Dec 09, 2025 Planning and Zoning Committee

[Call to Order]

[00:27:43]

ABOUT 30S.

[00:28:18]

[00:28:21]

[Roll Call]

[00:28:29]

[00:28:34]

[00:28:41]

[1. ID 25-0709     BINGHAM FELLOWS 2025 – Clark Welch, Greater Louisville Inc.]

CLARK, CAN YOU INTRODUCE YOURSELF JUST FOR. MAYBE YOU DID, AND I MISSED IT, BUT YES.

[00:30:04]

WE'RE REALLY LOOKING AT THIS AS A AS A CONVERSATION STARTER. SO PLEASE THINK OF THIS AS AS AN OPEN DIALOG IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ALONG THE WAY. SO I DID WANT TO JUST KIND OF START BY TALKING A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE ECONOMIC CHALLENGE. SO ONE OF THE BENEFITS, AND I DON'T THINK NEITHER ROB NOR I HAD THE SITUATIONAL AWARENESS BEFORE BINGHAM FELLOWS, BUT WE HEARD FROM A NUMBER OF OF LOCAL AND REGIONAL AND EVEN STATE EXPERTS ON THE TOPIC OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING, ATTAINABLE HOUSING. AND SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT KIND OF THE LANDSCAPE TODAY, THERE ARE ABOUT 1 IN 5 PROPOSED ATTAINABLE HOUSING UNITS ACTUALLY BEING BUILT. AND THERE'S A THERE ARE A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT REASONS FOR THAT.

YOU CAN LOOK AT THE OVERALL DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY. THEY MAY WANT TO BUILD THE RIGHT NUMBER OF HOUSES IN THIS PARTICULAR DEMOGRAPHIC ACROSS THE CITY, BUT CONSTRUCTION COSTS ARE RISING, LAND IS EXPENSIVE. TRADITIONAL LENDERS OFTEN SEE WORKFORCE HOUSING AS RISKIER INVESTMENT, AND WHERE THE LOUISVILLE AFFORDABLE HOUSING TRUST FUND, OR LA, HAS STEPPED IN IT TYPICALLY IN YEARS PAST, ONLY HAS THE RESOURCES TO FUND THAT 1 IN 5 ATTAINABLE HOUSING UNITS IN ANY GIVEN YEAR, DEPENDING ON THE FUNDING LEVELS. AND SO WHAT THAT WHAT THAT CREATES OVER TIME, NO SURPRISE IS SORT OF A BOTTLENECK OR A PENT UP DEMAND FOR THIS TYPE OF PRODUCT ACROSS THE REGIONAL ECONOMY. IN TERMS OF SETTING THE CONTEXT RELATED TO WORKFORCE HOUSING, ONE THING THAT REALLY STUCK OUT TO US WAS THE FACT THAT NEARLY HALF OF RENTER HOUSEHOLDS IN LOUISVILLE ARE COST BURDENED, MEANING THAT THEY SPEND MORE THAN 30% OF THEIR PRETAX INCOME ON HOUSING. AND SO WE WORKED. CURTIS STOFFER WITH THE KENTUCKY HOUSING CORPORATION WAS A PART OF OUR GROUP, AND THEY HAD RECENTLY DONE A REPORT THAT FOUND THAT THERE WERE OVER 40,000 HOUSING UNITS THAT WERE STILL IN NEED OF BEING BUILT ACROSS JEFFERSON COUNTY. AND SO THAT REALLY STUCK WITH US AND OUR GROUP AS AS THE MONTHS KIND OF TICKED AWAY FROM WHEN WE KICKED OFF IN JANUARY TO TODAY, LOOKING AT WHAT ARE WHAT ARE SOME TOOLS OR WHAT ARE SOME THINGS THAT OUR GROUP CAN COME UP WITH TO HELP SOLVE FOR THIS, THIS GAP IN THE MARKET. AND IT AFFECTS A LOT OF OUR ESSENTIAL WORKER, FELLOW CITIZENS LIKE, YOU KNOW, TEACHERS, NURSES, MANUFACTURING WORKERS. WHEN YOU LOOK AT THIS KIND OF 51 TO 110% OF AMI, THAT'S A HUGE PORTION OF THE POPULATION. AND SO WE WERE TRYING TO THINK OF WHAT ARE WAYS THAT WE CAN MEANINGFULLY IMPACT THAT WORK, WHILE ALSO COMPLEMENTING AND BUILDING UPON A LOT OF THE WORK THAT'S ALREADY BEEN DONE. SO WE CAME UP WITH A TOOL THAT I WILL TURN IT OVER TO ROB TO INTRODUCE. BUT THE NAME OF THE THE FUND THAT WE ARE PROPOSING IS CALLED LOUISVILLE HOME CAPITAL. AND I THINK I'LL LET HIM GIVE SPECIFICS, BUT THE INTENT IS TO TRY TO BUILD UPON A LOT OF THE CONVERSATIONS WE'VE HAD. MANY METRO COUNCIL MEMBERS WERE NICE ENOUGH TO MEET WITH US AND DISCUSS THIS IDEA. WE'VE HAD MEETINGS WITH THE PRIVATE SECTOR, A VARIETY OF OTHER COMMUNITY STAKEHOLDERS, AND WE FEEL LIKE WE'RE IN A IN A GOOD SPOT. WE'VE DONE SOME GOOD DUE DILIGENCE TO BE ABLE TO HOPEFULLY TAKE THIS TO THE NEXT LEVEL. SO, ROB, I'LL TURN IT OVER TO YOU. THANKS, CLARK, AND THANKS, COUNCIL FOR SPENDING SOME TIME WITH US TODAY. LOUISVILLE HOME CAPITAL IS THE FIRST OF ITS KIND

[00:35:02]

SO WE ARE LITERALLY TALKING ABOUT THE PEOPLE THAT MAKE LOUISVILLE WORK WHO STRUGGLE TO BE ABLE TO AFFORD A PLACE TO CALL HOME. I THINK IF THERE'S ONE THING TO LEAVE WITH YOU GUYS, IT'S THAT HOUSING, FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE, IS ALSO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. AND SO THOSE JOBS, HOUSING IS WHERE JOBS GO TO SLEEP AT NIGHT. THE FUND ITSELF, OUR GOAL IS TO RAISE $10 MILLION A YEAR FOR A TOTAL OF $50 MILLION. IMAGINE THE IMPACT THAT THAT COULD HAVE.

AND AS A PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP, THE GOAL IS TO SET SET IT UP SO THAT THE PRIVATE FUNDS ACTUALLY NOT ONLY FILL GAPS IN INVESTMENT PROJECTS, BUT ENCOURAGE METRO COUNCIL TO CONTINUE THE IMPORTANT WORK OF FUNDING THE TRUST FUND. LOUISVILLE HOME CAPITAL, AS A PRIVATE IMPACT INVESTMENT FUND, WILL MATCH ALL THE FUNDS ABOVE $10 MILLION THAT ARE ALLOCATED TO THE LOUISVILLE AFFORDABLE HOUSING TRUST FUND. SO IF THERE'S 15 ALLOCATED, 5 MILLION OF THE 10 MILLION IS RELEASED. IF 20 ARE ALLOCATED, 10 MILLION ARE RELEASED. CREATING A PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP THAT HAS ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRUE PARTNERSHIP. IF METRO FALLS BELOW 10 MILLION, LOUISVILLE HOME CAPITAL WILL PAUSE ITS INVESTMENT FOR THE YEAR. BUT WE NEED WE NEED LEADERS. WE NEED PEOPLE TO INVEST IN THIS FUND. SMART LEADERS, STRATEGIC LEADERS, LEADERS THAT LOVE OUR CITY, IMPACT. INVESTMENT FUNDS LIKE THIS EXIST IN INDIANAPOLIS AND CINCINNATI. IN NASHVILLE, THE MODEL IS PROVEN. IT UNLOCKS STALLED PROJECTS. IT ACCELERATES DEVELOPMENT AND STRENGTHENS PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS. THE INVESTMENT PART OF THIS FUND IS DESIGNED BY FINANCE PROFESSIONALS TO PROVIDE A RETURN OF INVESTMENT DOLLARS, BUT THE RETURN ON INVESTMENTS IS REALLY THE IMPACT PART OF THIS FUND, BECAUSE THAT $50 MILLION ACTUALLY HAS THE POTENTIAL TO YIELD 500 MILLION IN LEVERAGED INVESTMENT. IMAGINE THE IMPACT IN OUR COMMUNITY IF WE COULD ACTIVATE PROJECTS TO HELP MORE TEACHERS, NURSES, EMERGENCY RESPONDERS HAVE ACCESS TO THE POWER OF HOME. THE TWO WAYS THAT THIS FUND WILL MAKE A CHANGE. ONE IS THE GAP FINANCING PIECE, AND THE OTHER ONE IS TO MAKE A STATEMENT THAT WE WANT MORE WORKFORCE HOUSING AND AND TO ENCOURAGE METRO GOVERNMENT TO CONTINUE TO SUPPORT THE TRUST FUND. LOUISVILLE HOME CAPITAL IS AN ECONOMIC SOLUTION TO INCREASE THE SUPPLY OF WORKFORCE HOUSING. BUT BEHIND EVERY STALLED PROJECT OR EVERYONE THAT'S SUCCESSFUL IS A REAL FAMILY, A REAL WORKER TRYING TO MAKE ENDS MEET. AND WE THINK HOME CAPITAL IS A LINCHPIN TO IMPROVING WORKFORCE HOUSING. WE NEED CHAMPIONS, BUSINESS LEADERS, INVESTORS, COMMUNITY PARTNERS. AND BY DEFINITION, LOUISVILLE HOME CAPITAL IS A PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP. SO METRO COUNCIL IS A KEY COMMUNITY PARTNER NEEDED TO MAKE THIS PARTNERSHIP WORK. TEDDY ROOSEVELT SAID, DO WHAT YOU CAN WITH WHAT YOU HAVE, WHERE YOU ARE. WELL, HERE WE ARE IN OUR BEAUTIFUL CITY OF LOUISVILLE THAT WE ALL LOVE WITH THE OPPORTUNITY, THE RESOURCES AND THE RESPONSIBILITY TO MAKE

[00:40:05]

[00:45:06]

