGITIMATE THERAPY FACILITIES. 
          AND THEY JUST WANT TO RUN AN ANONYMITY AND NOT BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY AS PROVIDING A HEALTH CARE SERVICE. EVERY SINGLE PERSON AND BUSINESS THAT OPERATES A HEALTH CARE SERVICE RECORDS THIS INFORMATION. THANK YOU. COUNCILMAN WINKLER. I SEE YOUR HAND UP. IT LOOKS LIKE NEXT WILL BE COUNCILMAN MARINO WEBER. THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. AND IN THIS CASE, I AGREE WITH COUNCILMAN PIACENTINI. I MEAN, I DON'T SEE ANYTHING WRONG TO HIS POINT ABOUT ANY SORT OF MEDICAL OR MEDICAL ADJACENT PROVIDER LOGGING I COULD POTENTIALLY SUPPORT THE REMOVAL OF FOR THE TYPE OF SERVICE, BECAUSE THAT HAS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A MEDICAL OFFICE. 
          PRETTY SURE THAT THAT IS NOT AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION BY A GOVERNMENT INSPECTOR. WHAT I WENT IN TO SEE MY DOCTOR FOR AND SO I COULD SUPPORT THE REMOVAL FOR. I DON'T AGREE WITH THE REMOVAL OF THE ENTIRETY OF THE SECTION. THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. NEXT TO MY Q IS COUNCILMAN WEBER. I ALSO AGREE WITH THE IDEA THAT. HAVING A LOG OF SOME SORT, IT WOULD BE GOOD PRACTICE IF THIS IS A MEDICAL ESTABLISHMENT, WHEREAS SORT OF FIND MYSELF ODDLY STRUGGLING. IS IS THIS A THING WE DO FOR MEDICAL OFFICES AT THE CITY LEVEL IN ANY OTHER CONTEXT? I MEAN, I THINK PART OF MY PROBLEM WITH A LOT OF THIS IS NOT THE INTENT. CLEARLY, 
          [03:00:03]
I'M INCREDIBLY SUPPORTIVE OF THE INTENT. IT IS THAT IN DOING IT IN THIS FASHION, WE ARE SETTING VERY BIZARRE PRECEDENTS. I THINK THIS MORAL CHARACTER STUFF, THE THE HAVING THE INSPECTION OF OF PATIENT NAMES BY WHO LIKE, WE DON'T DO THAT FOR MY DENTIST. WE DON'T WE DON'T DO MORAL CHARACTER. I'LL TELL YOU WHERE WE HAVE DONE THAT. AND THAT'S IN SOME PLACES THAT DO NOT HAVE GOOD TRACK RECORDS WITH RULE OF LAW, WHICH AGAIN, LIKE I WANT TO SUPPORT COUNCILMAN HUDSON'S EFFORTS HERE AND I'VE TALKED TO HIM SEVERAL TIMES, REACHED OUT AND BUT I THIS FEELS DOING THIS IN THIS HAPHAZARD WAY FEELS BAD. SO I'M IF WE HAVE TO DO IT THIS WAY, FINE. BUT WE'RE NOT DOING THAT FOR LEGITIMATE MEDICAL ESTABLISHMENTS. SO WHY ARE WE DOING THIS HERE? NO. COUNCILWOMAN. RUBY, YOU'RE NEXT ON MY FLOOR. Q THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SO REGARDING THE REGISTER OF PATRONS, EVERYTHING IN SECTION A IS PRETTY MUCH ALREADY FILLED OUT BY A LICENSED MASSAGE THERAPIST AS THEY KEEP RECORDS ON THE TREATMENT, THE TREATMENT PROTOCOL THAT THEY USED ON ANY OF THEIR CLIENTS. AS FAR AS REQUIRING A GOVERNMENT ISSUED ID, THAT SEEMS OVERKILL TO ME, AND HAVING IT INSPECTED BY AN AUTHORIZED CODE OFFICER PURSUANT TO A WARRANT IS ALREADY STATE LAW, SO I DON'T SEE WHY THAT NEEDS TO BE INCLUDED IN HERE. SO I WOULD LIKE TO STRIKE OUT B AND C, BUT I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH SECTION A. OKAY. WELL AT THIS POINT WE HAVE THE MOTION THAT'S BEFORE US IS A COMPLETE STRIKING OF SECTION 115.181. SO THAT'S WHAT YOU'LL HAVE TO VOTE FOR A COMPLETE STRIKE OR NOT A COMPLETE STRIKE. COUNCIL. YOUR NEXT. THANK YOU THANK YOU. 
          THERE'S ALL KINDS OF THINGS BEING SAID INCORRECTLY. FIRST OF ALL, JUST IN CASE YOU ALL DON'T KNOW, EVERYTHING YOU DO AT YOUR DOCTOR'S OFFICE, INCLUDING THE PROCEDURE CODES, ARE TRANSMITTED TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. OKAY? NOTHING IS PRIVATE AS FAR AS WHAT YOU DO AT YOUR DOCTOR'S OFFICE. THEY DE-IDENTIFY IT WHEN IT GETS SENT TO THE GOVERNMENT, BUT THEY HAVE THE ABILITY TO KNOW PRECISELY WHAT HAPPENED IN YOUR DOCTOR'S OFFICE. ESSENTIALLY, AT ANY TIME THEY WANT, THEY DE-IDENTIFY THAT INFORMATION. THEY PUT IT UP THERE, BUT THEY'RE REQUIRED TO DO IT. THE REASON THAT WE'RE REQUIRING IT, MASSAGE THERAPY HERE AT A LOCAL LEVEL, IS BECAUSE THIS IS NOT SEEN AS MEDICAL TREATMENT BY FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AGENCIES, CMS, THE FDA, OR ANY OF THESE MAJOR AGENCIES THAT REGULATE THIS. SO THEY LEAVE IT TO THE STATES AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT TO DO THAT, AND THEY DON'T REQUIRE THE SAME REPORTING OF THINGS. 
          THIS IDEA THAT YOUR DENTIST DOESN'T REQUIRE A MORALITY STATEMENT, OF COURSE THEY DO WHEN THEY GET LICENSED, WHEN THEY TAKE THEIR BOARD TESTS AND ALL THESE THINGS, THERE'S ALL KINDS OF THERE'S JUST A DISGUSTING LEVEL OF STUFF THAT THOSE FOLKS HAVE TO DO IN ORDER TO GET THEIR LICENSE AND OPERATE THEIR FACILITIES, AND THEY HAVE TO GET REGULATED AT FEDERAL, STATE, AND IN MANY TIMES LOCAL JURISDICTIONS AS WELL. THE REASON WE'RE DOING THIS HERE IS BECAUSE UNLIKE A HOSPITAL FACILITY, FOR EXAMPLE, WHICH HAS HUNDREDS IF NOT THOUSANDS OF PAGES OF STATE AND FEDERAL REGULATIONS, THESE FACILITIES HAVE ALMOST NONE THAT OPERATE NO REGULATIONS AT THE FEDERAL AND STATE LEVEL. SO WE ARE REQUIRING SOME IN ORDER TO THAT. SO THERE'S THIS, AGAIN, THE PROBLEM THAT COUNCILMAN HUDSON WAS GETTING AT EARLY ON, THERE'S THINGS BEING SAID HERE THAT SIMPLY ARE NOT TRUE. AND AND NOW WE'RE GOING SO FAR AS TO SAY, WELL, YOU KNOW, WE SHOULDN'T COLLECT ANY INFORMATION. THAT INFORMATION IS NOT SAYING, BY THE WAY, THAT THEY'VE GOT TO TRANSMIT THAT INFORMATION TO LOUISVILLE METRO COUNCIL SO WE CAN SEE WHO'S BEING SERVICED HERE. OKAY. IT IS SIMPLY REQUIRED THAT THEY COLLECT IT SO THAT PROPER LAW ENFORCEMENT PERSONNEL UNDER PROPER, CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED INVESTIGATIONS CAN ENSURE THAT THIS IS LEGITIMATE BUSINESS AND CAN SEE PATTERNS OF ACTIVITY. IT'S THE ONLY REASON THEY'RE DOING IT. AND WHAT THEY'RE COLLECTING IS NOTHING COMPARED TO WHAT YOUR DOCTORS ARE COLLECTING. EVERY TIME YOU WALK IN AND OUT OF THAT OFFICE, AND THAT INFORMATION IS REQUIRED TO BE TRANSMITTED TO THE STATE AND FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. COUNCILMAN CHAPEL, YOU'RE NEXT TO MY FORK. 
          YOU. THANK YOU. IT WAS PROVIDED TO US EARLIER. THE APPLICATION FOR LICENSURE AS A MASSAGE THERAPIST. SO THIS IDEA THAT THE YOU'RE STATING THAT YOU'RE A GOOD MORAL CHARACTER WHEN YOU TAKE THE OATH OF YOUR LICENSURE. I THINK THAT APPLIES. AND THERE'S A LOT OF QUESTIONS IN HERE THERE. YES OR NO. BUT THAT REALLY ARE PRETTY IN-DEPTH. IT'S NOT LIKE, HEY, DO YOU DO YOU LIKE GIVING HAND JOBS? YES OR NO? HEY, DO YOU PLAN ON DOING SOMETHING, YOU KNOW, HIRING YOUNG WOMEN TO DO ALL OF YOUR WORK, YES OR NO? I MEAN, THERE'S HUNDREDS OF HOURS OF 
          [03:05:04]
WORK AND CERTIFICATION AND EXAMS AND ALL SORTS OF BACKGROUND THAT YOU HAVE TO DO IN ORDER TO BECOME A LEGIT LICENSED MASSAGE THERAPIST. AND I THINK THAT IT'S AN INSULT TO THOSE WHO PRACTICE MASSAGE THERAPY TO SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, THEY HAVE TO GO ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT WE ALREADY HAVE IN PLACE TO PROVE THAT THEY'RE GOOD MORAL PEOPLE. SO I'M GOING TO STAND BY WANTING TO STRIKE ALL OF THIS. BUT WHETHER OR NOT IF IT DOESN'T PASS, I WOULD AT LEAST WANT TO COME BACK AND ENTERTAIN THE IDEA OF STRIKING ITEM FOR TYPE OF SERVICE RECEIVED. AND THEN I THINK ITEM C NEEDS TO BE A LITTLE BIT MORE FLESHED OUT, AND MAYBE EVEN AN ITEM D OFFERED HERE. AND THAT'S AGAIN, ALL OF THIS INFORMATION IS COLLECTED, SAY, BY AN ADMINISTRATIVE OR JUDICIAL WARRANT IN AN AUTHORIZED CODE OFFICER, WHICH I'M ASSUMING IS FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF CODES AND REGULATIONS. I THINK THAT THERE NEEDS TO BE LANGUAGE IN HERE AND SAYING, HOW IS THAT INFORMATION OBTAINED, HOW IS IT STORED AND HOW LONG IS IT STORED? I THINK THAT THOSE THINGS ARE VERY, VERY IMPORTANT TO IDENTIFY IN THIS LEGISLATION. 
          SO AGAIN, STANDING BY STRIKING THIS WHOLE SECTION, BUT IF NOT, I'LL TRY TO POP BACK IN THE QUEUE AND OFFER THAT AS A AS AN AMENDMENT IF NOBODY ELSE DOES. COUNCILOR HUDSON, YOU'RE NEXT ON MY FLOOR. Q THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. SO A LITTLE BACKGROUND ON WHY THIS SECTION EXISTS. IN IN THE COURSE OF PUTTING TOGETHER BEST PRACTICES, WE LOOKED AT WHAT OTHER STATES ARE DOING AND WHAT IS EFFECTIVE. THIS PARTICULAR SECTION CAME FROM THE STATE OF FLORIDA, WHICH HAS A HUGE PROBLEM THAT WE'RE FACING AND HAS BEEN VERY EFFECTIVE AT. RESOLVING IT. AND IT IS IT IS STATE LAW IN FLORIDA JUST LIKE THIS TO TO COUNCILWOMAN CHAPPLE'S POINT ABOUT ALL OF THE ENUMERATED THINGS ALREADY ARE REQUIRED FOR A LICENSED MASSAGE THERAPIST. 
          AGAIN, THE STATE REGULATES AND LICENSES THE PEOPLE. THIS ORDINANCE REGULATES AND LICENSES THE FACILITY TWO COMPLETELY DIFFERENT THINGS. THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. 
          ANYONE ELSE DESIRE TO SPEAK ON THIS PROPOSED FLOOR AMENDMENT? I'M NOT SEEING ANY HANDS IN THE AIR. THEREFORE WE'RE GOING. COUNCILWOMAN MCCRANEY. THANK YOU. MR. MR. PRESIDENT. EARLIER, MY COLLEAGUE, RUI SUGGESTED HER AMENDMENT. SHE COULD IN FACT, AMEND THE AMENDMENT WITHOUT US GOING THROUGH THIS VOTE AND THEN GOING BACK TO HER. MOTION TO DO THAT. SHE COULD. THANK YOU. OKAY. ANYONE ELSE ON THIS PARTICULAR AMENDMENT? OKAY. I WOULD LIKE TO AMEND THE AMENDMENT THAT HAS BEEN PROPOSED TO STRIKE SECTIONS B AND C FROM SECTION 115 .18, REQUIRING THE USE OF A GOVERNMENT ISSUED FORM OF IDENTIFICATION. AND THE REGISTRY, THE REGISTER OF PATRONS BEING INSPECTED BY AN AUTHORIZED CODE OFFICER. SINCE THIS IS ALREADY STATE LAW, IS THERE A SECOND ON THAT AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT? I'M SORRY, SIR, I HAVE A QUESTION REAL QUICK. SO SHE. KNOW WHAT SHE WELL, YES. RIGHT NOW, THE AMENDMENT, THE INITIAL AMENDMENT WAS BEFORE US WAS TO STRIKE ALL OF SECTION 115.181 AND AND THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THAT SAYS LEAVE SECTION AN BUT STRIKE B AND C. IS THERE A SECOND FOR COUNCILWOMAN RUIZ PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT. SECOND, THERE WAS A SECOND OVER HERE. ALL RIGHT. WE NOW HAVE THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT BEFORE US. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON SUCH LOOKING AROUND FOR HANDS? I SEE NO HANDS, MADAM CLERK, LET'S DO A ROLL CALL ON THIS AMENDMENT, WHICH WOULD OR WOULD JUST CHANGE THE AMENDMENT. SO WOULD STRIKE ONLY B AND C OF SECTION 115 .181. CORRECT. COUNCIL MEMBER. PARISH RIGHT. YES. 
