Okay, if everyone would please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance.

Commissioner Shanack, would you lose another pledge?

Under God.

Chief Thompson, please leave the invocation.

We thank you for these commissioners who are making difficult decisions on behalf of this community.

We pray for everyone in this room tonight, all our citizens, our first responders, our employees.

We just lift them up in prayer and play your pressing upon them.

Please be seated.

First item um I will address is the excusing uh Kitty Stroke for the meeting tonight, but she is you have on it.

She's up there.

Kitty, you there?

Okay.

Commissioner Strode is here up in the right-hand corner on the screen.

She is here.

So uh first item of business is new business, appeal of a denied beer cheese relief fund grant application.

Shannon Tipton, who is with the Crystal Coat Kevin, Mystic Cottage, if you want to come forward and thank you all for allowing me to be here.

Selected by the advisory group.

Which indicated that the application was eligible for evaluation.

I was also not notified in writing that my application had been tabled by the advisory group, resulting in a three-month waiting period following by CPA review.

During that period, I did not receive written communication regarding the status of the tabled application, nor did I receive a notice when my application would be reviewed and ultimately denied.

Based upon the process as it unfolded, it appears that the advisory group exercised decision making authority over public administrative funds in the manner that exceeded an advisory role.

The application materials specifically stated that the funds are to be distributed following a review by an independent certified public accountant with an advisory committee establishing ranking and granting and grant totals to be submitted to the commission for review and approval.

The structure indicates that the advisory committee role is to rank and recommend applications for commission review rather than exercise final authority as to who is denied and who goes on to the governing governing body.

The advisory group made the decision which the applications were approved and forwarded to the governing body, which is you, the city council.

And what applications were denied, which never reached your governing body.

In regard to my application, the advisory group appeared to have exercised authority to deny my application using criteria outside of the published guidelines rather than serving solely as an advisory role in the to the governing body.

During the appeal process, when I asked clarification regarding the application review and determination process, Ms.

League acknowledged and took responsibility for typographical errors in the application materials.

This acknowledgment further raised concerns for me about how eligibility was determined and what criteria was being applied to the applications.

Additionally, the city commission minutes from September the 2nd, 2025 listed the beer cheese relief funds under the heading of DDIF fund.

This public record appears to indicate that the oversight and processing authority for the grant program rests with the Downtown Development Investment Fund.

This classification raises greater questioning about whether the advisory group determinations and actions aligned with the established oversight framework under the commission's own records where there are no DDIF minutes reflecting any activities related to the beer cheese relief fund.

When I appeared for the denial, a meeting was held, or when I appealed the denial, a meeting was held, a motion was made, that motion was seconded and votes occurred to uphold the denial.

However, no minutes were made or taken, and or will they be made available for public view?

This is a concern as there is a KRS 61.835 for Kentucky Open Meeting Act.

Because the program involves publicly adjusted funds and reportable grant payments, I'm respectfully asking the commission to review whether the process used is aligned with the requirements of Open Records Act KRS 61.800 through 61.850 and the Kentucky Open Records Act, KRS 61.870 through 61.8H4, including whether appropriate notice documentation and records were kept and would be made available.

I'm also respectfully requesting that the governing approval body overturn the denial of my application and approve the application based upon this assessed criteria and the information provided by the CPA as indicated in the eligibility process.

This request is not on behalf of just my business, but to ensure that all programs intended to support local businesses are administered with clarity, consistency, and transparency so applicants and the public can trust the process.

I appreciate your time, your service, and your consideration.

Thank you.

Thank you, Shannon.

While we're discussing this, I'm going to ask Whitney if she would like to come forward and address any of this, and that's these some other members of the advisory committee.

Mr.

Walker wanna come up with me to answer any questions.

Thank you, Shannon.

I guess I have a lot of notes.

Um, but if you guys have specific questions, I think that would be the easiest way to approach this.

So if you have questions about the process or anything like that, I'm happy to answer those.

And I know that Mr.

Walker would be as well.

I think maybe just explain to us what why it was denied.

Yeah.

Um, so the reasoning for the denial um from the advisory group was that um the businesses uh needed to have been in business for one year prior to application date in order to give a fair representation of a comparison of year over year data.

Um so Miss Tipton did have a business um prior to that, but it wasn't located in downtown Winchester, which the advisory group determined couldn't really give an adequate comparison.

Um so that was the reason for the denial.

Okay, Mr.

Walker, you want to add anything?

You're on the committee there, just kind of uh yeah.

Um what was the vote on the committee?

I have no clue.

All votes were been unanimous thus far, 100%.

Okay.

Um, and the reason for denial, I guess you kind of get in the weeds because you have two separate issues that you've been asked to look at tonight, which is whether or not this board was acting under authority or legal.

We've maintained we actually said this at the um appeal meeting that we've considered this an ad hoc meeting.

Uh, it does get a little confusing because DDIF funds uh are held by it's Beer Cheese Festival, it's held by the Blue Grass Community Foundation, it gets all back and forth.

It's a big mess.

You guys know more about it than me.

I'm not even gonna try to go down that rabbit hole.

Um, but I will say that um we tried to get this grant out in accordance with Mayor Reed, what you had requested.

Um, in the timeline that was requested, we could have possibly put together a um you know full set of bylaws and all that, but it would have taken another six months to a year to get to that point.