YEAH. REINVESTMENT ACT, IF YOU DON'T REMEMBER WHAT THE ACRONYM STANDS FOR. YES. ARE YOU LOOKING FOR LIKE WHAT IT IS OR THE AT WHAT THE ACRONYM STANDS FOR, WHY A BANK WOULD WANT TO INVEST MONEY TO SATISFY TO SATISFY ITS CRA REQUIREMENT. KIND OF. YEAH. AND I'M, I DON'T I DON'T KNOW THAT I KNOW THE SPECIFICS ON THAT, BUT YEAH. SO COUNCILMAN BRATCHER, TO YOUR QUESTION, A BANK WOULD NOT WANT TO INVEST MARKET RATE CAPITAL IN THIS FUND. THEY WOULD WANT TO INVEST BECAUSE WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO RETURN MORE THAN TWO, 3%. HOPEFULLY WE'D BE ABLE TO TAKE CARE OF THE TIME VALUE OF MONEY. BUT THE REALITY OF A LOWER. SO COST OF CAPITAL RIGHT NOW, IF I HAD TO GO BORROW CAPITAL ON THE OPEN MARKET FOR A LAND DEVELOPMENT PROJECT, I'D BE LUCKY TO GET SOMETHING MAYBE 7%. BECAUSE IT'S SHORT TERM CAPITAL. I'D BE LOOKING TO RETURN IT IN THREE YEARS. SO TO BE ABLE TO GET IT AT HALF THAT RATE, OR 3 OR 4%, I'D BE THRILLED. I CAN'T DO THAT EASILY NOW. AND THAT'S THE STRATEGY OF THIS FUND. BUT CRA ESSENTIALLY SAYS TO BANKS, HEY, YOU HAD A IT'S A FEDERAL RULE THAT SAYS IF YOU WANT TO EXPAND YOUR WORK, IF YOU WANT TO MERGE, IF YOU WANT TO GROW, IF YOU WANT TO DO MORE, THEN YOU HAVE TO MAKE SURE YOU ARE INVESTING IN ALL PARTS OF THE COMMUNITY WHERE YOU'RE ALSO TAKING MONEY OUT OF SO THAT ALL BANKS, AT LEAST RIGHT NOW, DO SOME FORM OF CRA INVESTMENT. SO THIS WOULD BE A AN INVESTMENT IN WHICH THEY WOULDN'T MAKE AS MUCH MONEY, BUT THEY ARE INDEED INVESTING IN THEIR COMMUNITY. I'LL JUST SAY THAT SOME OF THE CONVERSATIONS I'VE HAD WITH COMPANIES THAT ARE MANAGING LITERALLY HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN PRIVATE CAPITAL IS A CONVERSATION ABOUT, ARE YOU PARKING IT IN INDEX FUNDS? AND MOST OF THEM ARE THERE, YOU KNOW, IT'S GOOD ENOUGH FOR WARREN BUFFETT. IT'S GOOD ENOUGH FOR LARGE CORPORATIONS.

WELL, WHY NOT TAKE 5% OF IT AND PARK IT IN LOUISVILLE INSTEAD OF SAYING, I'M GOING TO INVEST IN A LITTLE PIECES OF EVERYTHING ALL OVER THE UNITED STATES, I WANT TO INVEST IN MY HOMETOWN. I WANT TO TAKE SOME SMALL PIECE, SOME PORTION OF THE TITHE AND LEAVE IT PARKED HERE FOR FIVE YEARS BECAUSE I THINK IT CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE. SO THAT'S THE IDEA OF SOME OF THOSE PIECES AT THE TOP IS TO SAY, FOR THOSE PEOPLE THAT HAVE THAT CAPACITY TO PARK A PORTION OF THEIR FUNDS TO ENCOURAGE THE DEVELOPMENT OF BOTH WORKFORCE HOUSING AND OF LOUISVILLE, BECAUSE MIN CLARK WILL TELL YOU MORE THAN ME THAT WHEN COMPANIES LOOK TO COME TO LOUISVILLE, THEY WANT TO KNOW ABOUT HOUSING AND CHILD CARE. SURE. YEAH. MAKES SENSE. JUST A SILLY QUESTION. JUST SOMETIMES I TRY TO TEST THE ENVELOPE. BUT IF SOME GUY IN HERE HYPOTHETICALLY JUST TOOK OFF WITH THE MONEY AND WENT TO COSTA RICA, WHO WOULD BE ON TAP FOR PAYING THE BANKS BACK AND THE INVESTORS BACK, WOULD IT BE THE METRO COUNCIL, OR IS THAT A NO? BECAUSE IT'S IF YOU LOOK AT THIS DIAGRAM, IT'S THE THE FUNDS ARE SEGREGATED. SO INSTEAD OF WHERE IT'S A SUBSCRIPTION AGREEMENT. SO IF WE FIND A COMPANY OR A PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL WHO WANTS TO INVEST IN THIS FUND, THEY'RE BUYING SUBSCRIPTIONS INTO LOUISVILLE HOME CAPITAL FOR WHATEVER THAT PARTICULAR SUBSCRIPTION MAY BE. LET'S JUST SAY IT'S $1 MILLION.

SO THAT MONEY IS LIVING IN A FUND THAT IS SEPARATE FROM WHATEVER PUBLIC INVESTMENT IS MADE. SO THERE'S NO CO-MINGLING OF FUNDS. AND THE LAST QUESTION, THANK YOU FOR YOUR INDULGENCE, MR. OWEN. IT SAYS ON THE FIRST PAGE OR SECOND PAGE IT SAYS OR THE FIFTH PAGE IT SAYS

[00:50:06]

IT'S ALWAYS HELPFUL FOR US TO SEE HOW OTHER CITIES ARE DOING. AND, YOU KNOW, FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, MY BIGGEST CONCERN, ALTHOUGH I THINK THIS IS SOMETHING THAT'S DESPERATELY NEEDED IN THE CITY, BADLY NEEDED. YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY MY BIGGEST CONCERN IS WHAT'S WHAT'S METRO LOUISVILLE'S EXPOSURE GOING TO BE? HOW MUCH HOW MUCH PUBLIC MONEY ARE WE TALKING? WOULD THIS BE SOMETHING THAT'S ONGOING IF THE PRIVATE EQUITY DOESN'T COME IN AS PLANNED, AS METRO LOUISVILLE GOING TO BE ON THE HOOK FOR A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF MONEY TO KEEP THE FUND GOING, BECAUSE AS WE KNOW, YOU KNOW, PUBLIC MONEY IS, TO ME AT LEAST, IT'S SACRED.

AND WE DON'T KNOW HOW THINGS ARE GOING TO BE FROM FROM YEAR TO YEAR. YOU KNOW, THE LAST FEW YEARS HAVE BEEN PRETTY GOOD, BUT I'VE ALSO BEEN PART OF BUDGETS THAT HAVE BEEN VERY TIGHT. SO MY CONCERN WOULD BE WHAT IS OUR EXPOSURE GOING TO BE? WHAT'S THE EXPECTED LEVEL TO METRO LOUISVILLE THREE YEARS DOWN THE ROAD, FOUR YEARS DOWN THE ROAD. IS IT CAPPED? IS IS IT A PERCENTAGE. CAN YOU CAN YOU TALK TO THAT. YEAH. SO ROB MENTIONED THIS A LITTLE BIT IN LET ME SEE IF I CAN I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S STILL ON THE SLIDES BUT. THE WAY THAT WE INTENTIONALLY STRUCTURED IT AS METRO COUNCIL TO SOME LEVEL OVER THE LAST TEN YEARS HAS MADE AN INVESTMENT WITH PUBLIC DOLLARS INTO AND THOSE INVESTMENTS AND CONVERSATIONS WILL EVOLVE IN COMING YEARS, I SUSPECT AS WELL. WE LOOKED AT THE PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP AS A STRUCTURE TO HELP ENSURE THAT INVESTMENTS IN ATTAINABLE HOUSING ARE CONTINUED GOING FORWARD. SO THE CONCEPT AS WE'VE PROPOSED IT NOW IS IF METRO COUNCIL ALLOCATES $10 MILLION TO LA IN ANY GIVEN BUDGET YEAR. AT THAT POINT, THE PRIVATE FUND LOUISVILLE HOME CAPITAL WITH PRIVATE DOLLARS WOULD MATCH DOLLAR FOR DOLLAR FOR EVERY DOLLAR ABOVE 10 MILLION. THAT METRO COUNCIL ALLOCATES. SO THAT IF METRO COUNCIL ALLOCATES $15 MILLION NEXT YEAR, THE DELTA BETWEEN 10 MILLION AND 15 IS FIVE. SO LOUISVILLE HOME CAPITAL WOULD COME WITH $5 OR $5 MILLION OF PRIVATE CAPITAL WITH A CAP OF. IF WE ARE SUCCESSFUL IN REACHING OUR FUNDRAISING GOAL OF 10 MILLION A YEAR, IT WOULD BE CAPPED AT THAT 10 MILLION MARK. SO AGAIN, THE THE FUNDS ARE DISTINCT, SEPARATE BUCKETS OF MONEY. THE PUBLIC DOLLARS ARE NOT BEING COMMINGLED WITH THE PRIVATE DOLLARS, BUT IT'S AN INCENTIVE FOR METRO COUNCIL TO MAKE THE INVESTMENT ABOVE 10 MILLION BECAUSE IT'S BEING LEVERAGED DOLLAR FOR DOLLAR WITH PRIVATE DOLLARS. BUT TO AND I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. BUT TO BE CLEAR, NONE OF THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING TRUST MONEY IS GOING TO BE USED FOR THIS. IS THAT CORRECT? USED FOR THE

[00:55:05]

SO DO WE KNOW HOW MUCH OF THAT THOSE COST BURDEN HOUSEHOLDS DO SO BY CHOICE VERSUS DO SO BY CIRCUMSTANCES OUTSIDE OF THEIR CONTROL? YEAH IT'S A GOOD QUESTION. AND AND THE ANSWER IS SUBJECTIVE. I DON'T HAVE DATA THAT SHOWS I DON'T KNOW THAT I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT DATA EXISTS. IT'S A VALID POINT. YEAH. AND I MEAN, I'LL POINT OUT, COUNCILMAN ARTHUR, WHEN HE WAS HERE, HE ACTUALLY POINTED OUT MY DISTRICT IS SOMETHING LIKE THIRD IN THE CITY IN COST BURDEN STATUS. BUT MOST OF THOSE FOLKS ARE MOVING INTO BRAND NEW HOMES. I MEAN, SO, YOU KNOW, AND I CAN TELL YOU, EVEN WITHIN HOME OWNERSHIP, THIS IS TRUE. I KNOW MANY PEOPLE WHO, LET'S JUST SAY, BUY WELL BEYOND THEIR MEANS. THEY DID THAT BY CHOICE. AND, YOU KNOW, IF THEY'RE SORT OF QUOTE, QUOTE UNQUOTE, HOUSE POOR BECAUSE THEY DECIDED TO BUY A $600,000 HOME INSTEAD OF A $400,000 HOME WHEN THERE WERE PLENTY OF $400,000 HOMES IN THE MARKET. THAT'S NOT THE MARKET'S PROBLEM. THAT'S THEIR THAT'S A PERSONAL CHOICE. I DON'T I DON'T HAVE THE I'M BRAINSTORMING HERE ON LIVE TIME WITH YOU, BUT I DON'T HAVE THE DATA TO BACK THIS UP. BUT I THINK MAYBE A MORE OBJECTIVE DATA POINT TO THINK ABOUT IS THE PROPORTION OF HOUSING UNITS RELATIVE TO THE POPULATION, BECAUSE THAT WOULD, YEAH, CREATE A CORRELATION BETWEEN SUPPLY AND DEMAND. I DON'T KNOW THAT IT'S I'M NOT AWARE OF ANY DATA THAT EXISTS TO TALK ABOUT YOUR YOUR FIRST QUESTION, COUNCILMAN. YEAH, IT'S A VALID CONCERN. AND BECAUSE, FOR EXAMPLE, I MEAN, I JUST PULLED UP AN ARTICLE AND MAYOR GREENBERG RIGHTFULLY TOUTED THIS. LOUISVILLE IS RANKED NINTH OUT OF THE TOP 100 CITIES IN THE UNITED STATES AS OF BEING THE MOST AFFORDABLE TO LIVE IN YOUR AVERAGE. AND I'LL QUOTE FROM THE ARTICLE, QUOTE, LOUISVILLE'S RANKED HOME BUYERS CAN EXPECT TO PAY ABOUT $241,000 FOR HOME IN THE CITY. AND IT'S IT HAS AS A PERCENTAGE OF MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME.