          COUNCIL MEMBER RENO WEBER. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. WINKLER. NO. ONE. MISTER PRESIDENT, YOU HAVE 
          [03:10:08]
11 YES VOTES AND 15 NO VOTES ON THE AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT. COUNCILMAN RUIZ, YOUR AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT FAILS. NOW, WE HAVE THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT BEFORE US, WHICH IS TO STRIKE THE ENTIRETY OF SECTION 115.181. ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT? FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT? I SEE NO HANDS. LET'S DO A ROLL CALL. VOTE ON THAT PROPOSED AMENDMENT. COUNCIL MEMBER. PARISH RIGHT. 
          YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. RENO WEBER. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. WINKLER. NO. COUNCILMAN BENSON, WE ARE VOTING ON THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO STRIKE THE ENTIRETY OF SECTION 115.181. 
          OKAY, MR. PRESIDENT, YOU HAVE SEVEN YES VOTES, 18 NO VOTES AND ONE PRESENT VOTE. 
          COUNCILMAN CHAPPELL, THAT AMENDMENT FAILS. DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER AMENDMENTS AT THE MOMENT, OR CAN WE ENTER THE FLOOR TO SOMEONE ELSE? OKAY, COUNCILMAN SANTINI, YOU'RE NEXT IN MY GENERAL QUEUE, NOT THE FLOOR. Q BUT THE GENERAL QUEUE. YEAH, JUST JUST WANTED TO TO LET A COLLEAGUE OF MINE KNOW. AND ALL MY COLLEAGUES KNOW, I TRY TO MONITOR ALL OF THE PRESS CONFERENCES THAT COME OUT OF THE MAJORITY CAUCUS. THE MINORITY CAUCUS TWO MONTHS AGO HAD A PRESS CONFERENCE. YOU CAN GOOGLE IT. IT'S ON YOUTUBE. THERE'S ACTUALLY MULTIPLE NEWS CHANNELS THAT COVERED IT. THERE IS A DOCUMENT THAT WE PUBLISHED ON THE PUBLIC WEBSITE CALLED THE METRO, THE MINORITY CAUCUSES, SAFER LOUISVILLE PLAN. AND IN THAT IT TALKS ABOUT ONE OF THE TOPICS IT TALKS ABOUT IS TACKLING HUMAN TRAFFICKING. SO I DO WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT WE ARE TRYING TO BE AS TRANSPARENT AS POSSIBLE. WE HAVE OUR DOCUMENTS RELATED TO OUR AGENDA OUT THERE. AGAIN, NOT SAYING THAT'S THE FULL COMMISSION, BY THE WAY. THAT'S NOT WHAT I'M SAYING. COUNCIL. I THINK YOU'RE FINISHING A LITTLE OFF TOPIC. I'M JUST RESPONDING TO A COLLEAGUE, BUT I'M GLAD TO BE REINED IN. THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. THANK YOU. 
          COUNCILMAN SAM. YOU'RE NEXT IN MY GENERAL. Q THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE SPONSOR, IF I MAY. YOU SAID THERE'S 347 MASSAGE PARLORS, MASSAGE THERAPIES ACROSS ALL OF METRO LOUISVILLE. OKAY. AND ARE THEY ALL LICENSED OR SINCE THIS 15 YEAR NON-LICENSED, ARE THEY NOT LICENSED OR OR WHAT? YES. SO OVER THAT 15 YEAR PERIOD, THE METRO GOVERNMENT CHANGED COMPUTER SYSTEMS THAT WE KNOW OF AT LEAST THREE TIMES WITH EACH ITERATION OF THE CHANGE OF DIFFERENT SOFTWARE. SOMEWHERE ALONG THE WAY, WE LOST THE ABILITY TO EVEN ISSUE A LICENSE. SO IF IF SOMEONE WANTED TO OPEN A MASSAGE FACILITY AND SAID, HEY, I DID MY RESEARCH, I LOOKED AT THE LAW, I'M REQUIRED TO HAVE A LICENSE, CAN YOU GIVE ME ONE? WE WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ABLE TO ISSUE A LICENSE. SO MY ANSWER IS NO. NONE OF THEM HAVE A LICENSE. NONE OF THEM ARE IN COMPLIANCE WITH TODAY'S LAW. THAT'S RIGHT. THANK YOU. NEXT. 
          MY Q IS COUNCILMAN RAYMOND. THANK YOU. I'D LIKE TO ASK SOME QUESTIONS OF THE SPONSOR, PLEASE. YOU OKAY WITH THAT? YEP. PERFECT. I'D SAY JUST DIRECT AND DIRECTLY TO. I'D LIKE TO KNOW HOW MANY MASSAGE THERAPISTS ARE ON THE TASK FORCE. I'LL HAVE TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT THE LIST. BUT I KNOW THAT THE ONE OF THE BOARD MEMBERS OF THE STATE BOARD OF LICENSURE IS IS ON THE TASK FORCE, THE A LOCAL OWNER. SO THERE'S TWO. TO GET AN EXACT NUMBER. I'LL HAVE TO GO BACK AND LOOK. AND HOW MANY TRAFFICKING SURVIVORS ARE ON THE TASK FORCE. THERE'S A REPRESENTATIVE FROM AN ORGANIZATION CALLED SCARLET HOPE TWO. ACTUALLY, TWO REPRESENTATIVES FROM ORGANIZATION CALLED SCARLET HOPE. THAT KIND OF REPRESENT THAT POPULATION. AND OCCASIONALLY I THINK THEY WOULD BRING SOMEBODY, BUT NOT A WHOLE LOT OF PEOPLE WANT TO COME FORWARD. AS YOU CAN IMAGINE, IN THE IN A NEWS ARTICLE FROM TWO WEEKS AGO THAT COULD HAVE GOTTEN IT WRONG, BUT SAID IT WAS ANNOUNCING THE FORMATION OF A TASK FORCE, RIGHT. THAT IN THE HEADLINE WAS THIS QUOTE FROM LMPD. IT'S A VERY COMPLEX ISSUE. IT'S A VERY COMPLEX ISSUE. KNOWING THAT AND YOU'VE SAID AS MUCH, I APPRECIATE THAT YOU'VE BEEN MEETING WITH FOLKS, BUT MEETING WITH FOLKS IS ONLY MEANINGFUL IF YOU'RE WILLING TO EVOLVE. AM I CORRECT THAT YOU WERE UNWILLING TO CHANGE ANYTHING IN THIS ORDINANCE? I THINK I HAVE PROVEN TONIGHT THAT I AM WILLING. I VOTED YES 
          [03:15:06]
ON COUNCILMAN CHAPEL'S AMENDMENT. PRIOR TO TONIGHT. YOU WERE UNWILLING TO. THAT'S NOT TRUE. PRIOR TO TONIGHT, YOU DID NOT CHANGE ANYTHING. I DID NOT CHANGE ANYTHING. BUT MY RESPONSE TO THAT WAS MY PREFERRED METHOD WOULD BE TO TAKE THOSE CHANGES TO THE TASK FORCE, ALLOW THEM TO COME BACK. I BELIEVE I SAID IN MY OPENING STATEMENT, I WOULD BE THE FIRST IN LINE TO SPONSOR SUCH AN AMENDMENT. THIS. THIS BRINGS ME TO SOMETHING THAT'S REALLY BOTHERED ME TONIGHT, WHICH IS WHERE YOU SAID YOU WANT THIS LEGISLATION TO BE A LIVING DOCUMENT. WE'RE ALL LEGISLATORS, RIGHT? THERE'S HUNDREDS OF YEARS OF EXPERIENCE LEGISLATING IN THIS ROOM. WE DON'T HAVE A LIVING DOCUMENT WITH ANY PIECE OF LEGISLATION. WE MAKE CHANGES SOMETIMES, BUT MORE OFTEN WE ALL KNOW THAT WE PASS A PIECE OF LEGISLATION AND WE GO TOOK CARE OF THAT. WE WOULD AGREE TO DISAGREE ON THAT. I THINK EVERY PIECE OF LEGISLATION. IT WASN'T IT WASN'T A QUESTION. OH, SORRY. APOLOGIZE. THAT IS WHAT HAPPENS. PEOPLE SLAP EACH OTHER ON THE BACK AND PEOPLE SAY WE TOOK CARE OF THAT. AND THAT'S WHAT I FORESEE HAPPENING HERE. ALSO, I THINK TONIGHT WE'VE SEEN SOME PHILOSOPHICAL THINGS THAT REVEALED REALLY BLACK AND WHITE THINKING. IF YOU'RE FOR THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION, YOU'RE GOING TO HEAVEN. IF YOU'RE AGAINST IT, YOU'RE AN ABSOLUTE MONSTER, RIGHT? THAT DOESN'T SERVE ANYONE TO PRESENT ISSUES THAT WAY AND TO PRESENT VOTES THAT. MR. PRESIDENT, IS THERE A QUESTION ANYWHERE IS A VERY COMPLEX ISSUE. I MAY SPEAK ON THE ORDINANCE, MAY I NOT SPEAK ON IT? BUT YOU'RE YOU'RE SPEAKING THE ORDINANCE, BUT THERE MIGHT BE A LITTLE BIT VENTURING OFF. I DON'T THINK THERE WAS ANY DISCUSSION OF GOING TO HEAVEN OR HELL TONIGHT. SO IF YOU'RE FOR THIS, YOU ARE AGAINST HUMAN TRAFFICKING. AND IF YOU DON'T VOTE FOR THIS, YOU'RE OKAY WITH IT CONTINUING. 
          THAT'S PRETTY CLOSE TO VERBATIM. I WOULD SAY THAT THAT WAS WHAT WAS SAID, NOT HEAVEN HELP. I'D LIKE TO ASK THE SPONSOR A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS THAT WERE RAISED BY A PROFESSIONAL IN MY DISTRICT, AND THIS COULD BE A PROPOSED CHANGE. SHE SAID SHE THINKS WHAT WOULD REALLY HELP IS IF MASSAGE THERAPISTS HAD TO DISPLAY THEIR LICENSE WITH THEIR PHOTOGRAPH. THIS IS ALREADY PRODUCED AT THE STATE LEVEL, RIGHT, LIKE A COSMETOLOGY LICENSE. DO YOU THINK THAT WOULD HELP? I DO. AND SHE ALSO RAISED THE QUESTION OF KEEPING HER PATIENT LOG RIGHT. SHE'S A PROFESSIONAL. SHE'S RUNNING A BUSINESS, BUT SHE'S A SOLE PROPRIETOR. SHE KEEPS LOGS. HOWEVER, SHE HAS TO SIGN NDAS TO WORK WITH SEVERAL OF HER CLIENTS. HOW WOULD THAT WORK WITH THIS ORDINANCE RELEASED THROUGH A WARRANT? ONLY? IS HIPAA INVOLVED AT ALL IN ANY OF THE TREATMENT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TONIGHT? I WILL DEFER TO THE COUNTY ATTORNEY, NATALIE JOHNSON, WITH THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. NO MASSAGE. MASSAGE THERAPISTS ARE NOT COVERED ENTITIES UNDER. COUNCILMAN RAYMOND. I'M ONE MORE QUESTION, THEN WE'RE GOING TO GET BACK TO OTHER PEOPLE IN THE QUEUE. YOU CAN CLICK BACK IN. OKAY. I'M PREPARED TO JUST FINISH. FINISH SHARING MY THOUGHTS ON THE PIECE OF LEGISLATION, SOMETHING ELSE THAT'S REALLY DISCOURAGED ME TONIGHT IS HEARING PEOPLE SAY THAT THIS IS GOING TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM AND END THE PROBLEM. UNFORTUNATELY, THIS IS GOING TO MOVE THE PROBLEM. I UNDERSTAND THAT ALL WE HAVE CONTROL OVER IS THIS AREA. AND ABSOLUTELY, LET'S DO THE VERY BEST THAT WE CAN TO PROTECT PEOPLE FROM BEING ABUSED IN THIS AREA. LET'S NOT PRETEND THAT WE'RE SOLVING IT OR ENDING IT WHEN WE'RE MOVING IT AS LITTLE AS TWO MILES THAT WAY, OR THAT WAY OR THAT WAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MADAM COUNCILMAN, YOUR NEXT TO MY CUE AND YOU HAVE THE FLOOR, SIR. THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. I HAVE A COUPLE OF AMENDMENTS, POSSIBLY, AND SOME QUESTIONS TO THE COUNTY ATTORNEY. IS THERE ALREADY A MORAL TURPITUDE CLAUSE IN THE LICENSURE OF MASSAGE THERAPISTS BY THE STATE? I'M NOT SURE IF BECAUSE THIS ORDINANCE DOESN'T REGULATE MASSAGE THERAPISTS. AND SO I'M NOT SURE WHAT MASSAGE THERAPISTS ARE NOT REQUIRED TO DO UNDER THEIR STATE LICENSURE OTHER THAN WHAT'S IN THE STATUTE. AND THAT'S NOT IN THE STATUTE. SO IT MAY BE IN THE APPLICATION, I'M NOT SURE, BUT THIS WOULD BE FOR THE APPLICANT OF THE FACILITY, NOT NECESSARILY MASSAGE THERAPIST. ALL RIGHT. 