So the idea was to get this out as quick as possible.

Um, when we proposed this for you guys, the kind of mandate was yeah, we'll do that.

You guys figure out the best way to get money to downtown businesses.

Um I don't specifically the reason that there were multiple applications tabled was we didn't have any information that the the bulk of the grant was given based on your loss of income year to year, not on any um damages or anything like that.

And so when you have a business that wasn't in the downtown the year prior, then construction begins, then that business is in downtown.

There's just no way to compare apples to apples.

I think the same would have been true had a business moved across the street, or if a business had expanded.

Uh, any alteration from exact same of this year to this year is going to definitely alter the profit and loss statements, and that's why the group decided that we just can't justify um uh awarding monies when we have no clear uh direction of what a comparable was this year to last year.

Okay.

Um, and just for clarity purposes, so when we approved the funding, there were two separate relief programs that were approved.

There was a DDIF fund that was up to $3,000 for any business within that district.

Um, and then the relief funds were a separate applicant application process under different guidelines, um, different rules, different process.

So those three thousand dollar grants did go through the DDIF commission committee, um, which is a appointed city commission um committee.

So we do have minutes, we do post-meeting announcements, that sort of thing for those.

Um because like Mr.

Walker said, this was an ad hoc group.

We did not have meeting minutes, we did not post um that the meetings were taking place.

Um there's been quite a bit of confusion when we established these two different relief programs about what was what, and so I think that um DDIF has been thrown in there as that this is that is the same thing, and it's not.

Um, and so I did as Ms.

Tipton said, I did take ownership that there was an error where DDIF was listed in either the guidelines or the application.

We should have caught that, but um, for the sake of trying to get these funds to people as quickly as possible, we did move quickly, and that was a mistake on on it, and I took ownership for that.

So because we did push you all for relief for the for the downtown uh business.

And I would like to add with that too that there were multiple communications.

I personally worked on the DDIF stuff myself to try to get it through as quick as possible with Whitney.

Uh, we also have been in communication with every downtown person I have their email on, and there's everyone is included in this, even the last one before the commission decided on this.

So if anybody's got any questions, if anybody wants to add to it, if there's any issue whatsoever, please come to this meeting and discuss it.

And I don't call anybody showing up to have any okay conversation about that.

And it's my understanding, correct me if I'm wrong that Ms.

Tipton or you can correct me.

Um, that you did receive three thousand dollars from DDIF.

Is that correct?

Okay.

Um Commissioner Toole, if you don't mind me asking, I'm gonna call you to put you on the spot, but you were at that meeting, I think.

Can you fill in some gaps or opinions or thoughts?

Um, I have all kinds of opinions, but in the end, um you know, we have created an advisory board for the reason to give recommendations, so above all else, I would say that my opinion is to follow the recommendation of the board.

Um I think Miss Tipton, after reading her narrative, has encountered a lot of um pain through the construction process, as numerous businesses on Main Street did, and I won't divulge too much of my opinion on that.

And I think the scenario is unfortunate because yes, she was operating in the city of Winchester, but unfortunately she wasn't on Main Street, and we have businesses on Court Cleveland, Lexington, Broadway who have been in existence numerous years and weren't eligible for this.

So it was a very specified um checklist of things that would make you be able to receive the funds.

Um a personal note, you know, I haven't spoken up in the best strongest way of saying things for Crystal Coven.

Um, there's been a lot of drama around the business, and so I'm taking this moment to say that I think Shannon's business, Mrs.

Tipton's business, is a great asset to the downtown community, but it's just a shame that it's this fine line of a timeline that is making the difference here.

How long were you downtown before you made this application?

So I took possession of that building in the first of May.

And it was May 17th, Shannon.

Right, sorry, Mr.

I officially opened my doors May 17th after all the um after all of the inspections were done and I was legally able to operate as a business.

I took possession of that building the first part of May.

Um, that was with careful consideration of reading the contract of the construction um and how things would play out, and as we all know, that's not how things played out.

And I will re-reference again that the criteria for why I was denied was not listed in the eligibility.

But if you open May the 17th, you made this application September the 25th, you were only open downtown four months.

So my the previous business was less than a mile away, serving the same community with the same offerings, same prices, same ownership, same everything, after spending multiple hours with the CPA, when you're looking at uh profit and loss based upon something specific, he he agreed that that was a reasonable, and I actually was approved for more than I asked for.

Um so um by the CPA that reviews my financials.

So when you're looking at revitalization, when you're looking at things uh on specific impacts because I'm less was less than a mile away, and the denial of which I received was not part of the application process to begin with.

That's why I'm here.

I believe you asked for 6500.

Is that right?

I spent the weekend trying to read all the time.

That does not, and I included both festival incomes, which we were allowed to take out for what we were told, they were left in.

I did not count any extra signage that had to be purchased because of construction.

I didn't count anything that I'm still using.

Um, and when your CK CDA looks at you and said you made more money being less than a mile away from a downtown, both downtown festivals, and what hurt you dramatically was the construction, it's devastating.

Knowing that I looked at that contract very carefully um to make sure that if I did experience, and which everyone was going to everyone is going to experience some type of impact.

That was understandable, but the way things played out, that impact was much more than I think any of us had intended.