MOST PEOPLE ARE AT 17.1% OF THEIR HOUSEHOLD INCOME GOING TO HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES. IT'S ONE OF THE LOWEST PERCENTAGES IN THE COUNTRY. SO WITH A TARGET YOU WANT TO STAY BELOW 30%, I THINK IS THE TARGET. YOU KNOW, AS A GENERAL STATEMENT, WE'RE DOING PRETTY GOOD. SO SPECIFICALLY TO THIS FUND. WHY IS THERE THIS NEED FOR AN EXTRA COULD THAT THIS SLIDE IS UP THIS MATCHING EXPECTATION ON TAXPAYERS. RIGHT. IN OTHER WORDS I THINK THIS IS AN INTERESTING IDEA. I THINK IT'D BE GREAT TO AT LEAST TRY THIS OUT TO SOME DEGREE. BUT TO GET, FOR EXAMPLE, TO EVEN 5 MILLION RELEASED, YOU NEED THREE X THE COMMITMENT FROM TAXPAYERS IN ORDER TO GET TO THAT, TO GET TO THE DOLLAR AMOUNTS THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT ON SLIDE SIX, WHICH IS 10 MILLION A YEAR, YOU WOULD NEED $20 MILLION OF TAXPAYER FUNDS DEDICATED TO THIS. SO WHY IS THERE SUCH A WHY IS THERE SUCH AN EXPECTATION ON TAXPAYERS TO PUT UP FOR THIS? IF THIS IS A GOOD IDEA AND I'M NOT DISPUTING IT IS, YOU KNOW, WHY DOES IT MATTER HOW MUCH MONEY WE'RE PUTTING IN AND AND WHY THIS? WHO CAME UP WITH THE $10 MILLION THRESHOLD? SO WE I'LL LET ME ANSWER THE QUESTIONS IN TWO PARTS. WE LOOKED AT HISTORICAL DATA OVER THE LAST HANDFUL OF YEARS, FIVE, TEN YEARS OF TYPICALLY WHAT METRO COUNCIL HAS BEEN INVESTING ON AN ANNUAL BASIS INTO LA. AND LIKE ANY PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP, WE THOUGHT, WELL, ON AVERAGE IT'S SOMEWHERE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF 10 MILLION. AND THAT'S NOT AN EXACT SCIENCE.

THAT WAS JUST A ROUNDING FUNCTION. SO WE THOUGHT IF HISTORICALLY THAT'S BEEN THE

[01:00:03]

RIGHT. DEPENDING ON HOW MANY CHILDREN. BUT WHAT PERCENTAGE OF AMI ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT TARGETING WITH THE FUND. SO THE PERCENT OF AMI IS 51 TO 110% OF AMI. BUT WE ARE NOT TARGETING A SPECIFIC HOUSING TYPE IF IT'S FOR SALE, IF IT'S FOR RENT, WE ARE NOT PUTTING RESTRICTIONS ON AROUND THAT CURRENTLY. OKAY. THE REASON I HAVE A CONCERN IS, AGAIN, I'LL COMPLIMENT MY FORMER COLLEAGUE, COUNCILMAN ARTHUR POINTED OUT ACCURATELY THAT THE HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT WOULD INDICATE THAT HOUSES THAT ARE HOME INVENTORY. I MEAN, AT 80% OF AMI. IS THAT A SURPLUS? SO WE YOU HAVE TO GET TO 50% OF AMI TO START TO SEE ANY SIGNIFICANT DEFICIT.

THAT DEFICIT IS ONLY 10%. IN OTHER WORDS, ACCORDING TO THE STUDY, 90% OF HOUSEHOLDS, EVEN AT 50% AMI ARE MET, THE HOUSING NEEDS ARE MET. IT GETS VERY BAD WHEN YOU GET DOWN TO 30% AMI, THEN IT'S 55% IS MET, RIGHT? THAT'S WHERE THE DEFICIT IS IDENTIFIED. RIGHT. AND SO I HE MADE AN EFFORT TO HAVE THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING TRUST FUND FOCUS ON THIS PARTICULAR GROUP.

RIGHT. THIS PARTICULAR ECONOMIC DEMOGRAPHIC, BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE THE MOST OBVIOUS NEED IS.

AND I'M CONCERNED WHEN WE TALK ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WHAT I'LL CALL AVERAGE INCOME FAMILIES. AGAIN, IF I'M GOING TO BELIEVE THIS REPORT, WE ARE ACTUALLY AT A SURPLUS. IF YOU LOOK AT 80% AMI, WE HAVE AN 11% SURPLUS IN HOUSING. IF WE LOOK AT 100% OF AMI, 12% SURPLUS IN HOUSING. SO IT WOULDN'T MAKE SENSE FOR US TO TARGET. AND I JUST WANT TO BE CAREFUL ABOUT HOW WE TARGET, YOU KNOW, WE SAY LIKE AVERAGE WORKING CLASS FAMILIES. YEAH I WANT TO KEEP BUILDING, KEEP UP WITH DEMAND SO THAT OUR AFFORDABILITY STAYS LOW. AND AT THE SAME TIME, I DON'T SEE EVIDENCE THAT WE NEED GOVERNMENT SUBSIDIES OR OTHER PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP SUBSIDY FOR ANYTHING UNTIL WE'RE AT 50% OF AMI BELOW. SO ARE WE TARGETING THAT? I MEAN, IS THERE A WAY THAT WE CAN TARGET THAT BETTER? SO I AND YOU ALL WOULD KNOW BETTER THAN I, BUT MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE LOUISVILLE AFFORDABLE HOUSING TRUST FUND, FOR THE MONEY THAT METRO COUNCIL ALLOCATES EVERY YEAR, 50% OF THAT HAS TO GO IN THAT BELOW 50% AMI. SO IF METRO INVESTS 10 MILLION, 5 MILLION OF THAT IS DEDICATED TOWARDS THAT LOWER END OF THE SPECTRUM.

THAT'S THE INTENT. YEAH. AND SO IF THE REMAINING 50% IS BEING DIRECTED TO OTHER ATTAINABLE HOUSING PROJECTS, AND IF I DON'T, I DON'T HAVE THE NUMBERS THAT YOU SHARED IN FRONT OF ME, COUNCILMAN. BUT IF IF 10% OF THE IS IT OF THE 40,000 UNIT DEFICIT THAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT EARLIER, OR A A DIFFERENT NUMBER APPROXIMATELY. YEAH. SO EVEN IF THAT IS 4000 UNITS, I STILL THINK THAT THAT'S A A PIPELINE THAT'S WORTH PURSUING. I MEAN THAT THE THE NUMBERS, DEPENDING ON WHICH REPORT YOU LOOK AT ARE GOING TO VARY. BUT BUT I THINK ON A, ON A PURE NEEDS BASIS, EVERYTHING THAT WE'VE READ AND UNDERSTAND IS THAT IF THE NUMBER IS 30,000 UNITS OR 40,000 UNITS, THERE'S STILL A SIGNIFICANT OPPORTUNITY FOR THIS TYPE OF TOOL TO BE

[01:05:05]

AND THE PROBLEM GOT WORSE BECAUSE WE'RE PROBABLY TARGETING THE WRONG GROUP. SO THAT'S JUST MY CONCERN GENERALLY ON HOW WE'RE TARGETING AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

BUT THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. APPRECIATE IT. COUNCILMAN HUDSON. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. I APPRECIATE ALL THE WORK THAT'S GONE INTO THIS, AND I AND I DON'T INTEND TO OVERSIMPLIFY IT, BUT JUST TO GET MY HEAD WRAPPED AROUND IT, I NEED TO SIMPLIFY IT. SO IN DEFINING THE HOME BUYER THAT YOU'VE YOU'VE TARGETED HERE, YOU'VE TAKEN A, A SEGMENT OF OF THE HOME BUYING MARKET, BUT YOU'VE ALSO TAKEN A SEGMENT OF THE HOMES TO BE PURCHASED. THE PEOPLE THAT ARE IN THIS, IN THIS HOME BUYER MARKET ARE NOT GOING TO GO OUT AND BUY $1 MILLION HOUSE. SO YOU DO HAVE A PRICE POINT THAT THAT IS IN YOUR IN YOUR EQUATION HERE. MY MY QUESTION TO YOU IS IN PROVIDING LOW INTEREST LOANS TO THIS SEGMENT OF THE MARKET. WAS THERE ANY MONTE CARLO ANALYSIS OR SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS DONE ON WHAT EFFECT THAT WOULD HAVE ON THE PURCHASE PRICE OF THOSE HOUSES? BECAUSE MY GUESS IS FOR EVERY PERCENTAGE RATE, INTEREST RATE THAT YOU DECREASE, THE PRICE OF THOSE HOUSES IS GOING TO GO UP. SO YOU'RE GOING TO UNINTENTIONALLY PENALIZE THE PEOPLE YOU'RE TRYING TO HELP. SO DO YOU KNOW WHAT AFFECTS HOW MUCH THE PRICES ARE GOING TO GO UP FOR EVERY PERCENTAGE? YOU DIDN'T LOOK AT THAT SPECIFICALLY. AND YOU MIGHT WANT TO JUMP IN HERE. BUT MY MY INITIAL THOUGHT TO THAT IS WHEN WE FIRST OF ALL, IT'S WE ARE NOT MAKING A CHOICE WHETHER OR NOT IT'S HOME BUYERS OR RENTERS.