          MY NEXT QUESTION A MASSAGE THERAPY PRACTICE THAT WAS OPERATING IN THE MEDICAL ARTS 
          [03:20:07]
BUILDING ON EASTERN PARKWAY, WHERE THERE IS A LOBBY WITH MULTIPLE ENTRANCES, ACCORDING TO PAGE TEN 115 .177 B THAT WOULD BE REQUIREMENTS ON ACCESS. CUSTOMERS OF MASSAGE FACILITY SHALL ENTER AND EXIT THE MASSAGE FACILITY ONLY THROUGH THE MAIN ENTRY DOOR. HOW WOULD MAIN ENTRY DOOR BE DEFINED IF A WITH A MEDICAL PRACTICE THAT HAD MULTIPLE ENTRANCES? SURE. 
          WELL, I CONSIDER IT TO BE THE MAIN ENTRY DOOR TO THE MASSAGE FACILITY, SO NOT NECESSARILY THE BUILDING BECAUSE THERE ARE, YOU KNOW, MASSAGE FACILITIES ALL OVER THE CITY THAT RENT SPACE OUT OF BUILDINGS. AND SO IT WOULD BE THE INTEREST TO THE ACTUAL FACILITY. OKAY, I WANT TO OFFER ONE AMENDMENT THAT IS SECTION 115. 173A FOR LITTLE A, CAN YOU GIVE US THE PAGE THREE? THAT'S PAGE SEVEN. I WAS COMING TO THAT, SIR. THIS IS A LIST OF. REASONS TO DENIAL OF APPLICATION BASED ON CONDUCT. ONE OF THESE AN OFFENSE INVOLVING NARTICS, DANGOUS DRUGS OR DANGEROUS WEAPONRY THAT AMOUNTS TO A FELONY IN SECTION B BENEATH IT. THAT YOU MAY ISSUE A LICENSE TO A PERSON CONVICTED OF ANY OF THESE CRIMES DESCRIBED IN SUBSECTION SUBSECTIONS THREE ONE THROUGH THREE OF THIS SECTION. IF IT FINDS THAT SUCH CONVICTION OCCURRED IN THE LAST TEN YEARS PRIOR TO THAT DATE, AND I'M GLAD THAT WE HAVE THIS IN HERE CONCERNING OURSELVES WITH SECOND CHANCES FOR MEMBERS OF OUR COMMUNITY WHO HAVE BEEN INVOLVED WITH ILLICIT ACTIVITY IN THE PAST, AND THEY'VE MOVED ON WITH THEIR LIVES. HOWEVER, I WOULD LIKE TO OFFER AN AMENDMENT TO STATE INSTEAD IN SECTION THREE. THEY'RE AN OFFENSE INVOLVING NARCOTICS, DANGEROUS DRUGS, OR DANGEROUS WEAPONS THAT AMOUNTS TO A FELONY. EXCLUDING CANNABIS. FRANKLY, WE'VE HAD CHANGES IN SOCIETY'S VIEW OF THE USE OF CANNABIS. WE HAVE HAD ACTION AT THE STATE LEVEL. THAT CHANGES THAT. I THINK IT'S WRONG TO PUNISH PEOPLE THAT IF THEY EIGHT YEARS AGO WERE CAUGHT WITH AN AMOUNT OF POT THAT ROSE TO THE LEVEL OF FELONY, WHICH IS A LUDICROUSLY SMALL AMOUNT. AS A MATTER OF FACT, IN TERMS OF PERSONAL USE, THAT WE ARE PROHIBITING THEM FROM ENGAGING IN A LEGITIMATE ACTIVITY. SO I WOULD MAKE THIS A MOMENT. IS THERE A SECOND? FANTASTIC. WE'VE GOT THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT BEFORE US BEING SECTION ON PAGE SEVEN. SECTION FOUR A, SUBPART B, I WITH A COMMA AT THE END OF THAT SENTENCE SAYING EXCLUDING CANNABIS. IS THAT CORRECT, COUNCILMAN? YES. THEN A PERIOD AFTER THAT. SO. DISCUSSION. GO AHEAD. THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. 
          THE EXAMPLE GIVEN WAS THE PERSONAL CONSUMPTION OF, LET'S CALL IT A VERY SMALL AMOUNT OF CANNABIS. I DIDN'T HEAR ANY EXCLUSION. AND AGAIN, WHY I WOULD JUST VOTE NO ON ANY AMENDMENT. BECAUSE THIS IS NOT BEING THOUGHT THROUGH ABOUT SOMEBODY WHO'S MOVING 10 POUNDS OF CANNABIS AND DEALING IT TO CHILDREN. SO THERE'S WITH WITH NO COMMENT ON THE AMOUNT OR THE TYPE AND ALL THIS STUFF, YOU KNOW, UNLESS YOU WANTED TO GET SPECIFIC TO THE SPECIFIC STATE STATUTE THAT PROHIBITS OR THAT THAT MADE, YOU KNOW, A SMALL AMOUNT OF POSSESSION FOR PERSONAL USE, A FELONY, YOU KNOW, BEYOND THAT, I WOULD NOT BE FOR IT BECAUSE THERE ARE PLENTY OF PEOPLE WITH FELONY CONVICTIONS FOR THE TRAFFICKING OF CANNABIS THAT, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY, WE WOULD WANT RUNNING ONE OF THESE FACILITIES. THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN LEONARD. 
          YOU'RE NEXT. THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. I AGREE THIS IS NOT A PERFECT WAY FOR US TO LEGISLATE. I THINK IT WOULD HAVE BEEN BETTER FOR US TO SEND IT BACK TO COMMITTEE OR TO HOLD IT SO THAT WE CAN WORK THROUGH THESE ISSUES AND BE MORE EXACT IN OUR LANGUAGE. YOU KNOW, IF WE WANT TO, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, REALLY HAVE A SCALPEL TO WHO WE'RE EXCLUDING, YOU KNOW, THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN THE WAY TO DO IT. BUT WE DON'T HAVE THAT OPTION. WE'RE DOING IT NOW. AND I THINK, FRANKLY, THAT THE BEST WAY TO DO IT WITHOUT GETTING INTO ANOTHER HOUR OF MAYBE NEEDING A RECESS TO GET THE COUNTY ATTORNEY TO GIVE US A LITTLE BIT OF RESEARCH, I THINK LET'S JUST FOR THIS PURPOSE, WE'LL EXCLUDE CANNABIS. COUNCILOR REED. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. I WOULD SUPPORT THIS IF YOU COULD DETERMINE AN AMOUNT OF CANNABIS. NO MORE THAN PICK A NUMBER. PICK A NUMBER. I DON'T KNOW. I'M NOT THE ONE COMING UP WITH THE WITH THE AMENDMENT, BUT LET'S LET'S SAY AN OUNCE. WHAT ARE WE PROPOSING? AN AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT. 
          [03:25:06]
THAT'S WHAT'S GOING ON HERE, FOLKS. YOUR SECOND ON THE AMENDMENT TO AMEND IT TO SAY AN OUNCE. YES. OKAY. MR. REED IS. POINT OF ORDER, MR. PRESIDENT, TO KEEP THIS A LITTLE CLEANER, SINCE IT SOUNDS LIKE THE ORIGINAL AMENDMENT SEEMS COOL WITH THIS. IF THEY AND THE SECONDER WOULD ADOPT IT, WE DON'T HAVE TO AMEND OR AMEND. WE CAN JUST WE CAN JUST START WITH THE ORIGINAL AMENDMENT. ARE WE OKAY WITH THAT? YES. LET'S LET'S GO THROUGH THE PROCESS. LET'S HAVE THE AMENDMENT, THEMENDNT AND THEN WE'LL COME BACK TO IT. 
          OKAY. SO WE HAVE THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT BEING SECTION, PAGE SEVEN SECTION FOR A S PAR I AND IS BNG EXCNG IN T AT NE. 
          AT CORRECT? CANNABIS IN THE AMOUNT OF ONE OUNCE. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THIS AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT? COUNCILMAN HUDSON, IS ONE OUNCE OF CANNABIS A FELONY? I DON'T KNOW, NO, NO, THAT'S THAT'S WHAT IT SAYS HERE. THAT AMOUNTS TO A FELONY. I DON'T THINK AN OUNCE OF CANNABIS IS A FELONY. TEN YEARS AGO, WAS THAT NATALIE JOHNSON WITH THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE? I UNFORTUNATELY DO NOT KNOW WHAT COUNTS AS A FELONY WHEN IT COMES TO MARIJUANA POSSESSION OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD. BUT I'M HAPPY TO TRY TO FIGURE OUT BEFORE THE END OF THIS MEETING. YEAH. MR. PRESIDENT. YES, MA'AM. I, I RECALL, SEEMED LIKE I WAS FIRST YEAR ON THE COUNCIL. DID WE VOTE IN FOR SOMETHING THAT SAID IF YOU WERE CAUGHT WITH ONE OUNCE OR LESS, CAN SOMEBODY JAR MY. THAT WAS YOURS. WHAT COUNCIL DO YOU WANT TO RESPOND TO THAT? YES. COULD YOU CLARIFY? WE PASSED A RESOLUTION THAT DEEMED YES, WE DID. WE CAN'T, WE CAN'T, WE CAN'T DECRIMINALIZE. WE DIDN'T PASS. WE PASSED A RESOLUTION THAT MADE THE POSSESSION OF MARIJUANA THE LOWEST LAW ENFORCEMENT PRIORITY, THAT. 
          OKAY. BUT IT JUST BUT IT DID NOT BECAUSE WE WE DON'T WE DON'T. ONLY THE STATE CRIMINALIZES WE PASS SOMETHING. SO WE MADE IT THE LOWEST LAW ENFORCEMENT PRIORITY. WE PASSED SOMETHING THAT THAT TALKED ABOUT, IF YOU'RE CAUGHT WITH AN OUNCE OR LESS IN YOUR CAR, IF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY COULD PLEASE REFER TO THAT. IT WAS AN ORDINANCE. WHILE THE COUNTY ATTORNEY IS LOOKING AT THAT. JP YOU'VE ASKED TO. YES, MR. PRESIDENT, AS A MATTER OF FACT, IT'S DIFFICULT FOR US TO BE ABLE TO SAY WHAT AMOUNTS TO A FELONY POSSESSION AMOUNT OF CANNABIS BECAUSE IT DEPENDS, FOR EXAMPLE, A SECOND OR SUBSEQUENT CONVICTION CAN COME THAT IS GOING TO ESCALATE PREVIOUS MISDEMEANOR CONVICTIONS, MISDEMEANOR AMOUNTS OF POSSESSION, IT TURNS IT INTO FELONY. I THINK IN THE INTERESTS OF MOVING THIS FORWARD, THE CLEANEST SOLUTION IS FOR US TO JUST EXEMPT CANNABIS FROM THIS CLAUSE, BECAUSE THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS, WE ARE NOT GOING TO COME UP WITH AN AMOUNT THAT'S GOING TO MAKE SENSE IN THE LAW BECAUSE FRANKLY, OUR LAWS DON'T MAKE SENSE. WELL, I THINK THAT WE'VE GOT PURSUANT TO WHAT YOU REQUESTED, YOU SAID YOU WANTED THE PROCESS TO PLAY OUT. YEAH. 
          AND SO WE HAVE THE AMENDED AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT, PROPOSED AMENDMENT PRESENTLY BEFORE US, WHICH IS ONE OUNCE. OKAY. YEAH. IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THE AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT WERE ADDED IN ONE OUNCE. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? I'M NOT SEEING ANYONE. LET'S DO A ROLL CALL. VOTE, MADAM. YES. THE MAIN MOTION. COUNCIL MEMBER PERISH, RIGHT. IS THIS YES TO THE AMENDMENT ON NO CANNABIS OR THE 1OZ OR 1OZ OF CANNABIS? AND THEN WE'LL COME BACK TO THE MAIN MOTION. OKAY. WE SHOULD VOTE NO ON THE AMENDMENT. OH. 
          YOU OKAY? SO I'M SORRY, WHAT WAS YOUR ANSWER, MA'AM? NO. THEN. OKAY. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER RINO WEBER. NO. AND COUNCIL MEMBER WINKLER. OH, I'M SORRY, SIR, YOU'RCOUNCIL MEMBER BENSON. 
          [03:30:15]
PRESIDENT, YOU HAVE FOUR YES VOTES AND NO VOTES. THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT FAILS. WE NOW HAVE THE AMENDED OR THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT BEFORE US, WHICH JUST SIMPLY SAYS CANNABIS. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THE WORDS EXCLUDING CANNABIS ADDED TO FOR A SUB PART, TRIPLE I? NO. SEEING NO ONE ELSE FOR DISCUSSION ON THAT. THE END RESULT IS. MADAM CLERK, OPEN A ROLL CALL FOR THAT VOTE. COUNCIL MEMBER PERISH, RIGHT? YES. COUNCIL MEMBER RENO WEBER. YES. AND COUNCIL MEMBER WINKLER. YES. MR. PRESIDENT, YOU HAVE 12 YES VOTES, 13 NO VOTES AND ONE PRESENT VOTE. OKAY. SOUNDS LIKE FROM THAT BY ME AGAIN. 12. IT FAILED. 12 YES VOTES, 13 NO VOTES AND ONE PRESENT VOTE. THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT FAILS. 