But the way things played out, that impact was much more than I think any of us had intended.

Okay, thank you.

So, Bill, do we need to take a vote?

Okay, appeal.

Yeah, of course.

Oh, I just wanted to Jennifer.

It's been a while since I didn't have something here.

Come on.

Um, Jennifer Wilson, 18 West Lexington Avenue.

Um, I have to say I had no idea that this was the DDF 3000 and this was separate.

So, and I was, as you know, intimately involved in all this stuff.

So if I didn't realize that we definitely had a little messaging problem.

Appreciate the both uh monies being made available as a downtown business owner.

Um, I understand where someone would want to say being a year downtown is a legitimate consideration to make, but it was not in the original requirements, and I think that we need to err on the side of assisting our downtown as opposed to creating criteria after the fact that business owners and citizens did not have as a consideration before applying.

Um, in this situation, the denied businesses.

I think she's the only one that existed over a year before being downtown.

So I think it's kind of niggly, and I think we should err if the money is available on the side of assisting.

I mean, I was just sitting in her store and she closed early, and I can't tell you how many people walked up to her door.

Um, you know, she has got significant traffic coming to come to her store, and I feel like we need to be as supportive as possible.

And I think we have to be very careful about being transparent in the way we treat our downtown downtown businesses and and funds that are being allocated through the city, whether it's through DDIF or from Beer Cheese or from an ad hoc committee created.

Um, I think that if she she went to the time in trouble and have the numbers that established that she had a bigger loss than she even asked for.

I think these are all significant.

And I also want to point out that nowhere does an appeal get considered by the entity that made the decision.

There's a reason for multiple layers, and I don't think an appeal could have been reviewed and justly carried out by the same entity that made the original decision that's being appealed.

And turning my lawyer brain off now.

Thank you guys very much for letting me see.

You you aren't eligible for these things.

I I was eligible for the 3,000 and I acquired it, and I think the other times you weren't right because I'm not sure.

But 12 months, but there was nothing in that application and in the materials that were provided to help guide whether or not you applied that indicated that you had to be open for a year in your location on downtown Main Street.

That was not there.

That was and it's not an ill, it's not illogical for that to have been a requirement, but it was not a requirement in the original application for a grant for grantees to apply to.

So you have to be very careful about what you're putting out there and being accountable for it as far as it was not a requirement when when Miss Tipton made her application and it was not uh it was it was not out there, it would have deemed her illegible.

Like I was not eligible to apply for that ten thousand dollars because I don't exist on Main Street.

When I looked at it, if it didn't say that, then I applied for it, then I'd get rejected for something that wasn't a requirement, then it's the same thing.

But that's not what we're talking about talking about grants.

You have to be very careful and you should have protectional writing those.

Well you know, and I I mean, we have to we have to go by the folks we ask do these things.

Uh because if we don't, if we don't listen to them, why that's I think a different point.

You you you put out an application for somebody to ask for grant money that they all have to report in their taxes that you have to account for where that money went as an entity that has ownership of the money, whether it was beer cheese or DDIF.

So you have to go, you have to be accountable for the good and the bad.

And I'm just saying in a small community like this where we're trying to do something with our downtown with type, I would err on the side of being helpful as opposed to not, but either way, but that was not a requirement.

If it was required that your business be open from 3 a.m.

to midnight, and your business isn't open from 3 a.m.

to midnight, it's continuously the next day or whatever.

I can't apply, but I won't know that you can't make that up as a rule after the fact.

Yeah.

Oh, but I mean, it's like if I wanted to move loads up on Main Street for one day.

Well, but that wouldn't meet the other requirements that are in the grant that you're open for certain amount of hours that you stay open for six months after.

I mean, you're you're going to an extreme to try to prove that there's a loophole when this is just a matter of fact of if I can't apply for this grant, you can apply for it.

She asked for 665.

She said she is for less than she was deemed eligible for by the accountant being eligible.

You asked for 6500, you were open for one third of the year.

I say we give her one third of what she asked for.

I was just wanted to make show my support and maybe that's your decision as far as how you guys proceed.

But I do think you have to be careful of who's reviewing decisions and who's making decisions.

If this is taxpayer money, I want to make sure that we're it's not taxpayer.

That's what I'm saying.

I don't know.

And I didn't know that going into it, but I just but it's still funds that are being allocated by the city.

Um it's just a pass, we're just the pass through.

I understand, but I think the the biggest point to me is if you put out a grant regardless of where the money's coming from, you have to abide by the word requirements or that was not a requirement when she applied.

Um anyway, just wanted to James.

Yeah, yeah.

Okay, so for anybody that doesn't know James Willman, high speed collectibles regularly on Main Street.

So um, I'm not gonna beat a dead horse, you know, for me from a legal legal perspective, the eligibility requirements didn't state that she met all the eligibility requirements.

The CPA signed off on it as well, saying that she should be unlighted at $6,600.

She requested 65.

From a legal perspective, and Mr.

Dykman can probably help me with this.

The money should be approved, no problem.

Because the denial letter is stating that they had to be open beforehand a year, that was not a uh an eligibility requirement.

So you can't add that to the fact, but you know, I'm not a legal expert, Mr.

Dyke Minutes.

So on top of that, I got approved for the 10,000 dollars, the full 10,000 dollars, um, which I greatly appreciate.