IT COULD BE A DEVELOPER WHO WANTS TO BUILD A 300 UNIT RENTAL PRODUCT. IT COULD BE. IT COULD BE ROB'S GROUP WHO'S WANTING TO BUILD HOMES FOR SALE. I THINK WHERE HOME CAPITAL IS COMING IN AND HELPING THE MARKET IS THERE ARE ANY NUMBER OF AFFORDABLE OR ATTAINABLE HOUSING PROJECTS THAT SIMPLY DO NOT GET THE FINANCING THAT THEY NEED, AND THEY DIE ON THE VINE BECAUSE THERE'S NOT THIS GAP FINANCING PRODUCT AVAILABLE TO MAKE THOSE PROJECTS PENCIL. AND IN AND SERVE AS A GAP FILLER TO TAKE A PROJECT THAT OTHERWISE WOULD NOT GET BUILT, ADDING MORE PRODUCT OR MORE SUPPLY TO THE SYSTEM FOR WHATEVER PRICE POINT IN THIS CASE, IT'S ATTAINABLE. HOUSING WOULD HAVE THE EFFECT OF PUSHING PRICES DOWN BECAUSE THERE'S MORE ON THE MARKET. SO ARE ARE THE LOANS? THE LOANS ARE GOING TO THE BUILDERS, NOT THE HOME PURCHASERS TO THE DEVELOPER. YEAH. AND SO AND YOU DON'T YOU DON'T THINK I'M SORRY TO CUT YOU OFF. YOU DON'T THINK THAT THAT IS GOING TO HAVE AN EFFECT ON THE PRICES. I THINK THAT BY JUST AND THIS IS MAYBE AN OVERSIMPLIFICATION OF SUPPLY AND DEMAND, THE MORE PRODUCT WITHIN A GIVEN PRICE POINT THAT YOU HAVE ON THE MARKET, THE THE LOWER THE PRICE WOULD BE. SO IF IF WE ARE NOT ABLE TO BUILD ATTAINABLE HOUSING BECAUSE IT WON'T PENCIL FINANCIALLY, THIS IS JUST MY REAL TIME ECONOMICS 101 IS THAT YOU WOULD BE DRIVING UP PRICES BECAUSE THERE ARE FEWER HOUSING OFFERINGS WITHIN THAT PRICE POINT. IF YOU HAVE MORE DEVELOPERS WHO ARE ABLE TO MAKE PROJECTS PENCIL BECAUSE OF THE EXISTENCE OF THIS FUND, THERE'S A GREATER SUPPLY WHICH WOULD DRIVE PRICES DOWN. YEAH. OKAY. THANK THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. DID YOU WANT TO THANK COUNCILMEMBER? YEAH. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. MR. CHAIR I'M GOING TO KIND OF CLERK ROB, THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING HERE. GREAT WORK. SO I'M GOING TO KIND OF PIGGYBACK A LITTLE BIT OFF WHAT COUNCILMAN HUDSON JUST SAID A LITTLE, BECAUSE ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT I WROTE DOWN WAS, WHO ARE WE LOANING THE MONEY TO? RIGHT. OBVIOUSLY IT'S I THINK IT'S THE DEVELOPER. BUT I THINK TO WHAT COUNCILMAN HUDSON'S POINT IS THE THE INTEREST RATES OF THE

[01:10:03]

BECAUSE I THINK I THINK WHAT I THINK WE'RE ON THE RIGHT TRACK WHEN IT COMES TO CREATING THE SUPPLY AND THE INVENTORY FOR A A LOWER PRICE POINT. BUT THEN YOUR, YOUR BUYER OR CONSUMER IS NOW STUCK IN THE TRAP OF SEVEN, EIGHT, 10% INTEREST RATES WHERE THE MARKET IS TODAY. SO THERE'S THAT BALANCING ACT. IS THERE ANYTHING YOU CAN TOUCH ON THERE. AND I THINK THAT MAY ALSO KIND OF PIGGYBACK ON. MY NEXT QUESTION IS IF YOU DON'T HIT THE $10 MILLION MARK ON THE ON THE PRIVATE INVESTMENT SIDE, NO MONEY IS LOANED OUT. IS THAT CORRECT? WE HAVEN'T MADE IT.

I'LL ANSWER IT IN REVERSE ORDER. SO I'LL ANSWER YOUR LAST QUESTION FIRST. WE HAVEN'T MADE A DETERMINATION, BUT I WOULD THINK THAT WE WOULD BE WANTING TO IF WE RAISED $8 MILLION INSTEAD OF TEN. I STILL THINK THAT THAT'S MONEY THAT SHOULD BE ALLOCATED. AND SO RIGHT NOW WE'RE IN A IN A CONCEPT PHASE. WE DON'T WE'RE NOT WE DON'T HAVE $10 MILLION THAT WE'VE RAISED. BUT IF WE GOT 8 MILLION INSTEAD OF TEN, I THINK THAT OUR GROUP WOULD BE ABSOLUTELY IN FAVOR OF ALLOCATING THAT AND MATCHING IT WITH PUBLIC SECTOR INVESTMENT. SO JUST DISCOUNTING IT BACK BASED ON WHATEVER WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO RAISE IN WITH. WITH THAT BEING SAID, YOU'RE GOING TO RUN THE UNDERWRITING THROUGH LOUISVILLE AFFORDABLE HOUSING TRUST FUND, CORRECT. TO BE QUALIFIED TO BORROW THE MONEY FROM THE LOUISVILLE HOME CAPITAL FUND, YOU HAVE TO BORROW FROM THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING TRUST FUND AS WELL. NO, IT'S ONE OR THE OTHER OR BOTH OR BOTH. SO IT'S ESSENTIALLY JUST A KIND OF GAP FUNDING. BUT YOU DO HAVE TO BE UNDERWRITTEN BY THE TRUST FUND. I MEAN, PART OF OUR THERE ARE A FEW ASSUMPTIONS. ONE WAS THAT THE SUPPLY IS LOW. AND SO WHILE THE ANALYTICS ON THE NEEDS ASSESSMENT, THOSE NUMBERS ARE THOSE 40, 30, 40,000 UNIT NUMBERS, THERE'S A ANOTHER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT BY KENTUCKY HOUSING CORPORATION. THAT'S A LOWER NUMBER. BUT IT'S JUST BASED ON SOME OF THE DIALOG THAT CLARK AND MR. ARGENTINA GOT INTO ABOUT. IT'S NOT THE WHY. IT'S THE REALITY THAT THERE'S NOT ENOUGH SUPPLY. AND THEN THE THE POINT THAT ONE WHEN YOU PROVIDE MORE SUPPLY IT CHANGES WHAT IS AVAILABLE IN TERMS OF AND THE IMPACT ON DEMAND. SO SO THANK YOU FOR THAT EXPLANATION. I THINK THIS IS A SO COUNCILMAN OWEN AND I HAD DEBATED THIS, I THINK A YEAR OR SO AGO ON SUPPLY AND WHAT WAS AND MY, MY THING IS I THINK THAT NUMBER IS SKEWED.

AND AND WHAT I MEAN BY THAT IS THIS 40,000 OR 15,000 NUMBER THAT WE'RE SHORT IN SUPPLY IS ONLY CALCULATED BASED ON. IF YOU'VE BORROWED MONEY FROM THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING TRUST, MONEY TO BUILD THIS PROPERTY. WHEN I'VE LOOKED AT SOME LET'S USE MULTIFAMILY, FOR EXAMPLE, A MULTIFAMILY COMPLEX OF 300 UNITS CAN BE BUILT BY A PRIVATE DEVELOPER AT $30 MILLION AND IS AT $1,200 A MONTH PER UNIT. AND THEN I LOOK AT AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING TRUST FUNDED MULTIFAMILY UNIT. AND AND THE THE RENT RATES ARE TWO AND $300 MORE. AND WHAT I'VE BEEN I'M BEING TOLD IS MARKET RATE UNITS ARE NOT CALCULATED INTO THAT SHORTAGE NUMBER. SO IS WHERE I SHOW THE NUMBERS ARE SKEWED. CAN YOU HELP PINPOINT THAT FOR ME. WELL, LET ME JUST MAKE THE POINT THAT THERE'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE METRO ANALYTICS ON HOUSING NEEDS.

THAT NUMBER IS MUCH HIGHER THAN THE THE STATE, THE ANALYTICS ON SUPPLY. THAT ANALYTIC IS UNDER 10,000. SO IT'S MORE IN THE 7000 RANGE. THAT'S JUST SUPPLY. IT'S NOT RELATED TO THE ISSUE OF AFFORDABILITY AND HOW WHAT PERCENTAGE YOU'RE PAYING. IT'S HOW MANY UNITS. WE NEED BOTH UNITS IN TERMS OF RENTAL AND HOME OWNERSHIP. AND AT THE STATE LEVEL, THERE'S A LOT OF DIALOG. AND I EXPECT THAT IN THIS NEXT SESSION, AROUND A 200,000 NUMBER FOR THE COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY, DIVIDED ROUGHLY IN HALF FOR HOMEOWNERSHIP AND RENTAL. SO I

[01:15:02]

I DON'T HAVE ANYBODY ELSE IN THE QUEUE. ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANYTHING THEY WANT TO DISCUSS BEFORE WE LET THESE GUYS GO ON THEIR MERRY WAY? I APPRECIATE IT. I APPRECIATE YOU COMING IN PRESENTING. I THINK THERE'S MORE DISCUSSION TO BE HAD. THANK YOU FOR HAVING US. THANK

[2. O-295-25     AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 115 OF THE LOUISVILLE METRO CODE OF ORDINANCES REGARDING HOMELESS SHELTER REGULATIONS. Action Required By: June 4, 2025  Sponsors: Betsy Ruhe (D-21) ]

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 115 OF THE LOUISVILLE METRO CODE OF ORDINANCES REGARDING HOMELESS SHELTER REGULATIONS. CAN I GET A MOTION? PROPERLY MOVED AND SECONDED. LET'S SEE, DO WE? BETSY, DO YOU WANT TO START HERE OR DO WE WANT TO START WITH THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OR WHAT DO WE HOW DO YOU WANT TO START ON THIS? OKAY, I'LL TURN IT OVER TO COUNCILWOMAN RUBY AND SHE'LL GET US STARTED. OKAY. SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE'VE BEEN WAITING QUITE A WHILE TO GET THIS ORDINANCE BACK UP HERE. SO WE HAVE THE LICENSING. SO WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IS THE ACCESSORY OVERNIGHT SHELTERS. WE DID THE POP UP SHELTERS AND WE KNOW WE GOT SNOW ON THE GROUND. AND EVERYBODY THANK YOU FOR STAYING THE OTHER NIGHT TILL ALMOST 11:00 AND SAYING YES. SO ANYWAY, SO WE WENT THROUGH THE ORDINANCE THE WAY LAURA PUT IT OUT AND LOOKED AT WHAT JOEL DOC PUT TOGETHER. AND WE'VE GOT AN AMENDMENT THAT KIND OF BLENDS THE TWO. AND THERE ARE A COUPLE OF POINTS OF DISCUSSION THAT WE'RE PROBABLY GOING TO WANT TO TALK ABOUT. AND AT THIS POINT, I WILL TURN IT OVER. LAURA FERGUSON ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY YES, THERE'S AN AMENDMENT IN THE SYSTEM THAT I BELIEVE WAS BASED ON SOME CONVERSATIONS SUBSEQUENT TO THE ORDINANCE BEING FILED, AND IT JUST SORT OF PROVIDES SOME CLARIFICATIONS ON WHAT PROVISIONS APPLY ACCESSORY OVERNIGHT SHELTERS WOULD BE SUBJECT TO AND WHICH ONES THEY WOULD NOT. I THINK MOST OF THE CLARIFICATIONS ARE IN THE DUTIES OF THE OPERATOR SECTION AS TO WHAT WOULD APPLY OR NOT APPLY TO IT. CAN WE HIGHLIGHT, JUST FOR THE KIND OF THE RECORD WHAT THE MAYBE JUST A HIGHLIGHT OF WHAT THE MAJOR CHANGES ARE IN THE AMENDMENT. IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WE CAN DO OR. YEAH THERE IT'S THE CHANGES ARE DOUBLE UNDERLINED. AND FOR THE MOST PART I WOULD SAY THAT THE MAIN CHANGES ARE WHEN IT WAS FILED, WAS SORT OF LEFT AS AN OPEN ISSUE AS TO WHAT DUTIES OF THE OPERATOR.