          ALRIGHT. AND CAN YOU CLEAN UP MY QUEUE HERE? I'VE GOT COUNCILWOMAN RAYMOND STILL IN HERE AND NOW I'VE GOT JP IN HERE. OKAY. SORRY, SIR. THANK YOU. JUST KEEPING ME STRAIGHT, COUNCILWOMAN RUBY, YOU'RE NEXT IN MY QUEUE. AND YOU HAVE THE FLOOR, MADAM. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. LET ME SEE WHERE I WAS IN THIS. GOODNESS. WE'VE BEEN THROUGH A LOT TONIGHT. ARE ALRIGHT. HERE WE GO. SO PAGE 14, SECTION 115 .187 PERSONS THE UNDER THE AGE OF 18 PROHIBITED ON PREMISES. PART A NO PERSONS UNDER 18TH MAY COME OR REMAIN ON THE PREMISES OF A MASSAGE FACILITY AS A PATRON, UNLESS THEY ARE WITH A GUARDIAN OVER THE AGE OF 21. NOW, I ASK COUNTY ATTORNEY NATALIE JOHNSON ABOUT THIS ONE AND AS SHE STATED, STATE LAW REQUIRES PARENTAL CONSENT. IN MOST CASES WHERE A MINOR IS SEEKING CAL CARE. BUT THE LAW DOES NOT STATE THAT A GUARDIAN MUST BE PHYSICALLY PRESENT TO GIVE CONSENT. I WOULD LIKE TO ADD AS AN AMENDMENT THAT UNLESS THEY'RE WITH A GUARDIAN OVER THE AGE OF 21, UNLESS YOU HAVE A SIGNED RELEASE TO TREAT UNESCORTED FROM A PARENT OR GUARDIAN, THEY ALREADY HAVE A CONSENT TO TREAT FORM ON, ON, ON THE PREMISES THAT'S ALREADY BEEN AGREED UPON. SO I JUST WANT SOMETHING THAT CLEARLY STATES THAT WE HAVE MANY STUDENT ATHLETES. COUNCILMEMBER, CAN I GET SOME CLARIFICATION HERE? JUST YES, I'M ON PAGE 14 115.187. YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT SUBPART A. NO PERSON UNDER AGE 18TH MAY COME OR REMAIN ON THE PREMISES OF MASSAGE FACILITIES, A PATRON, UNLESS THEY ARE WITH A GUARDIAN OVER THE AGE OF 21 AND YOU ARE ADDING IN THE WORDS OR HAVE A SIGNED RELEASE FROM THEIR GUARDIAN UNLESS THEY HAVE A SIGNED RELEASE. YES, YOU'VE GOT A LOT OF HIGH SCHOOL ATHLETES WHO ARE COMING IN HERE BEING TREATED FOR VARIOUS ACHES AND PAINS, AND IF THEY HAVE THE ABILITY TO DRIVE AND THEIR PARENTS ALREADY KNOW THEY'RE GOING THERE, I DO NOT SEE THE IMPORTANCE OF ENSURING THAT A PARENT COMES WITH THE PARENT ALREADY HAS A TRUSTED RELATIONSHIP. SO WHAT YOU'RE I THINK WHAT YOU'RE SUGGESTING IS, IS ADDING AN AFTER AGE 21 OR HAVE A SIGNED RELEASE FROM THEIR PARENTS OR GUARDIAN. OKAY, SO BECAUSE THE ORDER SAYS EITHER GOT SOMEBODY THERE OR YOU GOT THE SIGN RELEASE, DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? YES IT DOES. OKAY. SO IS THAT YOUR PROPOSED AMENDMENT? YES IT IS. IS THERE A SECOND FOR THAT. THERE'S A SECOND FOR THAT. WE'VE GOT THE AMENDMENT BEFORE US OF SECTION 115.187, SUBSECTION A ADDING OR A WRITTEN CONSENT FORM BY THE PARENT OR GUARDIAN. COUNCILMAN, YOU GOT YOUR HAND UP. YEAH. AGAIN AGAINST UNLESS THIS IS SIGNIFICANTLY DRAFTED A FAR MORE COMPREHENSIVE WAY FOR I MEAN AGAIN THIS COMES DOWN TO IS THIS CONSIDERED A THERAPY, A TRUE THERAPY RELATED TO HEALTH CARE CONDITIONS OR NOT? THERE ARE EXTREMELY LIMITED CIRCUMSTANCES THAT MINORS CAN GO TO HEALTH CARE PROFESSIONALS BY THEMSELVES. AND EVEN WITHIN THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES, THERE'S A BUNCH OF EXEMPTIONS. EVEN WITH PARENTAL CONSENT, THEY HAVE TO BE OF A CERTAIN AGE OR HAVE OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES. FOR EXAMPLE, IT'S AN EMERGENCY. 
          THEY'RE EMANCIPATED, ETC. THERE ARE THESE ILLEGAL OPERATIONS ARE POPPING UP NEAR NEAR HIGH SCHOOLS FOR THE PURPOSE OF SOLICITING YOUNG TEENAGE BOYS INTO THEM. OKAY, SO I, FOR ONE, 
          [03:35:04]
HAVE NO INTEREST IN MAKING THIS EASIER FOR YOUNG TEENAGE BOYS TO WALK IN AND OUT OF THEM AND JUST TO BACK UP TO SOMETHING TO SORT OF CIRCLE BACK ON ON WHY I'M AGAINST THIS. AGAIN, WE IF WE'RE GOING TO TREAT THIS LIKE OTHER MEDICAL FACILITIES, WE NEED TO FOLLOW THE WAY THE STATE DOES THIS AND THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT DOES THIS. RELATED TO MEDICAL FACILITIES. THE REASON HIPAA DOESN'T APPLY IS BECAUSE NOBODY IN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OR STATE CONSIDERS THIS MEDICAL. OKAY. SO THIS IS WE NEED THAT'S WHY WE NEED TO BE VERY CAREFUL AND FOLLOW THAT AND NOT CREATE. UNDER THIS CIRCUMSTANCE, SOMEBODY COULD GET A QUOTE NOTE, WHO KNOWS WHO'S SIGNING THAT NOTE. AND SOME TEENAGERS WALKING IN AND OUT OF THAT PLACE. I'M SORRY. 
          UNLESS THERE IS, THIS IS DRAFTED IN A WAY THAT HAS SIGNIFICANT PROTECTIONS THAT MIRROR WHAT THE STATE DOES, ALLOWING THIS TO BE OPEN FOR MINORS IS PLAYING INTO THE CRIMINALITY THAT ALREADY EXISTS AND HOW THIS IS BEING MARKETED TO CERTAIN DEMOGRAPHICS. SO I THINK WE WOULD NEED TO BE AGAINST THIS, ALBEIT, AGAIN, IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO BRING THE STATE REGULATIONS AND THEN THE RIGOR AROUND THOSE STATE REGULATIONS THAT APPLY TO MEDICAL FACILITIES, THEN WE COULD TALK ABOUT THAT. THANK YOU. COUNCILMAN. OKAY. SO, COUNCILMAN SANTINI, WOULD IT BE ACCEPTABLE IF SOMETHING WERE ADDED IN THERE TO THE EFFECT THAT THIS PARENT OR GUARDIAN SIGNS IT IN THE PRESENCE OF THE LICENSED MASSAGE THERAPIST? WOULD THAT BE ACCEPTABLE? I JUST I HEARD THE PRESIDENT SAY, GO AHEAD AND ANSWER, COUNCILMAN. 
          SO WHAT I WOULD SAY IS, AGAIN, YOU KNOW, HOW DO YOU GO ABOUT THAT PROCESS? YOU SAY THERE IN THE PRESENCE SAYS, WHO DO THEY HAVE THERE? THEY HAVE A COPY OF THEIR LICENSE, BIRTH CERTIFICATE THAT CERTIFIES THEIR THEIR PARENT, YOU KNOW, WHAT IS THIS PROCESS THAT THEY ARE THE PARENT OR GUARDIAN? AND WHO IS SAYING THAT OTHER THAN SOME RANDOM ADULTS ATTESTATION AND LOOK, THAT'S COMING FROM A PERSON WHO IS ADOPTED CHILDREN RIGHT NOW. LUCKILY FOR ME, I ADOPTED THEM AT BIRTH. THEIR BIRTH CERTIFICATES HAVE MY NAME ON IT. SO IT'S IT'S VERY SIMPLE FOR ME TO PROVE GUARDIANSHIP. THAT IS NOT THE CASE IN THESE VERY COMPLEX SITUATIONS. I HAVE SITUATIONS WITHIN THAT. I KNOW OF, OF, YOU KNOW, FOSTERING OF, YOU KNOW, THERE'S ALL KINDS OF OTHER GUARDIANSHIP SCENARIOS THAT ARE VERY COMPLICATED. AND PROVING THAT YOU ARE THE GUARDIAN IS ACTUALLY QUITE A FRAUGHT THING. I THINK GETTING INTO THAT IS IS VERY WEIRD. IT IS NOT ABNORMAL. I MEAN, I'VE HAD TEENAGE CHILDREN WHO HAD TO GET PHYSICAL THERAPY, WHO WERE ATHLETES, AND I WENT WITH THEM. AS A MATTER OF FACT, I WOULD THINK IT WAS QUITE WEIRD THAT I WOULD LET THIS CHILD GO INTO A BACK ROOM WITH AN ADULT AND LET THEM DO THINGS TO THEM WITHOUT ME BEING ALLOWED, OR THEIR MOTHER FOR THAT MATTER. SINCE I HAVE DAUGHTERS AND NOT ONE OF US BE ALLOWED TO BE THERE, I WOULD THINK THAT BE WHOLLY INAPPROPRIATE. SO NO, I THINK WE NEED TO BE VERY CAREFUL ABOUT THIS AND I WOULD REJECT THE AMENDMENT. THANK YOU. 
          COUNCILMAN, I AGREE WITH COUNCILMAN PIACENTINI THAT IT IS PRETTY DIFFICULT FOR US TO ASCERTAIN WHETHER OR NOT SOMEONE IS ACTING LEGITIMATELY IN THE ROLE OF GUARDIAN OR PARENT IN THESE CASES, I WOULD SAY THAT IT'S ACTUALLY IMPOSSIBLE FOR US TO MAKE SURE THAT THE PEOPLE ATTENDING WITH THE MINORS, AS THE LEGISLATION IS WRITTEN, ARE, IN FACT, LEGITIMATELY THE PARENTS. I WOULD ASK ANYONE TO TELL ME HOW WE'RE GOING TO PROVE THAT IN LIGHT OF THE FACT THAT MANY MINORS DO NOT HAVE GOVERNMENT ISSUED ID, MANY PARENTS DO NOT SHARE HOME ADDRESS OR LAST NAME WITH THEIR CHILDREN DESPITE STILL HAVING PARENTAL RIGHTS. I THINK THAT THERE WOULD BE NO WAY FOR US TO PROVE WHETHER OR NOT THE PERSON IN ATTENDANCE WITH SOMEONE IS NECESSARILY THE PARENT, TO ANY DEGREE OF CERTAINTY, ANY MORE THAN WHAT HAS BEEN PROPOSED. COUNCIL. PETERS TEAM, THANK YOU. WITH THE EXCEPTION OF YOU WOULD HAVE TO WALK INTO THE FACILITY. WE'VE ALREADY ESTABLISHED THAT ALL ENTRANCES TO THE FACILITY MUST HAVE A CAMERA, AND IT IS ILLEGAL TO WEAR A MASK IN THE CITY OF LOUISVILLE. SO YOU'D BE WALKING IN, THE CAMERA WOULD BE SEEING YOU. AND IF THERE WERE A QUESTION AFTERWARDS ABOUT THAT PERSON NOT BEING A GUARDIAN, YOU WOULD HAVE PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE OF WHO THE PERPETRATOR WAS UNDER THIS CIRCUMSTANCE, UNDER NOBODY'S SUPERVISION. AND EVEN IF IT WAS, AND YOU CAN'T PUT IT UNDER THE THERAPIST'S SUPERVISION, THEY ARE NOT THEY'RE NOT GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS OF A NOTARY, FOR EXAMPLE. BUT YOU COULD HAVE A SIGNED NOTE FROM GOD KNOWS WHO AND A MINOR JUST WALK IN AND GET THAT SERVICE, AT LEAST IF IF THEY'RE BEING ACCOMPANIED BY AN ADULT. YES. I DON'T 100% KNOW THAT YOU ARE THEIR PARENT. HECK, IN MY CASE, I DON'T LOOK LIKE MY CHILDREN. LIKE I SAID, THEY'RE ADOPTED, BUT AT LEAST WHEN I'M WALKING IN, THAT PERSON CAN MAKE A VISUAL IDENTIFICATION OF ME. THEY HAVE SECURITY CAMERAS, WE REQUIRED 
          [03:40:02]
IT, AND IF THERE IS AN ISSUE AFTER THE FACT, THEN THAT CAN BE ADJUDICATED AND THERE'S EVIDENCE OF WHO IT WAS. THANK YOU. IN THE SAME VEIN, IF WE HAD RECORD KEEPING OF THE NOTE, WOULDN'T WE BE ABLE TO ASK THE PARENT, IS THIS YOUR SIGNATURE? DID YOU ALLOW THIS? WHEN THE PARENT COMES BACK AND SAYS, NO, NOW WE HAVE PROOF THAT THERE WAS A CRIME THAT WAS COMMITTED. 
          IN AGAIN, 16 YEAR OLDS CAN DRIVE. SO UNDER WHAT CIRCUMSTANCE? THE PARENT DOESN'T HAVE TO SHOW UP. THE THERAPIST WOULD NEVER HAVE TO TALK TO THE PARENT UNDER THIS. 