But one thing I did want to add in there as well is that you know, randomly we would show up and the concrete would be busted up in front of our door, there would be newly poured concrete, and I'd not get communicated with about it the whole nine yards.

So we had to close randomly.

Um, however, I was not going to wait uh for the city support to ensure the success of our business.

So I maneuvered around that as well the best as I could, and uh, we ended up opening up opening seven days a week.

Now, the bad part to that is that actually put us in a position to where we made more money than we did last year, and it's like, okay, so if I would have let the business fail and you know eventually close by the end of the year because we didn't receive that financial support, you know, should I have done that or should I have tried to figure it out and still made the same amount of money, you know?

So that was the bad part is because I couldn't submit year-to-date reports because it did show that we had more sales this year than last year, and uh what we had to do is we had to get creative, we had to use the uh like week-to-week analogy based off of us having to close certain days and stuff like that that we didn't know about, and that's how we got approved for the full 10,000 dollars.

So the only reason why I'm speaking on this is because I actually did have a pretty close hand with Chad and helping come up with the eligibility requirements for downtown.

I did think that we did speak about the one year, you know, uh being open downtown, but because that didn't get into the eligibility requirements, I don't think that we can uphold it.

So just wanted to throw that out there.

That's just my two cents.

Yes, ma'am.

You care about Joyce.

Uh my name is Misty Gay.

Okay.

Um I am a uh patron of the Crystal Coven.

Uh, but I'm not really here to speak on being a patron there.

Um, I kind of want to address Mr.

Cox's comment about upholding what the advisory committee says.

Um and I understand that you guys feel obligated to do that, but I also want to point out that you are also obligated as a governing board to hold them accountable.

Um, they've made a mistake by not including what they wanted to originally into the guidelines, and you all do have a duty as the governing body of the city to hold that that ad hoc committee accountable, and I think that's what we're asking you to do.

We're asking you to be our government and to be our government transparently, effectively, and fairly.

Thank you.

Well, Royal, let me address what you say it.

Yes.

There were times when people came in here with applications that I knew that I I knew were suspect.

Okay.

Okay, but we approved them because that's what the committee said.

Even the guy that came in here who closed the next week, and I knew he was going to close.

Then I would say that you missed an opportunity, sir, to hold your committee accountable.

Well, they didn't know that though.

But but he eventually did he didn't get the money.

But but I mean, if if why have them if you're not going to listen to them?

I'm not saying don't do that.

Right.

But why have a committee in place for that or for historic preservation or anything else parks?

I've served on the WBS.

And if we tell them tonight, okay, we're not listening to your recommendation.

Next time they meet, they'll probably have three people there.

I'm not asking you not to listen to their recommendations.

Take the opportunity to be transparent, correct the mistake, learn from it, and govern with fairness.

And I think that's a reasonable request.

May I?

Please.

Um aside from what you're saying, I I am not debating you by any means.

I I do find that you know the CPA inappropriately approved this because unfortunately, directions item two say stating beginning in April 2025, it began in May of 2025.

And and this is, and we had, and I shouldn't maybe be the one speaking up because I was in the appeal because this is where it gets hard because it does become personal.

I've only purchased an item or two from Miss Tipton.

I have been in the store.

I believe in metaphysics, I believe in what she's doing.

The story about your reiki treatment, all of it.

There's so many things I can say to that construction project, but that's neither here nor there.

The one thing that this situation makes me think of is similar to what Commissioner Cox is saying of being consistent in our regulations, rules, and upholding them.

And I will use and use a very specific example of street closures and how at one point the city commission approved street closures, and there was a bunch of street closure that did not fall within those parameters, and it still was voted through, and from that moment the commission no longer approves street closures.

So I am here to uphold what we are supposed to be doing and not dart around it.

I think strongly of everything Mrs.

Tipton has done.

It's just one of those things that it's hard to play.

Well, we can play a third here and a half year, and you know, I'd ask questions about some of the fees that she incurred, and for clear, concise lines, I think that is why I stand with what the committee had suggested.

Okay.

So my question is if they didn't include guidelines that they added after the fact.

Do you feel that's fair to anyone?

So I can't speak to legality.

I can say that what I have in front of me, the scoring sheet says April, and that if I had been on the committee or thought of it, when I'm which it doesn't matter because I'm not on it, but the CPA maybe, and the CPA volunteered their time.

So I I'm not sitting here saying shame on the CPA.

Um, but in everyone trying to do their best to do the right thing, there was some human error.

You know, I think that the program in and of itself is not standard for a local government.

I I've I've had a lot of feelings about the program.

I think it's a healthy thing to provide.

Um, but I I do think we're trying to do the best we can.

We did it as quickly as we can.

I'm not gonna speaking into anything legally.

So in turn, with um uh Mr.

Bowman stating that he was not able to give you a year to date, but yet he was still awarded the 10,000 dollars, but yet you're requiring for Ms.

Tipton to give a year.

I'm not debating, and I would have to go back to look at all of it.

Again, I think our city is.

We would need the city attorney.

This is not a personal moment by moment debate on my.

I was asking for fairness, and it seems like there's not fairness.

I I could just ask the city attorney to answer all that because those were the requirements, and all that the commission has seen were things that were approved until this moment we did not see what was denied.