AND PAGE SEVEN, WHICH THINGS WOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE ACCESSORY OVERNIGHT SHELTER AND WHICH ONES WOULD NOT. AND ESSENTIALLY THE FIRST SEVERAL PROVISIONS. NOW IF YOU SEE THE DOUBLE UNDERLINED, IT ADDS ACCESSORY OVERNIGHT SHELTER AND ACCESSORY OVERNIGHT SHELTER FOR CRIMINAL RECORD CHECKS FOR THOSE THAT DEAL WITH CHILDREN, INFORMATION ABOUT CPR. WRITTEN POLICIES AND PROCEDURES ON THE HANDLING OF PRESCRIPTION OR OVER-THE-COUNTER DRUGS, MAINTAINING SANITARY CONDITIONS, ETC. AND THEN THERE'S ALSO A LITTLE BIT OF ADDITION IN AT THE VERY END. IN 115 010, THE ENFORCEMENT WHICH JUST GAVE THE DIRECTOR A LITTLE MORE FLEXIBILITY TO MAKE INTERPRETATIONS TO ENSURE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE WITH RESPECT TO THE LICENSE, AND THAT THE INTERPRETATIONS, IF THEY'RE MADE, WOULD BE PUBLISHED ON THE METRO WEBSITE. BUT THERE ARE NOT A LOT OF, YOU KNOW, NOT A LOT OF CHANGES BETWEEN WHAT WAS FILED AND WHAT THIS CURRENT AMENDMENT IS. OKAY. THANK YOU.

LAURA. ANYBODY ELSE HAVE THINGS THEY WANT TO DISCUSS HERE? COUNCILMAN BATSON, DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING YOU WANTED TO DISCUSS HERE? THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. FIRST OF ALL, I THINK, DO WE NEED TO MOVE THE AMENDMENT FIRST? YES. WE DISCUSSED. SONYA HARVEY, THE CLERK. SO YOU ARE YOU GOING TO DISCUSS THE AMENDMENT BEFORE OR ARE YOU GOING TO. IT DEPENDS. IT'S ON I THINK YOU WANT THE AMENDMENT BEFORE YOU. RIGHT BEFORE WE DISCUSS SPECIFICS OF THE AMENDMENT. SO YOU HAVE THINGS SPECIFICALLY TO THE AMENDMENT THAT YOU WANT TO DISCUSS. SO

[01:20:01]

WHEN THE DOOR IS CLOSED AT 11:00, YOU'RE NOT ALLOWING ANYBODY ELSE TO BE ABLE TO ENTER. WILL THERE BE STAFF ON SITE UNTIL THE NEXT DAY? RIGHT. THAT'S I THINK THERE SHOULD BE SOMEONE ON STAFF OR VOLUNTEERING TO OVERSEE 24 OVER SEVEN. I, I'D LIKE TO HAVE SOME DISCUSSION AROUND THAT. ASIDE FROM THAT, JUST FOR FULL CLARITY, I THINK COUNCILWOMAN RUBY AND HAS DONE AN EXCEPTIONAL JOB IN TRYING TO BRING THIS FORWARD AND GET US MOVING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION. AS WE PROMISED IN THE AFTER WE PASSED THE FIRST SET. SO SO THANK YOU. MY BIGGEST CONCERN AT THIS POINT IS, IS THE STAFFING PORTION. I THINK EVERYTHING ELSE IS KIND OF COVERED IN IN UNDER CONTROL. GREAT. THANK YOU. JOEL, CAN YOU HELP US WITH THIS? YEAH. OKAY. JOEL. DOC LOUISVILLE METRO'S OFFICE OF PLANNING. SO IN THE DEFINITION OF ACCESSORY OVERNIGHT SHELTER IN LEMCO ON PAGE TWO OF THIS LICENSE, WHICH IS THE DEFINITION OF ACCESSORY OVERNIGHT SHELTER, WHICH IS THE SAME DEFINITION THAT WE FIND IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. IT READS IN THE AFTER THE FIRST VERY LONG SENTENCE, THE FACILITY SHALL BE STAFFED BY PAID EMPLOYEES OR VOLUNTEERS THAT MANAGE DAILY OPERATIONS TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE LAWS AND REGULATIONS. SO THE DEFINITION ITSELF REQUIRES THAT THE FACILITY BE STAFFED. SO. BUT YES, I UNDERSTAND IT REQUIRES THAT.

JOEL AND I THANK YOU FOR THAT EXPLANATION, BUT IT DOESN'T SAY IT HAS TO BE REQUIRED TO BE STAFFED 24 OVER SEVEN. AND I THINK MY FEAR IN THAT IS, LET'S USE THIS DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SITUATION. FOR EXAMPLE, IF SOMEONE IS BEING HOUSED FOR A DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ISSUE OR SO ON AND SO FORTH, AND GOD FORBID THE THE OFFENDER IS LOCATED, THE PERSON WHO IS BEING. EXCUSE ME AT THIS CHURCH OR FACILITY AND COMES TO RETALIATE IN SOME FACET WHO IS GOING TO BE ABLE TO MAN THAT FACILITY, CALL THE POLICE, CALL THE AUTHORITIES AND ADDRESS ISSUES AS THEY HAPPEN? DOES DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? WHERE I'M WHERE I'M KIND OF GOING THERE? IT IT DOES MAKE SENSE. AND THERE'S NOT A SPECIFIC PROVISION IN HERE THAT REQUIRES IT TO BE STAFFED 24 OVER SEVEN. BUT IN MY EXPERIENCE, WORKING WITH DIFFERENT HOMELESS SHELTER OPERATORS, THOSE THAT INTEND TO OPERATE IN ACCESSORY OVERNIGHT SHELTER, EVEN THOSE THAT OPERATE TRANSITIONAL HOUSING, THOSE FACILITIES ARE EITHER STAFFED OR HAVE SOMEONE PRESENT THAT OVERSEES THE FACILITY OVERNIGHT. JUST FOR PEACE OF MIND, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT IN BLACK AND WHITE. SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT WILL TAKE AND HOW WE CAN HANDLE THAT. IS THAT A A LAURA FERGUSON QUESTION OR IS THAT A NEW QUESTION? ANYBODY? FEEL FREE TO CHIME IN WHEN THEY WANT. JUST JUST FOR THE RECORD, I, I THINK WELL, I'M NOT ENTIRELY SURE HOW I, HOW I FEEL ABOUT IT. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T I DON'T THINK IT'S A BAD IDEA. LET ME START BY SAYING THAT I DON'T THINK IT'S A BAD IDEA. OBVIOUSLY, IF THERE'S SOMEBODY THERE THAT'S

[01:25:01]

[01:30:05]

DAY OPERATIONS ARE SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT. SO EVEN IN THE INTENT OF THE DEFINITION, I VERY MUCH THINK THAT IN WRITING THIS FROM FROM MY PERSPECTIVE AND UNDERSTANDING HOW THESE OPERATE, THAT THE INTENT OF THE DEFINITION WAS TO REQUIRE THAT IT BE STAFFED WHILE IT IS OPERATING. MR. CHAIR, BECAUSE IT IS BECAUSE IT IS OVERNIGHT ONLY. AND THAT'S HOW I UNDERSTAND THESE FACILITIES OPERATE ANYWAY. SO I THINK TO TO THE ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY'S POINT, IT'S IMPLIED ALREADY IN THE DEFINITION AND COUNCILMAN. TO JOE'S POINT, I THINK I SEE WHAT HE'S SAYING. I JUST IF IT BEING AN OVERNIGHT ACCESSORY SHELTER AND I'M I'M USING THE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ONE AS AN EXAMPLE. RIGHT. THEY'RE STILL GOING TO BE THERE THE NEXT MORNING. IS STAFF GOING TO BE THERE WITH THEM. IT'S IT'S THE NEXT MORNING. IT'S NOT OVERNIGHT. I'M JUST LOOKING AT SOME CONTEXT AROUND SOMEONE NEEDS TO BE VOLUNTEER OR PAID EMPLOYEE OF THE FACILITY AT ALL TIMES. EIGHT AND, AND AGAIN, IN IN WRITING THESE DEFINITIONS AND THINKING ABOUT HOW THEY OPERATE AND TALKING ABOUT THE OPERATORS, A SIMPLE MODIFICATION TO THE DEFINITION WOULD STILL BE, I THINK, EXACTLY HOW IT'S WRITTEN, BECAUSE I THINK THESE FACILITIES WILL BE STAFFED OR HAVE VOLUNTEERS PRESENT THE ENTIRE TIME THEY ARE OPERATING. SO. SO I WILL SORT OF TRY TO RESTATE WHAT I WAS SAYING BEFORE. AGAIN, I, I DON'T DISAGREE WITH WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO. I DO THINK IT IS WISER FOR US AS A BODY NOT TO DO IT AT THIS TIME, JUST FOR THIS CLASSIFICATION. IF WE THINK IT'S IMPORTANT, I THINK WE SHOULD TAKE A STEP BACK AND THEN LOOK AT THE CLASSIFICATIONS THAT ARE RELATED AND DETERMINE WHETHER WE NEED SIMILAR LANGUAGE IN EACH ONE IN A SEPARATE INSTANCE. THAT'S THAT'S MY THOUGHT PROCESS ON IT. COUNCILWOMAN RUDY. OKAY. THANK YOU. I JUST WANT TO READ EXACTLY WHAT IT SAYS IN THE DEFINITION. SO IT SAYS THE FACILITY SHALL BE STAFFED BY PAID EMPLOYEES OR VOLUNTEERS THAT MANAGE DAILY OPERATIONS TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE LAWS AND REGULATIONS. SO THE DAILY OPERATIONS IN THIS CASE ARE NIGHTLY OPERATIONS. AND SO THE REQUIREMENT IS ALREADY IN THERE THAT THEY WOULD BE STAFFED. SO YEAH I THINK I'M OKAY WITH THAT AS IT IS. I THINK TO JOEL'S POINT, THERE'S STRONG IMPLICATION THERE WITHOUT IT SAYING SPECIFICALLY OVERNIGHT.