          UNDER THIS AMENDMENT, IN BOTH CASES, WE ARE DISCUSSING INVESTIGATION OF THE CRIME EX POST FACTO. WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, WE'LL BE ABLE TO LOOK AT THE PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE OF THE PEOPLE WALKING IN WITH THE CHILD. I THINK IN BOTH CASES, WE HAVE ESTABLISHED THAT AHEAD OF ENTERING THE FACILITY, IN NEITHER CASE ARE WE ABLE TO PROVE THAT THE PERSON IS GIVING LEGITIMATE PERMISSION. I'LL JUST WRAP IT UP BY SAYING I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF MAKING IT EASIER FOR MINORS TO USE THESE FACILITIES BY THEMSELVES. THAT'S WHAT IT IS. THAT'S AFTER WORKING IN HEALTH CARE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES FOR OVER THE LAST 20 YEARS, AS MINORS WOULD COME IN UNSUPERVISED, WE HAD TO WITHIN ANOTHER ADULT, THEY HAD TO HAVE A NOTARIZED LETTER. SO THERE WAS LEGIT LETTER DOCUMENTATION THAT WE WOULD FILE THAT IT WAS A NOTARIZED LETTER, THAT THEY ARE ACTING AS GUARDIAN FOR THE CHILD. ANYONE ELSE HAS READ? YES. THANK YOU. 
          HOLD ON A SECOND. COUNCILWOMAN PARISH. RIGHT. WERE YOU TRYING TO SPEAK? YEAH, I WAS OKAY. 
          WELL, THEN I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU THE FLOOR AND COUNCILMEMBER WILL HAVE IT AFTER YOU. THANK YOU. I KNOW YOU SAID TO YELL. IT'S HARD TO CHIME IN ONLINE. I JUST WANT TO SAY, JUST GETTING BACK TO COUNCILWOMAN RUIZ, ORIGINAL POINT OF THIS AMENDMENT. IT'S JUST IT MAKES SENSE FOR THE PEOPLE THAT ARE THAT NEED IT, THE YOUNG PEOPLE. AND JUST TODAY, WHILE I'M TRAVELING, MY SONS NEEDED THEIR PHYSICALS DONE, AND I JUST GAVE VERIFICATION OVER THE PHONE, EVEN THOUGH I HAD SUBMITTED, LIKE, A SIGN, AND THEY GOT THOSE PHYSICALS DONE AT JC AND I. AND I'VE ALREADY SUBMITTED A FORM BEFORE, SO SIGNATURES CAN BE VERIFIED. AS COUNCILMAN LEONARD JUST SAID, THERE'S JUST A LOT OF UNKNOWNS WITH THIS, WITH THE LEGISLATION AND WITH HOW PEOPLE ARE ACCESSING IT. AND THAT'S WHY PEOPLE ARE SO WORRIED ABOUT PUTTING THIS IN PLACE WITHOUT HAVING ALL THESE PIECES WORKED OUT. SO I SUPPORT COUNCILWOMAN RUIZ AMENDMENT BECAUSE THERE ARE UNIQUE SITUATIONS WHERE THIS WOULD APPLY. NOW, MY SONS ARE OF AGE TO BE ABLE TO DRIVE, BUT NEITHER ONE OF THEM HAVE A GOVERNMENT ID, SO THEY NEEDED MY VERBAL CONSENT. I'VE WRITTEN NOTES THAT HAVE I'VE USED FOR CONSENT. I MEAN, THIS STUFF HAS BEEN HAPPENING FOR A VERY LONG TIME. I JUST SAY, LET'S SUPPORT THIS AMENDMENT. LET'S TRY TO GET THROUGH THIS, BECAUSE I'M REALLY TRYING TO FIND A WAY TO SUPPORT THIS, AS I THINK THAT THE WORK THAT COUNCILMAN HUDSON HAS DONE IS ADMIRABLE. JUST AS EVERYONE ELSE WHO WORKS ON LEGISLATION OVER TIME. BUT WE'RE AT THIS PLACE BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF UNKNOWNS AND A LOT OF THINGS THAT WE'RE TRYING TO GO AFTER. BAD ACTORS WHO DON'T ASK FOR PERMISSION, WHO DON'T CARE ABOUT A NOTE, WHO DON'T CARE ABOUT ANY OF THOSE THINGS, THEY'RE STILL DOING IT. 
          AND THIS HAS THE POTENTIAL TO HURT GOOD ACTORS MORE THAN THE BAD ACTORS. SO LET'S WORK THROUGH THESE AMENDMENTS. I SUPPORT THIS WITH COUNCILWOMAN RUIZ AND REALLY READY TO VOTE ON THIS. THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN REED, YOUR NEXT TO MY FLOOR. Q THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. I THINK THAT WITH THE WITH REGARD TO COUNCILWOMAN PARISH, RIGHT, THAT APPLICATION PROBABLY OR THAT VERIFICATION OF SIGNATURE PROBABLY WENT THROUGH A TEACHER WHO WAS ABLE TO VERIFY YOUR IDENTITY. IS THAT NOT CORRECT? AM I ALLOWED TO ANSWER? YES, MA'AM. PLEASE DO. IT WAS ACTUALLY THE NURSE'S OFFICE THAT CALLED ME. I HAVE NOT MET THE DOCTOR OR THE NURSE PRACTITIONER. PRACTITIONER AT THE SCHOOL. THAT'S WHO CALLED ME TODAY. BUT SOMEBODY THAT KNEW YOU AND KNEW OF YOU HAD MET YOU. SOMEBODY THAT I GUESS THEY ASKED MY SON TO CALL TO GIVE THEM A NUMBER TO THEIR PARENT. AND THEN HE THEY CALLED ME AND I VERIFIED OVER THE PHONE. OKAY. SO I MEAN, PERSONALLY, I THINK THAT IT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, A LITTLE DISTASTEFUL TO THINK OF ANYONE UNDER 18. NOT HAVING PERMISSION FROM A, FROM A LEGAL GUARDIAN TO BE. LACK A BETTER TERM TOUCHED BY MASSAGE THERAPIST. SO, YOU KNOW, I'M NOT IN FAVOR 
          [03:45:07]
OF THIS. I UNDERSTAND WHERE SHE'S COMING FROM, COUNCILWOMAN RUBY, BUT AS A FATHER WITH TWO CHILDREN, BOTH GROWN, YOU KNOW, IF THEY WERE TEN AND 12 OR 15 YEARS OLD, THAT'S SOMETHING I COULDN'T LIVE WITH. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE ON THIS PROPOSED AMENDMENT BY COUNCILWOMAN RUBY? I'M NOT SEEING ANY HANDS. AND SO, MADAM CLERK, LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL. VOTE ON COUNCILMAN RUIZ, AMENDMENT OF 115. 187A. COUNCIL MEMBER. PARISH RIGHT? YES. COUNCIL MEMBER RENO WEBBER. 
          YES. COUNCIL MEMBER WINKLER. YES. I'M SORRY YOU SAID NO. NO. OKAY. SO. COUNCIL MEMBER SHANKLIN. I'M SORRY. THAT WE'RE VOTING ON THE AMENDMENT OF SECTION ON PAGE 14, SECTION 115. 187A ESSENTIALLY AT PRESENTLY READS. PRIOR TO AMENDMENT NO, PERSON UNDER THE AGE OF 18TH MAY COME OR REMAIN ON THE PREMISES OF MASSAGE FACILITY AS A PATRON, UNLESS THEY ARE WITH A GUARDIAN OVER THE AGE OF 21. THE AMENDMENT IS TO ADD A COMMA OR HAVE A WRITTEN CONSENT BY A PARENT OR GUARDIAN. OKAY, MR. PRESIDENT, YOU HAVE EIGHT YES VOTES, 17 NO VOTES AND ONE PRESENT VOTE. THE AMENDMENT FAILS NOW. I'VE GOT NO ONE IN MY GENERAL QUEUE. IS THERE ANY OTHER AMENDMENTS REGARDING THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION? WHAT'S THAT? I WAS SUPPOSED TO BE IN THE GENERAL QUEUE, BUT IT WAS. IT WENT SO LONG. NO, THAT'S OKAY MA'AM, IF YOU'D LIKE. THE FLOOR, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR. MY GENERAL QUESTION. I THINK A LOT OF MY COLLEAGUES COVER SOME OF MY CONCERNS WAS BEING PUT IN A, YOU KNOW, WE'VE BEEN TOLD DON'T NAME CALL, DON'T DO THIS, DON'T DO THAT. YOU'LL LOSE SUPPORT AND ALL OF THAT. BUT TO BE TOLD THAT IF WE VOTE AGAINST THIS, THAT WE ARE IN SUPPORT OF HUMAN TRAFFICKING AS A SEXUAL ASSAULT SURVIVOR, THAT'S REALLY HARD FOR ME TO RECEIVE. THERE ARE JUST NUANCES AND THINGS WITH THIS LEGISLATION AND LEGITIMATE PEOPLE WHO RUN THESE BUSINESSES HAVE THOSE CONCERNS. I DON'T HAVE THE KNOWLEDGE BASE THAT SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES HAVE. THEY KNOW THE INS AND OUTS, THE CAMERA, THE FLASHING, THE MONEY. I DON'T KNOW THAT STUFF UNLESS I GO WATCH A MOVIE ABOUT IT. 
          BUT I DO KNOW THAT THESE THINGS ARE HAPPENING AND THESE CRIMINALS ARE NOT GOING TO GO THROUGH THESE REGULATORY PROCESSES, AND THEY'RE IN THAT WAY. AND I THINK THAT THIS IS REALLY HURTFUL TO THE PEOPLE WHO ARE TRYING TO DO THE RIGHT THING. I THINK IT'S WELL INTENTIONED. NOBODY IS ARGUING WELL INTENTIONED. NOBODY IS SUPPORTIVE OF SEX TRAFFICKING. 
          AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE CLEAR ABOUT THAT. I SEE A LOT OF CONTRADICTIONS WITH THIS COUNCIL SAYING, OH, WE DON'T WANT TO DO AMENDMENTS ON THE FLOOR. OH, WE DON'T WANT TO DO RESOLUTIONS. OH, WE DON'T WE DON'T WANT TO CALL NAMES AND DO THINGS LIKE THAT. BUT OTHER PEOPLE DO IT. THEY JUST USE DIFFERENT WORDS TO SAY IT. AND THAT'S VERY DISRESPECTFUL TO PUT US IN BOXES BECAUSE WE DON'T AGREE WITH LEGISLATION. OKAY. I DON'T DO ANY OF YOU LIKE THAT. EITHER YOU AGREE OR YOU DON'T. BUT I DON'T CHARACTERIZE YOU AS PEOPLE WHO JUST DON'T CARE OR BEING NEGLIGENT OF A VERY SERIOUS CRISIS OUR CITY IS DEALING WITH. 
          I DON'T THINK THAT THIS IS GOING TO SOLVE THAT CRISIS. I DO THINK THAT WE SHOULD DO SOMETHING AS A BODY, BUT I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE MORE COLLECTIVE, MORE INTENTIONAL IN THAT WAY THAT WE TAKE THE TIME TO GIVE IT WHAT IT NEEDS. SO THAT IS WHY I WAS A NO, BECAUSE I WANTED TO SEE IT. BUT I DID AGREE TO THE AMENDMENTS BECAUSE THEY SHOW THAT MR. HUDSON, COUNCILWOMAN, COUNCILWOMAN HUDSON WAS MOVEABLE ON SOME OF THAT, BUT THERE'S STILL SOME PIECES THAT CAN HINDER PEOPLE GETTING WHAT THEY NEED. AND I THAT'S WHY I AM A NO. BUT I WANTED TO BE ON RECORD TO SAY MY NO IS NOT THAT I AGREE WITH HUMAN TRAFFICKING. THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. THANK YOU MADAM. ANYONE ELSE ON DISCUSSION ON THE PRESENT AMENDED VERSION OF THIS ORDINANCE? COUNCILMAN. READ. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. I JUST WANT TO SECOND MR. REED. I GOT COUNCILMAN MCCRANIE. I'VE GOT COUNCILWOMAN CHAPEL, AND THEN I'VE GOT YOU ON THE GENERAL QUEUE. I APOLOGIZE, I WAS IN THE MIDDLE OF A GREAT THOUGHT. WELL, I, YOU KNOW, I CAN HOLD THAT THOUGHT. I WILL YIELD TO THE GENTLEMAN. WELL, NO, IT'S WE'LL GO TO COUNCILWOMAN CHAPEL TO THE GENTLE LADY. THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH. GLAD TO SEE THIS QUEUE 
          [03:50:03]
FILLED BACK UP, BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE TO GO TO THE BATHROOM OR ANYTHING. PART OF THE PROBLEM. 
          BUT I'M GOING TO GO BACK AND REVISIT SECTION 115 .181 ON PAGE 11. I WOULD LIKE TO OFFER AN AMENDMENT THAT WE STRIKE SECTION OR ITEM A FOR TYPE OF SERVICE RECEIVED. AND WHEN IT COMES TO SECTION C, I WOULD LIKE TO CHANGE THAT TO THE REGISTER OF PATRONS MAY BE INSPECTED BY AN AUTHORIZED. CODE ENFORCEMENT. BY AN AUTHORIZED. I'M KIND OF STRUGGLING HERE BECAUSE THERE'S SO MANY PEOPLE. I DON'T KNOW IF IT SHOULD BE PUBLIC WORKS CODES OR REGS OR ABC, BUT MAYBE INSPECTED BY AN AUTHORIZED OFFICER PURSUANT TO AN ADMINISTRATIVE OR JUDICIAL WARRANT, RECORDS SHALL BE KEPT FOR NO MORE THAN SIX MONTHS FROM TIME OF. FROM TIME OF RETRIEVAL. IT'S NOT THE WORD FROM THE TIME THAT YOU GET THE RECORD THAT THE CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER GETS THE RECORD. THEY HAVE SIX MONTHS. 