And when I sat through the appeal process, I asked about other scenarios similar to this, and I'm aware of those, and there are some.

So Commissioner Strode, do you have any comments?

I'm sorry, any comments?

Well, the one comment that I have is I think what Shannon said, and I I came here real well tonight, but I think one reason this committee was put in place, and they're your peers from downtown.

And um I feel like that the commission needs to back their decision.

I mean, they are they are property owners, they are businesses, and they were put in place to make these decisions, and I really feel like we need to back them up.

Okay.

Well, from what I'm hearing, I think we need to be fair about it.

And I think we need to uh reopen it and look at it more further and come up with more for our solution for her.

That's what I think.

Okay, does anyone want to make the motion to Mr.

Dykman?

Should we say deny or to support, which is or as Commissioner Cox mentioned, make some other determination?

Monetary determination.

It's it's up to you.

Well, if we did not if it's denied, we don't have a vote, right?

Yeah.

No, I think it's too about.

Okay, I think it's too bad.

Yeah.

To either support the denial or overturn the denial.

So correctly.

Okay.

Anyone want to make a motion as to what you think?

I make a motion to support it.

To support the denial.

No, to support the fairness of what Mrs.

Gilton has spoken on.

We can send any appeal.

Okay, is that a motion?

Yes.

So motion is there a second.

Okay.

Motion fails for a lack of a vote.

Uh is there another motion?

You guys have already met on this twice, right?

Yes.

Should you did the appeal too?

Yes.

Oh, I'm sorry.

Excuse me, ma'am.

You heard me.

I would just say that's let's deny my mom work on her house now.

Guys, let's let's let's let's let's let's stay on topic, okay.

Please.

Okay, Jennifer.

So I was gonna suggest that having the same body um that made the initial decision really should not be who considers the appeal.

So not saying I'm saying that you, the commission should actually review the applications and and consider the appeal, I think is what Commissioner Shannot was suggesting.

So I was just trying to be a an aid in clarifying, but you are looking at having a decision making body because you've made them the decision making body as opposed to just making a recommendation that you will have them to then hear the appeal, and just saying for fairness that maybe that should be considered by you guys directly as opposed to the committee.

His ability to reviewed it, but it should be another set of people.

Okay, go ahead.

Mr.

Dykman, I I think our point's well taken in the sense that um can you speak up just a little bit?

I think the point is well taken in the sense that the body that makes a decision is not the body that hears the appeal.

It doesn't happen to the court, doesn't happen anywhere else that I know make the decision that's appealed to someone else.

And that that is you, and and that would be um Mr.

Chenult, Commissioner Chenol's recommendation to you that the commission ought to review the appeal and then the decision be made following uh following that.

So are you saying from this point on or well in this specific incident?

Specifically as it were as it relates to this ad hoc committee, because this I mean that's what an ad hoc committee is.

This this is over now.

That committee will be dissolved and will be no more um with completion of this, but this specific application should be reviewed.

There's been an appeal made.

Right.

You as a city commission will review that appeal and come back with the formal recommendation and vote up or down.

I motion to table the appeal to the next meeting so the commission can review the entire packet and the narrative.

That's that's reviewing the appeal.

So I was just yeah, well, I think we have to remotion it since it was denied.

Uh yes, we will so I will motion and I'll make a second.

There we go.

All in favor, aye.

Aye.

Any opposed by like so motion carries.

So we will bring this back.

Uh I have read the packet.

I will reread the packet.

Um, and then at our next meeting, which is March 3rd.

March 3rd.

Then we'll have an answer.

And it's okay in a public format.

Uh Mr.

Attorney Dykeman, if I cycle the appeal process.

Uh you didn't vote on it.

I don't really think you have not vote.

No, I think I think you can just wanted to know how thank you.

Okay.

Okay, thank you all.

All right.

Next item on the agenda is uh 2B frontier way pickup and drop off lanes for schools.

Uh who wants to address that, Mr.

I'm gonna let Mr.

Jesse uh and Mr.

McCoy if you'll come forward and he was the uh um the one that suggested this, and I want to give Jesse uh the credit in our uh public works committee meeting that he uh had mentioned this, and I think it's a very good suggestion.

Great idea.

Yeah, um after talking with Dustin when he was here because I included them on email the other day when I had this map drawn up to look at this.

Um my thoughts would be that we have the role of parking that is basically overflow parking for the area over there now with all the traffic with the the schools going in, uh all the traffic being back there with Winchester Farms in the back, uh the new additions going in.

I think we turn that lane into a loading and unloading drop-off pickup lane, block it out for a time determined by the school system that they feel would be beneficial to them, you know, like a six to eight, um like a uh three to five or two to four something tide period, just twice a day.

The residents would still be able to use the parking through the day, overnight, weekends without any problems, they would just have to be moved before loading and unloading.

And what that would do is they would put all the in-bound traffic that blocks everything over there against the curve and still allow two lanes of travel right for people to get in and out mornings, afternoons.

Oh boy, yeah, and then if somebody was to happen to park, say somebody had to run in their house real quick and they parked on the road in front of their house, you would still have enough room for traffic to flow without impeding anyone else in the area.

So I mean it's just something I thought of that, especially since that widens out once you get to Barton Court.