AND AND I JUST WANT MY MY FEAR AGAIN IS I WANT AS MUCH CONSISTENCY AS POSSIBLE WITHIN CLASSIFICATIONS IN AND THAT'S. YEAH. COUNCILMAN BACHCHAN, DID YOU WANT TO JUMP BACK IN AT THIS POINT? GUYS, I HEAR YOU. AND AND WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, I, I THINK THERE'S NEEDS TO BE SOME TYPE OF REQUIREMENT THAT IS SAID IN BLACK AND WHITE, THAT THERE NEEDS TO BE SOMEONE ON SITE AT ALL TIMES WHILE IN OPERATION. JOEL AND I, I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING AND YOU SAID I, YOU KNOW, I, I THINK AND I'M PRETTY SURE ARE YOUR WORDS LIKE THAT. IT'S GOING TO BE STAFFED.

WE ALL THINK IT SHOULD BE UNTIL IT'S THAT ONE TIME WHERE IT'S NOT. SO I THINK TRAVIS IS TRYING TO CHIME IN, BUT TRAVIS, DO YOU WANT TO JUMP IN? LAUREN ARE STILL DISCUSSING OVER HERE.

AND JOEL, I WANT YOU TO SEE IF YOU HAVE ANY ISSUES WITH THIS AS WELL. BUT OUR THOUGHT WOULD BE IN THE DEFINITIONS AFTER THE FACILITY SHALL BE STAFFED TO ADD THE PHRASE DURING OPERATING HOURS AND THEN CONTINUE, YOU KNOW, BY PAID EMPLOYEES OR VOLUNTEERS. I THINK THAT'S GETTING AT WHAT YOU'RE GETTING AT WITHOUT IF WE PUT IT IN ONE OF THESE OTHER SUBSECTIONS, WE NEED TO KNOCK OUT OTHER USES. IT'S GOING TO BE PROBABLY MORE COMPLICATED THAN WE CAN DO ON THE FLY. BUT I THINK IF WE WANT TO ADD THAT SMALL PHRASE TO THE DEFINITION OF DURING OPERATING HOURS, I THINK THAT MORE OR LESS GETS AT WHAT YOU'RE WANTING HERE. BUT CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG. I'M OKAY WITH THAT. IF YOU'RE TELLING ME THAT FROM MIDNIGHT TO 6 A.M. IS OPERATING HOURS AND SOMEONE IS STAFFED THERE, AND FROM 6 A.M. 6:01 A.M. TO 11:59 P.M. NO ONE IS

[01:35:06]

IS THAT WHAT I'M UNDERSTANDING? GENERALLY, YES. I MEAN, THESE ARE RELIGIOUS FACILITIES. SO FOLKS ARE TYPICALLY WELCOME THROUGHOUT THE DAY. SO THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF NUANCE THERE.

BUT BUT AS FAR AS THE SORT OF SHELTER USE THE OVERNIGHT, I MEAN RIGHT THERE IN THE NAME, THAT'S THE INTENTION. THEN I WILL I WILL AGREE TO WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. AND I ACTUALLY THINK DOING IT WITHIN THE DEFINITION LIKE THAT ALLEVIATES MY CONCERNS AS WELL. SO AND THAT WAS MY POINT. I WANTED IT TO BE DONE IN THE DEFINITION, NOT IN THE WHOLE CONTEXT. SO OKAY, SO DOES ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ABOUT THE AMENDMENT THAT'S IN FRONT OF US, COUNCILMAN HUDSON? YEAH. SO WHICH DEFINITION IS IT YOU'RE MODIFYING? FOR NOW? I WILL NOTE THAT THIS WILL PUT US OUT OF SYNC BETWEEN THE LAND CODE AND THE LMC, BUT I THINK WE CAN CORRECT THAT ON THE BACK END IF NEED BE. AND ULTIMATELY FOR THE LICENSE THAT WILL BE REQUIRED. SO, SO AT THE END OF THE DEFINITION FOR ACCESSORY OVERNIGHT SHELTER, YOU'RE ADDING THE WORDS DURING OPERATING HOURS. IT WOULD GO IN THE SECOND TO LAST SENTENCE.

THE FACILITY SHALL BE STAFFED DURING OPERATING HOURS BY PAID EMPLOYEES OR VOLUNTEERS, ETC.

SO DO WE NEED TO MAKE THAT IN FORM OF A MOTION? OKAY, SO THE MOTION HAS BEEN MADE. I THINK WE JUST IDENTIFIED EXACTLY WHERE IT WAS GOING. YEAH. WHICH I THINK CAN BE DONE WITHIN THE MOTION. AND SECOND, THAT WE'VE ALREADY HAVE IN FRONT OF US. OKAY. ARE YOU GOOD, COUNCILMAN HUDSON? YES. OKAY. ANYBODY ELSE? ALL RIGHT, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE AMENDMENT THAT'S IN FRONT OF US, PLEASE SAY AYE. AYE. ALL THOSE OPPOSED? NAY. THE AYES HAVE IT. ANY MORE DISCUSSION ON THIS BEFORE WE OPEN THIS UP FOR A ROLL CALL VOTE? THAT WAS JUST THE FIRST AMENDMENT. FOR THE AMENDMENT. THE SECOND TIER AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT, BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T BEEN ACCEPTED YET. WE I THOUGHT WE DID ALREADY VOTE ON WE VOTED TO AMEND. THE FIRST ONE WAS THE AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT RIGHT. SO IT WAS VOICE VOTE. IT WAS IT WAS UNANIMOUS FOR THE FIRST AMENDMENT. AND THIS IS THE SECOND ONE. SO I THINK WE'RE I THINK WE'RE GOOD. VERY SIMPLE, VERY SHORT. I JUST WANT TO AGAIN, THANK MY COLLEAGUES FOR WORKING ON THIS AND AND THANK THE STAFF AND PLANNING STAFF FOR, FOR MAKING THESE AMENDMENTS AND GIVING US THE, THE RIGHT TRACK TO, TO TO MOVE FORWARD SO WE CAN MAKE SURE THAT THE RELIGIOUS FACILITIES THAT ARE WANTING TO HELP AND ARE WILLING TO HELP AND ARE, ARE IN OUR COMMUNITIES DOING GREAT WORK, THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO MORE GREAT WORK. SO, SO THANK YOU. AND I AM A YES IN MOVING THIS FORWARD. SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AND I WANT TO SAY THAT AS WELL. THIS HAPPENED QUICKLY. AND LAURA I APPRECIATE THE FAST ACTION AND TRAVIS AND EVERYBODY THAT WORKED ON IT. HAPPY TO GET THIS THING MOVED THROUGH. SO CHERYL CAN YOU.

COUNCILWOMAN OKAY. THANK YOU. I JUST WANT TO ENSURE THAT AS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THESE DIFFERENT THINGS, THAT THE SECTION REGARDING THE TB TESTS AND THE TUBERCULOSIS GOT PULLED OUT, IS THAT CORRECT, LAURA? OKAY. BECAUSE WE KNOW THAT WAS A THAT WAS A PARTICULAR BURDEN ON PEOPLE TO WHEN YOU'RE ONLY A VOLUNTEER AND YOU'RE ONLY THERE ONCE AND ETC. SO THAT'S WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT ONE'S OUT OF THERE WAS WAS THAT A YES LAURA. YES. IN SECTION ONE 1505 AND 21 IT SAYS SUBSECTIONS FOUR THROUGH EIGHT, WHICH ARE REALLY THE TUBERCULOSIS SECTIONS, SHALL NOT APPLY TO ACCESSORY OVERNIGHT SHELTERS. SO THAT LANGUAGE IS IN THERE. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. OKAY, WITHOUT FURTHER ADO, CHERYL, WILL YOU OPEN UP THE ROLL CALL? VOTE, PLEASE. COUNCIL MEMBER RAYMOND. YES. THANK YOU. VOTING'S CLOSING CHAIR. YOU HAVE SEVEN YES VOTES. YES. SO WITH UNANIMOUS VOTE THAT CAN BE MOVED TO THE CONSENT CALENDAR.

OH IT'S AMENDMENT. IT'S THAT'S TRUE. IT'S AMENDED. SO IT'LL HAVE TO BE MOVED TO OLD OLD BUSINESS AT THE NEXT COUNCIL ON THE NEXT COUNCIL AGENDA. OKAY. ITEM NUMBER THREE WILL BE HOLDING AS WE'VE DISCUSSED IN THE PAST, THAT'S THE THE TEMPORARY MORATORIUM ON ON DATA CENTERS. WE'LL BE HOLDING THAT AND MOVING ON TO NUMBER FOUR, WHICH IS. OUR DASH 160 125

[4. R-161-25     A RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE PLANNING COMMISSION CONSIDER REZONING THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1901 R PAYNE STREET TO A LOWER, MORE APPROPRIATE ZONING CLASSIFICATION. Action Required By: June 4, 2026 Sponsors: Andrew Owen (D-9) ]

[01:40:02]

SO LET ME SAY, WITH THAT BEING SAID, I WILL SAY THAT I DON'T BY BY FILING THIS RESOLUTION, I DON'T THINK THAT AS A CITY, WE OUGHT TO GO AROUND FILING SIMILAR RESOLUTIONS FOR PROPERTIES THAT ARE HISTORICALLY ZONED INDUSTRIAL AND ARE NEAR RESIDENTIAL, BECAUSE I DON'T THINK IT'S FAIR TO THE COMPANIES THAT ARE OPERATING UNDER THOSE HISTORIC ASSUMPTIONS. I MEAN, IT'S A IT'S A MAJOR PENALTY FOR FOR A PROPER FOR THE TYPE OF BUSINESS TO THE TYPE OF ZONING THAT AFFECTS THE TYPE OF BUSINESS YOU CAN DO ON THAT PROPERTY FOR THE GOVERNMENT TO PROACTIVELY CHANGE THAT WHEN THERE HAVEN'T BEEN SPECIFIC EVENTS LIKE THE ONES I JUST MENTIONED, I THINK IS IMPROPER IN THIS CASE BECAUSE OF WHAT I WOULD CALL THE UNICORN TYPE OF NATURE, OF WHAT HAS HAPPENED HISTORICALLY AT THIS LOCATION. I THINK IT'S PROPER THAT WE THAT WE TRY TO ADDRESS THIS. NOW, ONE MORE THING I'LL SAY IS THAT VERY EARLY AFTER THE MOST RECENT EXPLOSION, THE MAYOR AND I TALKED ABOUT WHETHER WE THOUGHT IT WAS APPROPRIATE FOR INDUSTRIAL ZONING, A SIMILAR TYPE OF ACTIVITY OR SIMILAR TYPE OF BUSINESS, TO CONTINUE OPERATING AT THE SITE AFTER THE TWO INCIDENCES THAT WE'VE DISCUSSED PREVIOUSLY. AND WE VERY KIND OF QUICKLY DECIDED THAT WE DIDN'T THINK THAT THAT WAS THE CASE. AND WE HAVE SAID THAT TO BOTH OUR CONSTITUENTS SINCE THE VERY BEGINNING AND ALSO TO THE TO THE COMPANY SINCE THE VERY BEGINNING. I THOUGHT IT WAS APPROPRIATE THAT I REACH OUT TO THE COMPANY TO TO TALK TO THEM ABOUT THIS RESOLUTION. AND I HAVE DONE THAT. AND THE RESPONSE FROM THE COMPANY WAS BASICALLY, THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WE WEREN'T EXPECTING. IT WAS SOMETHING THAT WE WERE EXPECTING. THEY ASKED WHAT KIND OF ZONING DESIGNATION WE WERE THINKING, AND I SAID, THAT'S SORT OF UP TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND HOW THEY RESPOND TO TO OUR REQUEST, BUT THAT I HAVE ALSO SAID PUBLICLY, AS THE COUNCIL PERSON IN THE DISTRICT, THAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOMETHING THAT ALLOWED FOR A MIXED USE TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT WITH SOME SORT OF DENSITY THAT WON'T SURPRISE ANYBODY IN THIS ROOM OR ANYBODY LISTENING, BECAUSE THAT'S KIND OF MY APPROACH TO MOST MOST THINGS ALONG THE LINES OF DEVELOPMENT. SO I TOLD THEM THAT I AGAIN, WE DIDN'T HAVE THE THE CONTROL EXACTLY OF WHAT THE, WHAT THE DESIGNATION WAS GOING TO BECOME, BUT THAT I WOULD LIKE IT TO BE SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES. AND THE COMPANY AT THIS POINT SAID, WHAT WE WOULD LIKE MORE THAN ANYTHING IS THAT WHATEVER YOU DO, YOU DO IT QUICKLY SO WE KNOW WHAT KIND OF HAND WE HAVE.