          I'M LOST. CAN YOU CAN YOU TELL ME AGAIN WHAT OUR PROPOSED AMENDMENT IS? WE'RE ON PAGE 11, SECTION 115.181. BUT THEN WHAT SUBSECTION WERE YOU TALKING ABOUT? ITEM C THE REGISTER OF PATRONS MAY BE INSPECTED BY AN AUTHORIZED BANK OF LOUISVILLE METRO GOVERNMENT PURSUANT TO AN ADMINISTRATIVE OR JUDICIAL WARRANT. ALL RECORDS SHALL BE DESTROYED OR DELETED. SIX MONTHS AFTER THEY'VE BEEN OBTAINED. HOLD ON ONE SECOND. YES, THE TYPE OF SERVICE RECEIVED. SO ITEM A FOR. SO YOU'RE PROPOSING TO STRIKE A4 IN ITS ENTIRETY? YES. AND THEN YOU'RE PROPOSING TO ADD A SENTENCE AT THE END OF C, THAT SENTENCE BEING ALL RECORDS WILL BE DESTROYED OR DELETED SIX MONTHS AFTER BEING OBTAINED. YES. OKAY. BUT I ALSO AM WONDERING SHOULD IT BE INSPECTED BY AN AUTHORIZED CODE OFFICER? IS THAT A CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER? THIS IS NATALIE JOHNSON WITH THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. SO CODE AUTHORIZE CODE OFFICER IS ACTUALLY DEFINED IN THE DEFINITION SECTION OF THE ORDINANCE. AND THAT INCLUDES ANY OFFICER OF LMPD, ABC, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND WELLNESS CODES AND REGS OR PLANNING AND ZONING. IT'S A LOT OF HANDS IN THE POT, BUT I'LL LEAVE IT AS IS. OKAY. IS THERE A SECOND FOR HER PROPOSED AMENDMENT? DO WE HAVE A SECOND FIRST IN THE QUEUE REGARDING THE THIS BEING THE FOR QUEUE AS COUNSEL PAGE? AGAIN, I I'M FLABBERGASTED BY THIS DESIRE TO TRY TO TO TRY TO DESTROY RECORDS STANDARD REQUIREMENTS FOR FOR ALL KENTUCKY MEDICAL FACILITIES TO RETAIN RECORDS AT LEAST FIVE YEARS. IF YOU WANT TO MAKE IT FIVE YEARS, FEEL FREE TO MAKE IT FIVE YEARS. BUT IF THIS IS GOING TO BE IF WE'RE GOING TO CONSIDER THIS A SERIOUS THERAPEUTIC FACILITY DOING SERIOUS THERAPEUTIC WORK, THAT THEY SHOULD BE REQUIRED TO GO ALONG WITH WHAT OTHER THERAPEUTIC TYPE FACILITIES HAVE TO DO RELATED TO RECORDS RETENTION, AND THAT IN THE STATE OF KENTUCKY, AS A MINIMUM OF FIVE YEARS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. I WEARILY RISE TO CORRECT MY COLLEAGUE FROM ACROSS THE ROOM. THIS IS NOT AN AMENDMENT THAT IS REGULATING HOW LONG THE BUSINESS WILL KEEP THESE RECORDS, BUT RATHER HOW LONG THE RECORDS WILL REMAIN IN POSSESSION OF THE GOVERNMENT FOLLOWING THE WARRANT. COUNCILWOMAN CHAPEL IS MERELY CLARIFYING THAT THE GOVERNMENT SHALL RELEASE OR DESTROY THE RECORDS SIX MONTHS AFTER ACTION. 
          IS ALSO BEING USED, AND TYPE OF SERVICE WOULD BE REMOVED. THANK YOU. SURE. JUST IN THIS ENTIRE CONVERSATION THAT'S GONE ON FOR SO LONG. THE WHOLE TIME. THIS ISN'T A MEDICAL FACILITY. THIS ISN'T A MEDICAL FACILITY. HIPAA DOESN'T APPLY. THIS ISN'T A MEDICAL FACILITY. IT'S NOT 
          [03:55:01]
REGULATED AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL. THIS IS NOT A MEDICAL FACILITY. BUT NOW WE WANT TO SAY IT IS A FEDERAL. IT IS A MEDICAL FACILITY. AND YOU NEED TO KEEP YOUR RECORDS FOR FIVE YEARS. I THINK WE NEED TO DECIDE IS IT OR ISN'T IT? I WOULD SAY YES. AND IF YOU WANT TO ALSO ACCEPT THAT IT IS A MEDICAL FACILITY, MAYBE I WOULD BE AMENABLE WITH THAT ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO EXTENDING IT TO FIVE YEARS FROM SIX MONTHS, EVEN THOUGH I FEEL A LITTLE ICKY ABOUT THAT. I THINK THERE'S CONFUSION. SO CAN YOU ELABORATE ON YOUR AMENDMENT AGAIN TO HELP OUT WITH THE CONFUSION? SURE. THANK YOU. IF WE ARE GOING TO ADMIT IN THIS BODY THAT THESE ARE MEDICAL FACILITIES, THEN I WILL BE WILLING TO EXTEND THOSE RECORDS TO FIVE YEARS TO BE IN CONJUNCTION WITH. HEALTH CARE LAW. IF WE ARE STATING THAT THESE ARE FACILITIES THAT PRACTICE HEALTH CARE. SO, SORRY. JUST TO CLARIFY, CAN YOU RESTATE THE AMENDMENT? I'M SORRY, I DIDN'T MEAN TO TO RESTATE YOUR POINT, BECAUSE I THINK THERE IS MAYBE DIFFERENTIATION BETWEEN HOW I'M UNDERSTANDING YOUR AMENDMENT AND WHAT COUNCILMAN, I'VE BEEN KEEPING TRACK OF THE AMENDMENT. I'M GOING TO RESTATE THE AMENDMENT. OKAY. AMENDMENT IS ON PAGE 11. GOTCHA. SECTION 115.181. SHE IS UNDER SECTION SUBSECTION A, CAPITAL A. SHE WANTS TO STRIKE PART FOUR WHICH IS STRIKE TYPE OF SERVICES RENDERED. SHE WANTS THAT STRICKEN. THE NEXT PART OF THIS PROPOSED AMENDMENT IS UNDER SECTION C OF THAT SECTION, WHERE SHE'S ADDING AN END SENTENCE, A NEW SENTENCE AT THE END OF SECTION C SAYING ALL RECORDS WILL BE DESTROYED OR DELETED SIX MONTHS AFTER BEING OBTAINED, PERIOD. THAT'S HER AMENDMENT TO THE POSSESSION OF THE GOVERNMENT. BUT OKAY. SORRY. SO THANK YOU. SO WE'RE TALKING TWO SEPARATE THINGS. RECORD RETENTION BY THE FACILITY VERSUS RECORD RETENTION BY LAW ENFORCEMENT. THERE. AGAIN, I WOULD SAY THERE ARE ALREADY STATE STATUTES IN PLACE THAT COVER HOW LONG LAW ENFORCEMENT CAN RETAIN RECORDS UNLESS THERE IS AN ONGOING INVESTIGATION. SO SO AGAIN, I WOULD DEFER TO THE STATUTES THAT ALREADY EXIST WHEN THERE'S AN ONGOING INVESTIGATION. AND QUITE FRANKLY, THERE ARE ACTUALLY STATE STATUTES THAT HAVE REQUIRED THAT REQUIRE THE ELIMINATION OF RECORDS UNDER A SHORTER PERIOD OF TIME IN SIX MONTHS IF THERE'S NO ACTIVE INVESTIGATION. SO I'M JUST SAYING, I THINK THAT THAT IS SOMETHING THAT I WOULD ALSO BE AGAINST, BECAUSE AGAIN, WE NEED TO DEFER TO WHAT THE STATE DOES ON THIS, AND WE'RE JUST GOING TO BE DOING IT FOR ONE INDUSTRY. THAT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO ME. 
          JP, YOU'RE UP. I WOULD LIKE TO ASK THE COUNTY ATTORNEY SPECIFICALLY IN THE CASE OF THE REGISTER OF PATIENTS THAT WOULD BE OBTAINED BY A CODE OFFICER PURSUANT TO AN ADMINISTRATIVE OR JUDICIAL WARRANT, WHEN CURRENTLY WOULD THEY BE REQUIRED TO DELETE OR REMOVE THAT RECORD FROM POSSESSION OF THE GOVERNMENT? NATALIE JOHNSON WITH THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE I THINK IT WOULD DEPEND ON WHAT THE WARRANT SAID. SO MOST OF THE TIMES, WARRANTS WILL ACTUALLY BE EXPLICIT ON WHAT RECORDS YOU'RE OBTAINING, WHY YOU'RE OBTAINING THEM, HOW LONG YOU'RE OBTAINING THEM. SO I THINK IT WOULD DEPEND ON THE WARRANT. BUT UNDER LAW, I THINK THAT WOULD JUST BE THE RECORDS RETENTION POLICY. FINISHED. AND I'LL GET BACK IN THE QUEUE IF I NEED TO. JENNIFER. SURE. SO IT WAS SAID THAT THERE'S ALREADY STIPULATIONS FOR HOW LONG A LAW. 
          LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER IS ALLOWED TO KEEP RECORDS. BUT I DO WANT TO GO BACK TO THIS DEFINITION OF AUTHORIZED CODE OFFICER. LAST TIME I CHECKED, NO ONE WITH THE PUBLIC HEALTH AND WELLNESS WAS A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER AND THEN ALSO PLANNING AND ZONING. 
          THERE'S NO ONE IN THAT DEPARTMENT. BUT ALSO WE DON'T HAVE A DEPARTMENT CALLED PLANNING AND ZONING. WE HAVE A COMMITTEE CALLED PLANNING AND ZONING, SO THAT SHOULD PROBABLY BE CLEANED UP TO SAY, THE DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING. BUT I'M NOT OFFERING THAT AMENDMENT. 
          BUT I WOULD LIKE TO ALSO ADD THAT I WOULD LIKE TO ADD SECURELY STORED TO ITEM C. WELL, THAT WOULD BE AN AMENDMENT TO YOUR AMENDMENT. AND I THINK JP WOULD TELL US LET'S PLAY THAT OUT. YEAH. WHAT TO ADD. SECURED LOCATION THAT WAS NOT IN YOUR AMENDMENT EARLIER. AND SO THE QUESTION NOW IS SHE COULD WITHDRAW. SHE COULD SHE COULD ACTUALLY DO CLARIFY HER. AND 
          [04:00:02]
THEN WE GET A SECOND. I'M FINE WITH THAT. BUT JUST CLARIFY. IT'S NOT A DIFFERENT PERSON TRYING TO SAY, OKAY, YOU'RE HOLD ON A SECOND HERE. I'M TRYING TO TO KEEP EVERYONE CLEAR THIS UP. HOLD ON. OKAY. SO LET ME WHERE'S WHERE DO YOU WANT THE WORD SECURED LOCATION. 
          THE REGISTER OF PATRONS MAY BE INSPECTED BY AN AUTHORIZED CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER PURSUANT TO AN ADMINISTRATIVE OR JUDICIAL WARRANT, AND SHALL BE IN A SECURED LOCATION AND SHALL BE STORED IN A SECURE LOCATION AND RELEASED OR DESTROYED WITHIN SIX MONTHS OF OBTAINMENT. SO, JUST SO WE'RE ALL CLEAR, YOU WANT PART FOUR OF A STRICKEN STILL CORRECT? YOU WANT PART C TO BE READ AS THE REGISTER OF THE PATRONS MAY BE INSPECTED BY THE AUTHORIZED CODE OFFICER PURSUANT TO ADMINISTRATIVE OR JUDICIAL WARRANT, AND STORED IN A SECURED LOCATION PERIOD. ALL RECORDS WILL BE DESTROYED OR DELETED SIX MONTHS AFTER BEING OBTAINED. SURE. OKAY. NEXT IN MY QUEUE, I BELIEVE, IS COUNCILMAN HUDSON. YEAH, I THINK I CAN ADD A LITTLE BIT OF CLARITY ON THE CODE OFFICER LANGUAGE. THERE IS A COMPANION ORDINANCE THAT WAS MEANT TO COME TO SAFETY COMMITTEE AT THE SAME TIME AS THIS ONE, BUT WE SIMPLY RAN OUT OF TIME TO BRING IT UP. I WOULD ASK COUNTY ATTORNEY IF SHE COULD DESCRIBE THAT COMPANION ORDINANCE THAT DEFINES CODE OFFICER CODE OFFICERS DEFINED IN THIS ORDINANCE, SIR. WELL, IT IT EXPANDS THE DEFINITION TO INCLUDE ABC CODE, CODE AND REGS. AND I'M GOING TO DEFER TO THE COUNTY ATTORNEY ON THIS. BUT IF IF THERE'S A DEFINITION IN THIS ORDINANCE, DEFINITION IN ANOTHER ORDINANCE WOULD NOT APPLY THE DEFINITION, THIS ORDINANCE WOULD APPLY. AM I CORRECT ON THAT MATTER? THAT IS CORRECT I THAT'S CORRECT. SO THE END RESULT IS IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT THE COMPANION ORDINANCE SAYS IS THE DEFINITION. WE'RE DEALING WITH THE DEFINITION IN HERE AS THE SOLE DEFINITION. AS IT RELATES TO THIS DOCUMENT. I'LL ADMIT TO BEING WRONG. I DID NOT PROVIDE CLARITY. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SO WHO'S NEXT IN MY QUEUE? JP HAND WENT UP FIRST I'D LIKE TO MOVE TO DIVIDE THE QUESTION BETWEEN THE TWO SECTIONS OF THE AMENDMENT. WHAT WHAT WHAT DO WE WANT TO DIVIDE? I WOULD LIKE TO CONSIDER THE TWO SECTIONS OF THE AMENDMENT SEPARATELY. OH, SO THE THE STRIKING SUBPART FOR AND THEN SEPARATING SUBPART C. 