Yep, you can see the road widens.

So why don't we take advantage of that, especially with you know, possibly the subdivisions growing in the back and some some other future plans?

It's a phenomenal creative idea.

Have you discussed this with the school system?

They were included in the emails.

Uh I told them we would get together with um transportation dust and ourselves to sit down and discuss it first before we actually brought a real plan on how to do things well with other with Brian public work.

So we would strike it out.

We're looking at the cost and making sure and signage and everything right now, just so we all know up front what it would be and how beneficial I think this is going to be too.

Well, I taught at the trade station, it took a helicopter to get out of there.

Yeah.

So they're blocking off through the day because they don't want cut through traffic.

Correct.

So this will help them.

They could come out after drop off and pick up, keep the steel keep closed.

The residents still can use the parking through the day, evenings and weekends without really any hindrance.

So Mr.

City Manager, do you want us to wait and no vote tonight?

Yeah, and we'll let you all bring it back to the next meeting.

I just wanted your I just wanted your consensus on it.

I didn't want to waste the school board's time and our staff time and doing the work.

So if we can if we have your consensus that you're fine with it, then we'll move forward.

We'll put together, we'll put together a little cost estimate of what it's gonna cost us to sign, stripe it and all that, and then uh we'll go from there and then hopefully, you know, um definitely in the next month or so.

If we can get Brian broke loose, we'll get him out there and we'll try to get this done.

We're probably gonna have to make some notification.

And then I think it would be good to notify the property owners at front along that entire uh area of what we're proposing to do here.

Uh I'm sure you know nobody wants to lose a parking spot, but at the same time, uh they want traffic to flow as well.

So, you know, it's uh it's hard to uh please both sides of it.

But we'll try we'll do our best, but I think notification it would be in order to do that.

And all of these houses have driveways, too.

Driveways, garages, uh and you know, we're technically not taking anything from them.

That's just overflow parking currently.

Uh a lot of people, I mean, we all know we like to keep Marty's car out there.

Maybe we could space him off the spot, spread out that way.

The car's not sitting there in the you know, once we do this to still keep the memorial going kind of for him in an area, and then uh I just think that's better use of that area because once you get past the preschool's driveway, it actually the road comes back down to just two lanes.

So, you know, with future connection points, we may be able to take this out once we get a little bit further down the road with some of these subdivisions and at future connection points out to Kobe, out the Lexington road toward you know, going to Fat County.

So but this was just a suggestion I had while we were sitting in meetings listening to listening to our public talk about, you know, because I was in the planning zoning meeting and some people were concerned because you only have that way in and out for the whole entire area back there.

So once you get past Lowe's, you're one road in one road out.

Exactly.

So this is just something I'm popped in my head to think maybe we bring it out and let you all discuss it, see if everybody's on board, school boards on board.

And there's a safety reason as well you know you got injury one one way in and one way out is a fire you have a school threat chief and you know access so that'll open that back up for everybody.

So I just think this is something we'd think of especially because once we get that and a connection point out we could always extend Martin Luther to go on and connect to then we'll give us a full loop in the future.

Unless the commission has a reason not to I think we'll go ahead and ask for your due diligence on this and do a cost run and come back with recommendation.

And every one of these houses needs to be yeah anybody that will be within basically especially from Barton all the way to the end of frontier right now I think anyone facing that area even if it's I don't know if we can send out to everyone in the area but at least those houses I I think every at least everyone between Crockett and Tremont.

Yeah because that's the only about well I mean really from Bart from where it widens out from that point I think we go from that point to the end of the front here anyhow facing frontier over notifications not gonna hurt yeah because the word will start spreading through the neighborhoods and then you know once we somebody watches this and we start putting out a few more things everyone will start getting a little traction on what we're talking about.

So I think I think a lot of everybody over there like that.

Great idea.

I don't have to deal with it I know there's a lot of folks that are in and out there that do like I said both chiefs you know police and fire they just takes 45 minutes to pick your child up at your school yes there's a problem.

And you know these days a lot more people are dropping off picking up and it allows them to stack up safely not in the middle of the road so thank you thank you all thanks Jesse okay item three old business um winchester fire department funding request chief whitely and Alicia Martin who will come to the podium and tell us what's going on.

Just tell them what we did so they're aware what we do um I'd like to take credit for all this great letter and great work but uh Ms.

Martin truly is the architect of this process uh I wasn't even aware of some of these things that were available and we've met with multiple people now um Miss Martin helped draft this letter I believe we've sent it to Senator Elkins um as you may recall recall uh under previous leadership of the city manager we had worked with GRW which Mr.

Flynn was instantly involved with uh with some initiative for station three station two as well as potential new construction for a fire station um we have those plans shovel ready so uh with the help of miss martin we sent that off to senator elkins in hopes of getting some fundings of support for one or all or some of that and I guess we'll find out yeah so the the state legislator this budget session formalized a process for requesting funding should there be any discretion discretionary funding available so the correspondence you have is just the letter we submitted to Senator Elkins to initiate that process and then I filled out an online application so our request is in the queue um for the appropriate committees to review so like Chief said we have different levels of funding whatever he can secure we've got a project ready so um you know along with grants we're just trying any way we can to get our projects funded so but it's a testament to us having shovel ready projects we have the plans we have the cost estimates and that makes our projects that much more competitive so thank you for doing that.