AND AND THEN WE ARE ALLOWED TO GO AHEAD AND PLAY THE HAND THAT WE HAVE. SO THAT'S KIND OF THE HOW THIS CAME ABOUT. LET ME SEE. I HAVE COUNCILMAN PIACENTINI IN THE QUEUE FIRST. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. I WANT TO BE CLEAR. I HAVE A FEW COMMENTS HERE. COMMENTS. I'VE ALREADY SPOKEN TO THE CHAIRMAN ABOUT THIS BECAUSE I DIDN'T WANT TO SURPRISE HIM WITH WITH MY THOUGHTS. BUT I WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT I WILL BE SUPPORTIVE. I CAN'T VOTE HERE IN COMMITTEE.

[01:45:01]

BUT HERE IS MY CONCERN WITH THE PRECEDENT OF IT. THERE ARE MANY AREAS OF THIS CITY WHERE RESIDENTS WOULD LIKE TO SEE DOWN ZONING. AND SO, FOR EXAMPLE, SOME MAY REMEMBER ARTICLES ABOUT A CONCRETE PLANT GOING UP IN DISTRICT 19. THAT PLANT WAS ON M-2 ZONED LAND.

THAT M-2 ZONING WAS THERE BEFORE THE. THE ABUTTING RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD IS LAKE FOREST BEFORE LAKE FOREST EXISTED. SO THAT WAS ALREADY ZONED HEAVY INDUSTRIAL. THE CONCRETE PLANT WENT UP. AND TRUST ME WHEN I TELL EVERYBODY THAT THE RESIDENTS THERE WOULD LOVE ME TO DOWN ZONE THAT CHUNK OF LAND, BUT I DON'T HAVE THE BLESSING OF THE LANDOWNER.

THEY'RE NOT INDICATING THAT THEY PLAN ON MOVING IT IN ANY WAY. SO AND THEREIN LIES THE CONCERN. RIGHT. AND I'LL GIVE YOU ANOTHER EXAMPLE. IN FLOYDS FORK, ALL THE DEBATE WE DID ABOUT THAT, THERE ARE PEOPLE THAT WANT ME TO TAKE SOME OF THE R4 ZONING AND DOWN ZONE IT TO RR. THEY WANT TO KEEP IT VERY RURAL, VERY, VERY LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL. BUT AGAIN, WE DON'T OWN THAT PROPERTY. AND I'M LOATH TO DO THAT WITHOUT THE PROPERTY OWNERS. IF WHATEVER COMES OUT OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION HERE, IF THE LANDOWNERS COME BACK AND WHAT I'LL CALL DON'T FIGHT IT IF THEY COME BACK AND SAY, YOU KNOW, WE COULD LIVE WITH THIS.

YOU KNOW, MAYBE THEY'RE NOT LOVING IT, BUT THEY'RE NOT HATING IT, YOU KNOW, THEN I HAVE NO LIKE THEN WE'RE GOING TO I'M GOING TO APPROVE IT. RIGHT. BECAUSE AT THE END OF THE DAY, IF THE LANDOWNER IS FINE WITH THE CHANGE, THEN WHO CARES IF THEY INITIATED YOU INITIATED AS LONG AS THEY ULTIMATELY ARE GOOD WITH THE PRODUCT. IF THEY'RE NOT. I HAVE CONCERNS BOTH FOR THE PRECEDENT ISSUE AND ALSO THE POTENTIAL TAKINGS ISSUE. RIGHT. IF WE DOWN ZONE A PROPERTY WHICH AFFECTS THE LAND VALUE OF A PRIVATE CITIZEN, RIGHT. IN THIS CASE A COMPANY, BUT WHETHER IT'S A COMPANY OR AN INDIVIDUAL IS IRRELEVANT. THEN WE OPEN OURSELVES UP TO A POTENTIAL LAWSUIT BECAUSE WE HAVE TAKEN VALUE WITHOUT DUE PROCESS.

RIGHT? WE WOULD WHEN WE TAKE PROPERTY FOR ROAD CONSTRUCTION, WE COMPENSATE, RIGHT? SO THERE WOULD BE THAT POTENTIAL ISSUE. I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO VOICE THE IDEA, AND I HOPE THE PLANNING COMMISSION LISTENS ABOUT ALTERNATIVES DEPENDING. AND AGAIN, EVEN IF WE GO DOWN A SPECIFIC PATHWAY HERE, OTHER ALTERNATIVES TO SEPARATE HEAVY INDUSTRIAL AND RESIDENTIAL, SUCH AS BUFFER ZONES. IT'S SOMETHING THAT CAME UP IN DISCUSSIONS AGAIN AROUND THE CONCRETE PLANT. AND I THINK ANOTHER EXAMPLE WOULD BE GOOD HERE THAT WOULDN'T AFFECT EXISTING OPERATIONS ON EXISTING LAND. BUT IF WE START TO SAY IN OTHER JURISDICTIONS HAVE DONE THIS, THERE ARE CERTAIN USES THAT YOU CANNOT PUT IT WITHIN A CERTAIN DISTANCE OF RESIDENTIAL, THEN I THINK THAT'S AN ALTERNATIVE ROUTE TO MAYBE GET TO THE SOLUTION WITHOUT GOING FULL DOWN ZONING. RIGHT. BUT ANYWAY, I JUST WANT TO PUT THAT OUT THERE AS A POTENTIAL IDEA, SOMETHING I DO WANT TO WORK ON WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION AT SOME POINT. AGAIN, I'LL JUST WRAP UP. THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THEY WERE ON THE RECORD, BUT THAT I WILL ABSOLUTELY VOTE FOR THIS BECAUSE THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES. BUT I DON'T WANT PEOPLE SURPRISED DEPENDING ON HOW THIS GETS OUT. IF YOU KNOW, IF THE WORST CASE SCENARIO HAPPENS AND WE HAVE THIS BIG CONFLICT, I MAY HAVE A TOUGH TIME VOTING FOR IT ON THE FLOOR WHEN IT COMES BACK, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE WHAT HAPPENS HERE. AND I SUPPORT YOUR EFFORT TO ADDRESS A VERY, VERY DIFFICULT SCENARIO. SO THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. COUNCILMAN. MISTER CHAIR, THANK YOU. I FIRST WANT TO SAY I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO, AND I AND I RESPECT THAT, BUT I'M, I'M, I'M GENEY ON THE SURFACE A LITTLE OPPOSED TO, TO GIVING US THE JURISDICTION TO, TO DOWN ZONE A PROPERTY. WHETHER YOU HAVE A VERBAL COMMITMENT OR NOT OF THE, OF THE LANDOWNER. I THINK THEY SHOULD GO THROUGH THE DUE PROCESS OF, OF REZONING IT ON THEIR OWN. IF THEY'RE OKAY WITH IT, LET THEM REZONE IT AND LET'S DO WHAT WE CAN TO EXPEDITE THAT PROCESS FOR THEM SO WE CAN GET TO WHERE THEY NEED TO BE. I JUST WANT TO PUT THAT OUT THERE, BECAUSE I THINK WE'RE OPENING UP A CAN OF WORMS THAT WE MAY NOT BE ABLE TO CLOSE. THANK YOU. COUNCILMAN BRATCHER, CAN I ASK YOU SOME HISTORICAL QUESTION? WAS THIS BUILT BEFORE THE SURROUNDING RESIDENTIAL AREAS OR VICE VERSA? DOES ANYBODY IN THE PLANNING

[01:50:03]