          YES. IS THAT THAT'S MADE IN FORM OF A MOTION. RIGHT. YES. AND I HEAR A SECOND FROM SOMEBODY SECOND. OKAY. ON THIS ONE WE CAN GO FOR A VOICE VOTE. OKAY. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF SEPARATING THIS AMENDMENT, SAY I, I ALL THOSE OPPOSED. NO. I THINK AT THE END, THE CHAIR HAS AS A NOTE, I'LL ABIDE BY THE CHAIR'S DECISION. OKAY. SO WHO'S UP NEXT? I'M NOT SEEING ANYBODY WITH THEIR HAND UP OR OR OR CHIMING IN. SO AT THIS POINT WE. WHAT'S THAT. THAT'S WHAT I'M GETTING READY TO DO HERE. ON JENNIFER'S PRESENT AMENDMENT. LET'S OPEN THE ROLL. 
          COUNCIL MEMBER. PARISH. RIGHT. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. RENA WEBBER. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. 
          ONE SECOND. I DIDN'T GET THAT. WINKLER. NO. ONE SECOND, MR. PRESIDENT. YOU HAVE NINE YES VOTES AND 17 NO VOTES. THE AMENDMENT FAILS. OKAY, SO I'M GOING BACK TO MY QUEUE. AND IN MY QUEUE I HAVE COUNCILMAN REED IN THE TOP OF MY GENERAL QUEUE. I LOST THAT GREAT TRAIN OF THOUGHT THAT I HAD EARLIER. BUT IF SOMEBODY ELSE HAS A I'M NOT INVITING ANOTHER AMENDMENT, BUT IF SOMEBODY ELSE HAS SOMETHING TO OFFER, GO AHEAD. I'LL JUST YIELD MY TIME. COUNCILMAN LINENGER, YOU'RE NEXT IN MY QUEUE. YES, MR. PRESIDENT, I WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO THE LEGISLATION AS AMENDED. I THINK THAT IT'S REALLY UNFORTUNATE WHAT WE'VE ARRIVED AT TONIGHT. 
          WE ARE NOW SEVERAL HOURS INTO CONSIDERING THIS LEGISLATION. WE'VE HAD PROCEDURAL VOTES, WE'VE HAD DISCUSSION ON THE FLOOR OF NUMEROUS CLAUSES OF THIS ITEM. I THINK IT IS CLEAR 
          [04:05:03]
THAT THIS LEGISLATION WAS NOT READY TO BE BEFORE THIS BODY. I THINK IT WAS CLEAR THAT DEBATE SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN CUT OFF AT THE COMMITTEE LEVEL, AND PEOPLE SHOULD HAVE BEEN ALLOWED TO ASK THEIR QUESTIONS. SOME QUESTIONS, WHICH CAN ONLY BE ASKED AT THE COMMITTEE LEVEL, SUCH AS ASKING FOR A STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL IMPACT. I THINK IT'S UNFORTUNATE THAT DESPITE ALL OF THESE ISSUES WITH THE LEGISLATION, WE COULD NOT AGREE TO LET'S SEND IT BACK OR LET'S HOLD IT. LET'S WORK ON SOMETHING THAT WE CAN COME TOGETHER ON AND WE CAN MAKE THIS GREAT LEGISLATION AGAIN. THIS IS NOT IN THE GRAND SCHEME OF THE LEGISLATION, CONTROVERSIAL AT ALL. OKAY. A CURED VERSION OF THIS LEGISLATION WOULD HAVE PASSED THIS BODY 26 TO NOTHING. UNQUESTIONABLY. WE HAD SPECIFIC ISSUES WITH THIS LEGISLATION, AND THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS THAT THE SPONSOR OF THE LEGISLATION HAD THE VOTES, SPONSOR OF THE LEGISLATION, HAD THE VOTES TO MOVE IT TONIGHT, REGARDLESS OF CONCERNS. I DON'T THINK THAT'S A GOOD WAY FOR US TO OPERATE AS A BODY, PARTICULARLY AGAIN, ON A PIECE OF LEGISLATION THAT, WHEN ADDRESSED, IS NOT IDEOLOGICALLY DIVISIVE. IT'S NOT CONTROVERSIAL AT ALL. NO ONE IN THIS ROOM OR ON THIS SIDE OF THE BARRIER TO THE PUBLIC OR ON THE OTHER, IS IN FAVOR OF HUMAN TRAFFICKING. LITERALLY NO ONE IN THIS ROOM IS IN FAVOR OF HUMAN TRAFFICKING. WE COULD HAVE WORKED TOGETHER ON THIS. WE COULD HAVE PRODUCED A PIECE OF LEGISLATION THAT WE WOULD HAVE ALL STOOD BEHIND A PODIUM AND CHEERED ABOUT. WE ARE STILL NOT, AT THAT POINT, THIS LEGISLATION. I THINK IT'S REALLY UNFORTUNATE, AND I WANT TO APOLOGIZE TO THE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, PARTICULARLY THE PEOPLE WHO ARE GOING TO BE IMPACTED BY THIS ADMITTEDLY IMPERFECT PIECE OF LEGISLATION WHEN IT PASSES, WHICH IT WILL NO DOUBT PASS, I WON'T APOLOGIZE. THANK YOU. THANK NEXT TO MY Q IS COUNCILMAN MCCRANEY. THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. I WANT TO ASK THE COUNTY ATTORNEY TO IF SHE WOULD. 
          AND I APOLOGIZE IF THIS HAS BEEN DONE, BUT COULD YOU CLARIFY FOR ME THE TERM OR THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MASSAGE? ESTABLISHMENTS AND MASSAGE? THERAPISTS? YEAH. NATALIE JOHNSON WITH THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. SO THE MASSAGE THERAPIST IS JUST THE PERSON THAT HOLDS THE MASSAGE LICENSE. THE MASSAGE FACILITY IS ACTUALLY THE MASSAGE BUSINESS. SO THIS ORDINANCE REGULATES THE MASSAGE BUSINESS, BUT NOT THE ACTUAL PERSON. SO IN SECTION 115.196 WITH THE EXCEPTIONS OR IT SAYS THE SUBJECT. SUBCHAPTER DOES NOT APPLY TO THE FOLLOWING ESTABLISHMENTS OR CLASSES OF PERSONS IN C LICENSED. LET ME SEE LICENSED MASSAGE THERAPIST WHO ARE NOT OPERATING A MASSAGE FACILITY. COULD IT READ LICENSED MASSAGE THERAPISTS WHO ARE PROVIDING MASSAGE SERVICES IN ACCORDANCE TO THE. SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED MASSAGE ESTABLISHMENTS. SO ARE YOU ASKING THAT? BASICALLY IF A MASSAGE, IF THERE'S A MASSAGE THERAPIST RUNNING MASSAGE BUSINESSES, THOSE BUSINESSES AREN'T CONSIDERED MASSAGE FACILITIES UNDER THE ORDINANCE? YES. I MEAN, I THINK THAT THERE'S NO THERE'S NO LEGAL ISSUE WHY YOU COULDN'T DO THAT. BUT I THINK THERE WOULD LIKELY BE ENFORCEMENT ISSUES. I'M SORRY I DID NOT HEAR YOU BECAUSE I WAS DISTRACTED BY MY COLLEAGUES WHO ARE NOT PAYING ATTENTION TO THE MATTER AT HAND. THAT'S SO IMPORTANT. WE'VE GOT TO GET PAST THIS LEGISLATION. BUT WE CAN ONLY DO THAT IF WE ARE HEARING EACH OTHER AND WE'RE PAYING ATTENTION. THANK YOU. FROM DISTRICT SEVEN IS ASKING YOU ALL TO TO PLEASE KEEP YOUR VOICES DOWN. YES. SO I DON'T I DON'T THINK THERE'S A LEGAL ISSUE WITH ADDING THAT EXCLUSION. BUT IT THERE MAY BE AN ENFORCEMENT ISSUE. ENFORCING THE INTENT OF THE ORDINANCE, WHICH. YEAH. I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT YOU JUST SAID. DO YOU WANT TO CLARIFY IT FOR. YEAH. SO 
          [04:10:14]
THERE'S NOT A LEGAL ISSUE WITH ADDING ADDING THAT EXCLUSION. THERE'S NO LEGAL REASON WHY YOU COULDN'T DO IT, YOU KNOW, AND I DON'T KNOW THAT I'M, YOU KNOW, THE ONE TO SPEAK TO THIS, BUT I THINK IT WOULD CAUSE ENFORCEMENT ISSUES AND KIND OF GO AWAY FROM THE INTENT OF THE ORDINANCE. BECAUSE ESSENTIALLY, SORRY, ESSENTIALLY, THAT WOULD EXCLUDE PRETTY MUCH EVERY MASSAGE FACILITY FROM BEING REGULATED BY THE ORDINANCE, BECAUSE IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING, FROM JUST WHAT I'VE GAINED BEING IN THE TASK FORCE IS THAT EVEN ILLICIT MASSAGE FACILITIES WILL TYPICALLY HAVE LICENSED MASSAGE THERAPISTS, AT LEAST ONE ON STAFF OR ONE WHO OWNS THE FACILITY. OKAY. THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. ALL RIGHT, NEXT TO MY CUE I'VE GOT IN THIS ORDER, I'VE GOT COUNCILMAN RUBY, I'VE GOT COUNCILMAN REED, COUNCILMAN BENSON, AND THEN COUNCILMAN OWEN. COUNCILWOMAN RUBY, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR IN THE INTEREST OF. IT'S BEEN A VERY LONG NIGHT, AND I THINK A LOT OF US ARE HAVING TROUBLE UNDERSTANDING AND FOCUSING. I THINK WE'RE ALL TIRED. I'D LIKE TO CALL THE QUESTION, IS THERE A SECOND ON CALLING THE QUESTION? WELL, SHE'S BEEN CALLED ALRIGHT. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ALL THOSE OPPOSED, I, I THINK IN THE CALL THE CHAIR. I THINK THE NOTES HAVE IT. UNLESS SOMEONE WANTS TO ROLL CALL. THE ROLL CALL ON CALLING THE QUESTION. MADAM CLERK PLEASE. COUNCIL MEMBER. 
          PARISH. RIGHT. IS THIS FOR THE AMENDMENT OR THE THE THE ORIGINAL VOTE? IT'S CALLING THE QUESTION ON THE VOTE. OH, YES. COUNCIL MEMBER RENO WEBER ENTHUSIASTICALLY. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER WINKLER. YES. MISTER PRESIDENT, YOU HAVE 16 YES VOTES AND TEN NO VOTES. THE CALLING OF THE QUESTION FAILS. ALL RIGHT, SO I'M BACK TO MY CUE. TWO THIRDS, TWO THIRDS. 
          I'M CALLING THE QUESTION. SO WE WERE TWO VOTES SHY. ALRIGHT. SO NEXT IN MY QUEUE IS GOING TO BE COUNCILMAN REED, THEN COUNCILMAN BENSON AND COUNCILMAN OWEN. THANK YOU, MISTER CHAIR. I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT THAT COUNCILMAN HUDSON DID GIVE EVERYBODY AN OFF RAMP BY OFFERING THE TASK FORCE AS A MEANS TO SUBMIT QUESTIONS AND AMENDMENTS SO THAT WE COULD HAVE AVOIDED ALL OF THIS. AND TO COUNCILMAN LINEKER'S QUESTIONS OR ISSUES WITH THIS GOING ON AS LONG AS IT HAS, I WOULD I WOULD SUSPECT THAT THIS ISN'T THE FIRST TIME THAT THIS IS GOING TO HAPPEN IN YOUR COUNCIL CAREER. WE'VE HAD SOME DEBATES GOING BACK MY MY NINE YEARS UP UNTIL TWO, 3 A.M. SO THIS IS NOTHING. BUT ANYWAY, SO THE PEOPLE THAT GOT TO OFFER THEIR AMENDMENTS OFFERED THEIR AMENDMENTS, AND HOPEFULLY WE CAN TAKE A VOTE QUICKLY. THANK YOU. COUNCILMAN BENSON, YOUR NEXT IN MY QUEUE. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. I'LL TRY TO BE PRETTY QUICK, YOU KNOW, NOT TO, YOU KNOW, COUNCILMAN HUDSON, YOU KNOW, EVERY TIME WE COME INTO THE MEETING, THE CAUCUS TALKS ABOUT HOW MUCH TIME HE SPENT ON WORKING AND TALKING TO THE PEOPLE AND TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO MAKE THIS GOOD FOR THE PEOPLE WHO ARE IN BUSINESS. 