You all have done a great job on that and if we get a new fire station out of it that'll be even better.

Fantastic so and we're all still we're all still really concerned about the west side of the community with very little fire protection.

Yes man so thank you both of you any comments from the commission okay it number four resolution uh I've asked our jailer to be here with us this evening and Mr.

Sammons uh to talk about uh House Bill 557 and if you all will look in your packet you know we have a resolution but we will hear from the jailer first okay I was trying to pull that in back without breaking it all right first of all just let me say thank you for the opportunity to speak tonight um I believe you all have a copy of the uh Caico's uh furnished support of House Bill 557 and also on the uh second um page area leaders urge to engage legislation on house bill five five seven I just wanted you to have that so that you'd be able to kind of see what we're looking at I I've got a uh couple of bullet points that I just want to touch base with um you know as you already know jails and tensioners uh they're the largest unfunded um mandate that the state puts on them uh on our counties uh it's uh this mandates crypt in our counties and our city budgets across the state you know contrary to some people's opinions taxpayers who live in the city uh they pay a county tax as well um

Um, as you already know, jails and tensors, uh they're the largest unfunded um mandate that the state puts on them uh on our counties.

Uh it's uh this mandates crippling our counties and our city budgets across the state.

You know, not contrary to some people's opinions, taxpayers who live in the city, uh they pay a county tax as well.

Um House Bill 557 if passed, it'll move some of the burden back to the state where it belongs.

Now I could spend the next 30 minutes talking about that, but I'm not gonna do that.

Thank you.

Um, first of all, um, among other things, if this is passed, it's going to um require the state to pay the actual cost of the incarceration, uh, which is we all know long overdue.

It will also require the state to cover the medical expenses of the state inmates, which we know was long overdue.

It will also require the state to reimburse the county taxpayers for expense when the inmate receives credit for time served.

I'll elaborate on this real quickly.

Sometimes we may have someone housed in our county and city jail here for a year, year and a half.

I've seen it go two years.

It takes that long to go through the process.

The time they go to the different courts, district court, circuit court, grand jury, and and so on.

You and I, the taxpayers are footing the bill on this.

We're paying for this.

Three meals a day.

We're taking care of their medical.

Not because we want to, it's because the law says we have to.

You know, a lot of times you'll hear people say the jail costs a lot of money.

It does, but we have laws that we have to follow.

Those expenses come with those laws.

We didn't create it.

Uh so this this will be good.

I just always like to elaborate on that so that people get a thorough understanding of it.

Um, when it takes them that 18 months to two years to go through here, and we're footing the expenses on it.

They'll go to court when it gets final sentencing, they'll give them credit for time served.

So you done done a year and a half, you done done two years of it.

That's all fine and dandy.

But you and I, the taxpayers have foot the bill on that 18 months or two years of taking care of these people if they're gonna give them credit for it.

The state needs to credit back to the cities and counties that have put the bill on it.

Uh the bill um, the bill will incentivize these regional jails where it's beneficial and practical.

An example would be six small eastern Kentucky jails, and I'm not picking on Eastern Kentucky, I'm simply using them as an example.

Six small uh eastern Kentucky jails, it wouldn't pay for them to have 30 million dollars or ever how much involved in each one of these jails.

So it makes sense for them to have a regional jail, okay?

A town the size of Winchester uh places, we should be involved in it.

But where are we gonna go?

You're gonna go to Burton County, you're gonna go to McGovern County, gonna go to Mattis County, gonna go to Lexing.

Um it's something that we need to look at.

Uh I I feel this way, as elected leaders, our voices, your voices carry a lot of weight in Frankfurt, and that's why I've come to speak to you tonight to try and ask for your support.

Um your support on House Bill 557 through a resolution, your personal telephone calls, your emails to our senators and representatives.

I think it'll help bring this issue to a forefront.

Uh as far as I'm concerned, this money could be better spent.

If we need to look at taking care of our cities and counties where it's blockedropping streets and roads, or it's building and improving our parks.

I think that's where a lot of this money can be a whole lot more helpful to our communities in Clark County and Winchester than us constantly footing the bill on what the state should be taking care of in these county jails.

They're they're putting this on the backs of these counties and cities, and uh it needs to be addressed.

And I think with uh your all support and everybody else's, we can do that.

I thank you for your time and appreciate it.

Well, while you're standing there, I will share with the commission that uh jailer came over to speak with me.

We had quite a good conversation about this.

I immediately picked the phone up and called KLC to see what they recommended to us as a city.

Yeah, and they said the bill is drafted is good.

Good.

And the other comment from JD Cheney was much more constructive approach than we've seen going in the past.

Good.

And they had no problem with us supporting the bill.

I went uh the first day or two, we had about 14 state representatives that co-sponsored this bill.

Uh we were very fortunate to have the amount of people reach out and talk to some of these people.

I went the other night to uh Frankfurt to the um Caico legislative reception.

Uh when I got there, they informed us that as of uh six o'clock that evening, they had 40 state representatives co-sponsored, and it was still moving, so so that's good.

Uh that's a plus, but uh, you know, they always say squeaky wheel gets grease, so I'm I'm gonna try and make it squeak best I can.

Well, and Frank, for clarification, how many folks you have over here next door is how many do we have?