DO YOU GUYS HAVE ANY HISTORICAL REFERENCE? NOT SO MUCH EITHER. SO I DON'T I DON'T KNOW IS THE ANSWER IS AND YOU DON'T HAVE TO ANSWER THIS IF YOU DON'T WANT TO, BUT IS THIS BEING DRIVEN BY YOUR CONSTITUENCY? THIS IS IS BEING MY CONSTITUENTS ARE ARE VERY INTERESTED IN THIS NO LONGER BEING AN INDUSTRIAL FACILITY. AND YOU KNOW, I TRY, YOU KNOW, JUST NEW HERE. BUT I WANT TO DEFER TO THE LOCAL COUNCIL MAN OR WOMAN ON A LOT OF THESE ISSUES. I'M KIND OF LIKE. COUNCILMAN CARLISLE. I'M NOT REALLY CRAZY ABOUT DOING THIS BECAUSE OF WHAT'S BEEN TOLD. LIKE MR. PIACENTINI SAID, THAT YOU'RE TAKING PROFITS AWAY MAYBE FROM THIS GROUP, AND THAT COULD BE OPEN A WHOLE CAN OF WORMS. BUT ANYWAY, I WILL HEAVILY FAVOR WHEN THE FINAL VOTE. THE FACT THAT YOU'RE PUSHING THIS BECAUSE YOUR CONSTITUENTS ARE ASKING YOU TO DO IT. THANK YOU. COUNCILMAN REED THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. AND THIS MAY BE AN OBVIOUS QUESTION, BUT THE COMPANY DOES OWN THIS LAND. THEY DO. OKAY. IS THERE ANY OTHER? I'VE BEEN ON PLANNING AND ZONING FOR CLOSE TO NINE YEARS. THIS IS THE FIRST TIME THAT I CAN EVER REMEMBER ANYTHING LIKE THIS. HAS ANYTHING LIKE THIS BEEN DONE IN THE CITY SINCE MERGER? BRIAN, DO YOU WANT TO OR ANYBODY, I GUESS FROM YOUR GROUP IT TALK TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT AUTHORITY TO DO AND THEN WHETHER AND THEN WHETHER WE HAVE DONE THIS, EVER DONE IT OR DONE IT RECENTLY. CHANGED THE RULES ON US. WE WE FORGET TO HIT THE BUTTON EVERY TIME. NOW SEE. YEAH. BRIAN DAVIS, LOUISVILLE METRO OFFICE OF PLANNING I MEAN WE WE HAVE COMPLETED MULTIPLE AREA WIDE REZONINGS FOR VARIOUS REASONS, WHETHER IT'S ASSOCIATED WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN ASSOCIATED WITH, YOU KNOW, SOME OTHER REQUESTS FROM EITHER METRO COUNCIL OR THE PLANNING COMMISSION, BOTH THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND METRO, ANY LEGISLATIVE BODY HAS AUTHORITY TO INITIATE AN AREA WIDE CHANGE. SO WHENEVER WE RECEIVE SUCH A REQUEST, THEN, YOU KNOW, WE WE LOOK AT THAT, WE MAKE A RECOMMENDATION. IT GOES THROUGH THE PLANNING COMMISSION MAKES A RECOMMENDATION TO THE LEGISLATIVE BODIES. AND IN THE LAST YEAR, YOU KNOW, EARLIER THIS YEAR, THE CITY OF JEFFERSONTOWN DID AN AREA WIDE REZONING ON SOME PROPERTY THAT THEY HAD ANNEXED. AND SO, I MEAN, IT'S NOT UNCOMMON FOR A CITY TO INITIATE SUCH ZONING REQUEST. NOW, HAVE WE HAD ONE THAT'S BEEN INITIATED BY AN EVENT LIKE THIS? I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH ANYTHING. JULIA MAY HAVE SOMETHING FOR US HERE, SO I'LL LET HER CHIME IN AS WELL. SO I DON'T KNOW THAT WE'VE HAD ANY INITIATED IN THIS MANNER, BUT WE HAVE HAD A COUPLE RESOLUTIONS FROM COUNCIL ABOUT TURNING PROPERTIES INTO LIKE DIFFERENT RESIDENTIAL. THERE WAS ONE IN BARRYTOWN, THERE WAS ONE IN. LIKE WATSON LANE ELEMENTARY AND THEN ONE IS OFF OF DIXIE HIGHWAY FOR VETERANS HOUSING. THOSE THREE WERE PROBABLY CAME IN EITHER EARLY THIS YEAR OR LAST YEAR. THAT WAS SOMEWHAT SIMILAR.

THOSE PROPERTIES WERE OWNED BY METRO, THOUGH, AND JULIA, THIS IS LAURA FERGUSON. WASN'T THERE ONE AN AREA WIDE REZONING ALONG LEXINGTON ROAD THAT WAS DONE SEVERAL YEARS AGO? YES. FOR SOME OF THE INDUSTRIAL PROPERTIES IN THAT AREA. RIGHT. SO THERE WAS A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT THAT WAS DONE ALONG LEXINGTON ROAD, SOMEWHAT SIMILAR OR IN THE SAME GENERAL VICINITY OF THE THAT INDUSTRIAL SITE. I'M GOING TO PRONOUNCE IT WRONG. GIVE IT, GIVE IT ON. I THINK WHAT I WAS GETTING AT, IF I COULD JUST POP BACK IN THANK YOU, IS A SPECIFIC SITUATION OR INSTANCE OF INDUSTRIAL SPECIFIC INDUSTRIAL DOWN ZONING. WELL, I MEAN, RIGHT NOW WE ARE ACTUALLY IN THE MIDDLE OF A PROJECT WHERE WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THE LAND BANKS, LOOK AT LAND BANK PROPERTIES, LOOKING AT THOSE THAT ARE ZONED EASY ONE, THEY ARE PRIMARILY OWNED BY LOUISVILLE METRO GOVERNMENT AND POSSIBLY DOWN ZONING THOSE OUT

[01:55:05]

IF IT WAS RECKLESS, IF IT WAS INTENTIONAL, THEN THEY MAYBE SOME PUNITIVE ACTIONS ARE IN ORDER, BUT THEY DID NOT INTEND FOR THIS EXPLOSION TO HAPPEN. SEVERAL YEARS AGO, GE APPLIANCES HAD A BUILDING GO UP IN FLAMES THAT RAINED DOWN PLASTIC ON HOUSES ALL OVER THE AREA SURROUNDING THEM. ARE WE GOING TO DOWNGRADE THEIRS? YOU KNOW, PLANES COME OFF THE RUN OFF THE THE RUNWAY AT BOWMAN FIELD MULTIPLE TIMES. ARE WE GOING TO DOWN DOWNGRADE BOWMAN FIELD? YEAH I, I CAN'T I CAN'T SUPPORT THIS ONE. COUNCILMAN VETERAN THANK YOU JULIE I THINK ANSWERED THE QUESTION BECAUSE SHE WAS TALKING ABOUT THE YOU KNOW THE WATSON LANE AND DIXIE HIGHWAY. OBVIOUSLY WE WE OWN THOSE PROPERTIES AND WE'RE WE'RE REZONING THEM FOR A SPECIFIC USE. AGAIN, HARD PRESSED TO TO SAY YES TO THIS BECAUSE I THINK WE ARE JUST OPENING THAT CAN OF WORMS. I, I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO. I THINK THEY SHOULD GO THROUGH THE PROCESS TO REZONE IT IN THE MANNER THAT THEY SHOULD. WHEN THAT HAPPENED, I REMEMBER A ZONING CASE IN MY DISTRICT THAT WAS GOING TO BE AN M-2 ZONING, AND I THINK BRIAN AND JULIA CAN REMEMBER THIS, THAT IT CAUGHT A TON OF BACKLASH ON BECAUSE IT WAS A WEAKER COUPLE WEEKS AFTER THIS EXPLOSION HAPPENED, BUT IT ALLOWED US TO ALSO LEARN AND UNDERSTAND WHAT TYPE OF BONDING ELEMENTS AND THINGS WE CAN PUT ON THAT PROPERTY MOVING FORWARD.

SO WE DON'T HAVE WE MITIGATE THE RISK OF ANYTHING, CATASTROPHES HAPPENING OF THAT, OF THAT NATURE. SO IF YOU SAID, HEY, I WOULD LIKE TO SUGGEST ADDING THESE SPECIFIC BONDING ELEMENTS TO THIS PROPERTY IN SOME FACET. IT'S CHEAPER THAN REZONING IT AND ALLOWING THE THE OWNERS TO DO THAT AND GETTING THEIR BLESSING. WE PROBABLY BE HAVING A DIFFERENT CONVERSATION HERE, BUT THAT'S ALL I GOTTA SAY. THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN BRATCHER. WELL, JUST ARE THEY GOING TO SPEAK? THE OWNERS ARE GOING TO SPEAK ON IT, OR IS THEY GIVE YOU ALL THEY'RE GOING TO GIVE YOU? DO YOU KNOW THEY WILL? I WOULD GUESS THAT ONCE WE I DON'T THINK THAT THEY WOULD SPEAK UNTIL WE HEAR BACK FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION BECAUSE WE'RE THAT'S WHAT WE'RE ASKING THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO TAKE A LOOK AT IT AND SAY, YOU KNOW, WHAT DO YOU THINK? DO YOU THINK THIS SHOULD BE DOWN ZONED? SO I THINK MAYBE ONCE THAT HAPPENS, THEN THAT WOULD BE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THEM TO REACH OUT TO MY OFFICE OR REACH OUT TO THE MAYOR OR SPEAK ABOUT IT. I'VE HEARD A COUPLE OF MY COLLEAGUES SAY THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT GO THROUGH THE SYSTEM.

WHAT IS THE PROCESS? WHAT IS THE SYSTEM? IF THIS, SAY, DOES NOT PASS, WHAT IS THE SYSTEM LIKE? THEY WERE? I THINK WHAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT IS IF IF THE PROPERTY IS GOING TO BE REZONED, THAT THEY WANT IT TO BE THAT THE PROCESS, THAT THE PROCESS TO BE STARTED TO BE INITIATED BY THE OWNER. OH, I SEE THAT'S THE PROCESS, THE REZONING PROCESS. IT TYPICALLY COMES FROM EITHER THE OWNER OR AN APPLICANT THAT HAS A HAS A, AN OPTION OR, OR SOME SORT OF CONTRACTUAL ABILITY TO PURCHASE THE PROPERTY IS WHO USUALLY IS THE INITIATE INITIATES THE PROCESS. AND I ASK THIS QUESTION ONCE, I'LL JUST QUICKLY SAY IT AGAIN ARE THEY GOING TO BE LOSING, YOU KNOW, LIKE ABOUT THEY'RE GOING TO LOSE VALUE IF WE DO THIS RIGHT.

AND WE'RE JUST BASICALLY THE GOVERNMENT IS TAKING THAT VALUE AWAY. SO IT DEPENDS. I THINK,

[02:00:02]

THAT DOESN'T MEAN WE HAVE TO TAKE THE RECOMMENDATION. SO I'M ANXIOUS TO SEE WHAT THEY COME BACK WITH. SO I'LL BE IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU. AND I DO APPRECIATE THAT, COUNCILMAN REID AND I THINK THAT'S COUNCILMAN, COUNCILMAN PIACENTINI HAD TOLD ME AS WELL THAT HE HE KIND OF WANTED TO SEE THE RESOLUTION GO FORWARD SO WE COULD HEAR BACK FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION. AND THEN IF YOU HAVE A PARTICULAR STANCE BASED ON THAT RECOMMENDATION, SIMILAR TO THE ONES WE'VE HEARD HERE TODAY, I THINK THAT WOULD BE THE MORE OPPORTUNE TIME TO TO TAKE THAT STAND. AND I WOULD HOPE THAT THE RESOLUTION ITSELF TODAY WOULD GO THROUGH SO WE COULD HEAR BACK FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND HEAR THEIR THOUGHTS. SO I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO SUPPORT THIS, EVEN IF THE ULTIMATELY, YOU MAY BE A NO VOTE ON WHAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION COMES BACK WITH. OKAY. WITH THAT SAID, I HAVE NO FURTHER NO MORE SPEAKERS HERE. THIS IS A VOICE VOTE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. AYE. ALL THOSE OPPOSED OKAY. SO I THINK LET'S DO A ROLL CALL SO WE KNOW WHAT WE HAVE HERE. VOTING IS OPEN.

COUNCIL MEMBER RAYMOND. YES. VOTING'S CLOSING CHAIR. YOU HAVE FOUR YES VOTES AND THREE NO VOTES. OKAY. 4 TO 3. THIS WILL GO ON OLD BUSINESS ON THE NEXT COUNCIL AGENDA. OKAY.

WITHOUT ANY FURTHER AGENDA ITEMS IN FRONT OF US. ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANYTHING ELSE THEY WANT TO DISCUSS BEFORE WE ADJOURN? WITHOUT HEARING ANYTHING ELSE? WE ARE ADJOURNED.

[Adjournment Note: Agendas are followed at the discretion of the Chair. While an item may be listed, it does not mean all items will be heard and/or acted upon by the Committee.]