          YOU KNOW, I REMEMBER ONE TIME I SAT IN THE CHAIR UP THERE, AND THEY WANTED TO TALK ABOUT THE FOOD TRUCKS, AND THEY WERE GOING TO MAKE IT SO BAD. WE'RE GOING TO REALLY REGULATE THESE TRUCKS, BUT THESE PEOPLE ARE GOING TO GO OUT OF BUSINESS. BUT THAT'S OKAY. WE'RE GOING TO FIX IT. AND SO I'M ALWAYS WANTING TO LISTEN TO THE PEOPLE WHO ARE IN BUSINESS. AND SO BUT NOT TILL THE NIGHT I FOUND OUT THAT THAT THERE WAS AN ORDINANCE ALREADY THAT'S REALLY PRETTY STRONG. IT CAN REALLY GO AFTER EVERYBODY AND AND BUT COUNCILMAN HUDSON SAID THIS WILL BE BETTER FOR THE PEOPLE WHO ARE IN BUSINESS, AND WE CAN HELP THEM. HEY, TO ME, WE NEED TO ASK THE POLICE, WILL YOU, IF WE PASS THIS, WILL YOU ALL ENFORCE IT BECAUSE YOU HAVEN'T BEEN ENFORCING THE ONE THAT'S ALREADY IN? AND RIGHT NOW? I MEAN, IF KEVIN REMEMBERS PROBABLY 20 YEARS AGO, WE WORKED REALLY HARD ON A NOISE ORDINANCE. YOU KNOW, ALL THESE PEOPLE MAKING ALL THE NOISE AND BOOM BOXES AND BULL. YOU KNOW WHAT THE POLICE SAID THEY WEREN'T GOING TO ENFORCE IT. SO WE WASTED TIME. AND SO ALMOST WE SHOULD SAY, MAYOR, IF WE PASS THIS ORDINANCE, WOULD YOU ENFORCE IT, PLEASE? WOULD YOU ENFORCE IT? I MEAN, I DON'T LIKE ALL THAT CRAP. DO. ARE WE GOING TO WASTE ALL OF OUR TIME TRYING TO MAKE SOMETHING BETTER 
          [04:15:05]
FOR THE HUMANS IN OUR COMMUNITY? ARE WE GOING TO SAY, LET ME HAVE A LITTLE MORE TIME HERE? LET ME LET ME STAND UP IN FRONT HERE AND AND TELL EVERYBODY WHO I AM. THIS IS THE FIRST TIME I'VE TALKED, AND I KNOW IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE, BUT SOMETIMES I GET TIRED OF LISTENING TO PEOPLE GO ON AND ON. ARE YOU REALLY HERE TO HELP SOMEBODY? ARE YOU TRYING TO GRANDSTAND? I WON'T TELL YOU WHAT I THINK. SO SORRY, MISTER PRESIDENT. NO, NOTHING TO APOLOGIZE, STUART. THE REALITY WAS IT DID MAKE SENSE. SO IT WAS, YOU KNOW, IT WAS GOOD. IT MADE SENSE. SO. ALRIGHT. NEXT. WITHDRAW. I'VE GOT NO ONE LEFT IN MY QUEUE. NO ONE RAISING THEIR HANDS. ALRIGHT. WE HAVE THE AMENDED ORDINANCE BEFORE US. MADAM CLERK, PLEASE OPEN THE ROLL. COUNCIL MEMBER. PERISH. RIGHT. JUST LIKE THE AMENDED ORDINANCE, THE FINAL VOTE, MA'AM. OH, OKAY. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. RENA WEBER. NO. COUNCIL MEMBER. WINKLER. YES. COUNCIL. 
          MISTER PRESIDENT, YOU HAVE 21 YES VOTES AND FOUR NO VOTES. THE AMENDED ORDINANCE IS 
          [New Business]
ADOPTED. THE NEXT ITEM OF BUSINESS IS NEW BUSINESS. AS YOU LEAVE THE CHAMBERS, DO SO QUIETLY AS NEW BUSINESS IS BEING READ. IF YOU WANT TO MAKE A STATEMENT AFTER NEW BUSINESS, STICK AROUND AND LET ME KNOW. OKAY. MADAM CLERK, WILL YOU READ THE NEW BUSINESS ITEMS 48 THROUGH 65 INTO THE RECORD. THE FOLLOWING LEGISLATION WAS SENT TO APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE. 
          ITEM 48, AN ORDINANCE APPROPRIATING $6,500 FROM NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT FUNDS IN THE FOLLOWING MANNER $2,500 FROM DISTRICT 14 $1,500 FROM DISTRICT 13, 1000 EACH FROM DISTRICT 12 AND 21. $500 FROM DISTRICT 25 THROUGH THE OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET TO SOUTHWEST FAMILY MINISTRIES INCORPORATED. EXODUS FAMILY MINISTRIES FOOD PANTRY, STAFFING, UTILITIES, AND SUPPLEMENTAL FOOD FOR ITS FOOD PANTRY. ITEM 49 AN AUDIENCE APPROPRIATING $5,000 FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT FUND TO THE FOLLOWING $2,500 EACH FROM DISTRICT NINE AND 24 THROUGH THE OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET TO THE JUNIOR ACHIEVEMENT OF KENTUCKY, UNINCORPORATED FOR JUNIOR ACHIEVEMENT. CIRCLE OF MATERIALS. ITEM 15. AN ORDINANCE OF $8,600 FROM DISTRICT ONE NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT FUNDS TO THE OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET. TWO ALL STARS, TWO A-1 ALL STARS INCORPORATED FUND. PUMPKINS IN THE PARK HELD OCTOBER 18TH, 2025 AT PARKLAND PLAZA. ITEM 51 AN ORDINANCE APPROPRIATING $4,800 FROM NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT FUNDS IN THE FOLLOWING MANNER $4,800 FROM DISTRICT NINE THROUGH THE OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET TO THE LOUISVILLE FOLK SCHOOL INCORPORATED FOR THE FOLK MUSIC MUSICALS IN RESIDENCE PROGRAM. 
          THE FOLLOWING LEGISLATION WAS SIGNED TO THE BUDGET COMMITTEE. ITEM 52, AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 0910 2025 RELATING TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2025 2026 OPERATING BUDGET BY TRANSFERRING $50,000 FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT FUND DISTRICT NINE TO THE LOUISVILLE METRO COUNCIL. GENERAL OPERATIONS DISTRICT NINE, ITEM 53 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 335.005 OF THE LOUISVILLE METRO CODE ORDINANCE REGARDING TUITION ASSISTANCE. 
          ITEM 54, AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 084 2022 RELATING TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2022 2023. THE CAPITAL BUDGET AMENDMENT ORDINANCE NUMBER 080, SERIES 2023 RELATING TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2023 2024. CAPITAL BUDGET AMENDMENT ORDINANCE NUMBER 181, SERIES 2021 2022 RELATING TO THE FISCAL YEAR, OPERATING BUDGET TRANSFERS BETWEEN VARIOUS AGENCIES OF THE FISCAL YEAR 2021 2022. AMENDING ORDINANCE 101, SERIES 2024 RELATING TO FISCAL YEAR 2024 2025. CAPITAL BUDGET AMENDMENT ORDINANCE 091 SERIES 2025 RELATING TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2025 2026. OPERATING BUDGET AMENDING ORDINANCE 092 SERIES 2025 RELATING TO FISCAL YEAR 2025 2026. CAPITAL BUDGET AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING YEAR END OPERATING BUDGET TRANSFERS BETWEEN VARIOUS AGENCIES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2022 2024 AND TO PROVIDE VARIOUS TRANSFERS AND DETAILED HEREIN. THE FOLLOWING LEGISLATION WAS SENT TO EQUITY, COMMUNITY AFFAIRS, HOUSING, HEALTH AND EDUCATION COMMITTEE, ITEM 55 RESOLUTION ORDER. MR. ALLEN STEINBERG BY DEDICATING THE CORNER OF PETERSON AVENUE AND GRINSTEAD DRIVE, ITS HISTORIC BRICK HILL, IN HIS HONOR. ITEM 56 THE RESOLUTION. HONOR NANCY CRAFT, NANCY CRAFT FLORES BY NAMING THE ALLEY WAY BEHIND NANCY KRESS FLORES AS NANCY CRAFT ALLEY, AND IN THE COMPANY'S HONOR, ITEM 57 AND 
          [04:20:01]
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO $700,000 OF FUNDING FROM THE FOUNDATION OF THE HEALTHY KENTUCKY THROUGH THE BRIDGING THE GAP IMMUNIZATIONS AND PREVENTION SERVICES GRANT PROGRAM, TO BE ADMINISTERED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND WELLNESS. ITEM 58 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO ACCEPT $65,623.57 OF FUNDING FROM THE KENTUCKY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH THROUGH THE PUBLIC HEALTH CRISIS RESPONSE COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT GRANT PROGRAM, TO BE ADMINISTERED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND WELLNESS. 
          THE FOLLOWING LEGISLATION WAS ASSIGNED TO THE GOVERNMENT OVERSIGHT, AUDIT AND APPOINTMENTS COMMITTEE. ITEM 59 THE ORDERS OF THE LOUISVILLE JEFFERSON COUNTY METRO COUNCIL TO APPROVE THE REDUCTION OF THE BOUNDARIES BY THE CITY OF OLD BROWNSBORO PLACE OF A TRACT OF LAND TOTALING APPROXIMATELY 5.555 ACRES, LOCATED AT 7302 BROWNSBORO ROAD, RETURNING SAID TRACT TO THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF THE FORMER JEFFERSON COUNTY. THE FOLLOWING LEGISLATION WAS ASSIGNED TO THE LABOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE. ITEM SIX. THE RESOLUTION APPROVING THE GRANTING THE LOCAL CITIZENS TO THE FISCAL CARE COORDINATION CONSULTANTS, LLC, AND THE SUBSEQUENT SUBSEQUENT ASSIGNMENTS OF APPROVED AFFILIATES THEREOF. PURSUANT TO CRS. CHAPTER 154. CHAPTER 32. ITEM 61. THE RESOLUTION PURSUANT TO THE CAPTAIN OPERATING BUDGET ORDINANCE APPROVING APPROPRIATION TO THE FUNDING OF NONCOMPETITIVE, NEGOTIATED SOLE SOURCE CONTRACT FOR LOUISVILLE METRO ANIMAL SERVICES TO PAY FOR SPAY AND NEUTER SURGERIES. ALLEY CATS INCORPORATED $90,000. ITEM 62 RESOLUTION PURSUANT TO CAPITAL OPERATING BUDGET ORDINANCE APPROVING AN APPROPRIATION OF THE FUND OF THE FOLLOWING NONCOMPETITIVE NON-NEGOTIATED SOLE SOURCE CONTRACT FOR LOUISVILLE METRO ANIMAL SERVICES TO PAY FOR BLOODWORK ANALYSIS DEVICE. THE FOLLOWING LEGISLATION WAS SENT TO THE PARKS AND SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE. ITEM 63 A RESOLUTION URGING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE URBAN FOREST MASTER PLAN. STRATEGIC ACTIONS TO ENSURE LOUISVILLE-JEFFERSON COUNTY METRO GOVERNMENT TREE CANOPY IS PROTECTED AND SUSTAINABLE. THE FOLLOWING LEGISLATION WAS SENT TO PLANNING AND ZONING COMMITTEE. AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE ZONING PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 9115 TO 9119 PRESTON HIGHWAY, CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 1.0 ACRES AND BEING A LOUISVILLE METRO CASE NUMBER 25, ZONE 0070. 
          THE FOLLOWING LEGISLATION WAS ASSIGNED TO THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE. ITEM 65 ORDINANCE ENACTING A NEW CHAPTER TO TITLE 11 OF THE LOUISVILLE METRO CODE OF ORDINANCE RELATING TO IN-PERSON SECURITY AT LATE NIGHT BUSINESS WRITING FOR. ALRIGHT, HOLD ON A SECOND. DOES 
          [Announcements]
ANYONE MAKING ANNOUNCEMENTS? COUNCILWOMAN MCCRANEY, YOU'VE GOT THE FLOOR, MADAM. THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. I WOULD LIKE TO REPORT OUT TO THE COMMUNITY THAT WREATHS ACROSS AMERICA THAT IS SUPPORTED ON A NATIONAL LEVEL IS TAKING PLACE. IT HAS KICKED OFF ITS FUNDRAISING EVENT AND DECEMBER THE 1ST IS THE LAST DAY TO PURCHASE WREATHS FOR THE FAMILIES OF THE THE THE VETERANS THAT WILL GET THE WREATHS PUT ON THEIR GRAVESITE AT ZACHARY TAYLOR NATIONAL CEMETERY. AGAIN, WREATHS ACROSS AMERICA IS A NATIONAL MOVEMENT AND YOU CAN PURCHASE SEVEN FOR ONE WREATH FOR $17. SO I'M ASKING THE COMMUNITY. I'M ASKING MY COLLEAGUES. I'M ASKING ANYONE WHO HAS A HEART FOR OUR VETERANS AND WANT TO THANK THEM FOR THEIR SERVICE. TO PLEASE PURCHASE A WREATH OR WREATHS AT $17 EACH. THE DEADLINE TO DO SO IS ON DECEMBER THE 1ST. YOU CAN CALL THE BROWNSBORO HARDWARE AND PAINT STORE TO GET ALL THE DETAILS ON HOW TO PURCHASE THE WREATHS OR CHECK WITH WREATHS ACROSS AMERICA.ORG. THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH. I HOPE THAT WE CAN PLACE A WREATH ON EVERY GRAVE AT ZACHARY TAYLOR CEMETERY ON DECEMBER THE 13TH, BUT DECEMBER THE 1ST IS THE DEADLINE TO PURCHASE THE WREATHS. THANK YOU. ARE YOU DONE, MADAM? OKAY. THIS CONCLUDES THE MEETING. OUR NEXT MEETING IS SCHEDULED FOR THURSDAY, DECEMBER 4TH, 2025 AT 6 P.M. WITH NO FURTHER BUSINESS. 
          WE STAND ADJOURNED.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.