Yeah, we're probably probably about 260 right now.

And how many of them are in jail for violation of a city or a county ordinance?

Oh, I understand.

No, yeah, right?

Yes, you're right.

They're all over there for violation of state or federal law.

You're right.

You're right.

You're absolutely correct.

But uh appreciate your time.

You have a question.

I do.

I started looking up what a regional jail authority was.

Are we we are not a regional jail?

So what does it take to become one?

Because we're we would need to become one, right?

So you know I know that's when you're talking about would be partner with bourbon or Paris because Montgomery County is a regional one, right?

So is Bourbon.

So would we, and I know this is not a final answer by any means.

I know it's your decision, but would we join you though?

Would we create?

And if we create one, what is like what's that cost?

Well, here's a good thing.

I think the the way that I'm reading this and understanding it.

Um, is that it's not so much we have to come a regional jail, we just have to have an agreement with other counties to house their inmates, which we have done that before.

I'll be honest with you.

I've housed for Estel County, I've housed for Madison County.

Um, you you know, uh, we house for Scott County, uh, which to be honest with you, I don't need to name reads, or I'm good.

Long as they pay us every month, you know.

I'm I'm good with it.

They only need you at some point.

And and uh, you know, uh no pay, no state.

Sure, sure.

But uh, but but it works out good.

Uh so I mean it's it's uh it's a great benefit um to this uh somewhere down the road uh and I apologize I didn't bring it tonight because I didn't want to get I didn't want to waste your all's time get too deep in the woods on it.

But but it's amazing.

I mean I sit and I look at each one of these each year we've been here, how much money we've been able to generate and turn back over to the physical courts and and and things you know from from housing out of county inmates from housing state inmates from housing federal inmates.

It's it's been uh it's been great.

Uh just it makes a difference now.

You know, they're like the weather, you know.

Some days you've got a um a full house, you know, where you're you're making pretty good, and then by the time they move them or they get final sentencing, you know, and and and there's a lot of different laws that pertain in this too.

It's just like with the state inmates.

If they get sentenced in their five years or less time, they can serve it in a county jail.

If it's five years or more time, they have to go to a prison.

Now, they might not stay there for two or three months, they might kick them back out to a county jail.

I just want to be on that list with them.

Sure, you know, their money's good, and and I'm willing to accept it because it comes right back in our community.

So kind of relevant to that, this last minute.

Um it says to have contracts with fiscal courts based on actual housing costs.

And I'm wondering what's the gap in that right now.

I can tell you right now, just for a state inmate, I'll use this for an example.

Uh just just sit down for a minute when I say this.

All right, so they pay us $35 and 34 cents a day to house a state inmate.

Okay.

Uh the average that the state pays their state facilities to house one is about six to three dollars and forty-four cents.

Uh so there's there's a huge difference, about double uh that they're paying their own.

They they they know they know what it costs.

You know, it's just time, it's just time for them to step up and uh sure say, hey, we need to be responsible.

We need to address what it is, you know.

Thank you all.

And we included that in the resolution, those figures.

Okay, so thank you so much.

So they are there.

Okay, is there a motion to approve the resolution?

Do we have to read it?

Go ahead and read it.

I'll order it.

No, I'm just getting just the title, please.

Title on me.

I'm just gonna discuss the city of Winchester, Kentucky requesting and urging the General Assembly to consider and pass House Bill 557.

I'll make that motion.

Is there a second?

I'll second.

Second by Commissioner Cox.

Any discussion, further?

All in favor, aye.

Aye.

Any opposed by like sign?

Resolution passes, and uh we'll send it on to Frankfurt.

Thank you all.

Thank you.

Okay, next item on the agenda is uh five orders, general orders.

Um Madam Clerk and order accepting the resignation of Joe Chenault from the Winchester Urban Renewal and Community Development Agency Board.

No, he just needs to not vote, I guess.

Don't you yeah, he can't he has to repeat this repeat.

I'll make a motion.

I'll second it.

All in favor, aye, aye.

Any opposed by like sign?

Motion carries, and Mr.

Chenault.

I'm Commissioner Chenault.

I'm thinking you served how many years on the urban renewal board right at 18.

18.

Your age, right?

Um the uh the reason he's uh submitting his resignation is basically because we were concerned it might be a conflict of interest with him being a commissioner and also uh working on a board that does expend funds.

So that was a major concern.

Thank you, Commissioner.

Okay, madam clerk, item B.

An order amending order number 2026-1, an order approving and accepting an automatic aid agreement between the city of Winchester and the Clark County Fiscal Court.

Okay, Chief, would you like to address that?

Um basically it's adding some language uh that could help uh live the um I guess my position being in this position, she mentioned his position.

Uh just providing some clarity to the structure of the company.

Nothing about what we're doing or the operations of it or the intent.

Uh is there to be changed.

So I think she's saying so.

And um the change is each party to this agreement shall relinquish command to the authority having jurisdiction and responsibility for the location or any emergency responses taking place, and I think that will clarify a lot of issues we've had in the past as who's in charge.

Yes, I should.

So is there a motion to approve?

So move motion by commissioner Shanauth.

Is there a second I'll second it?

Second by Commissioner Tool.

Any discussion?

All in favor, aye.

Aye.

Any opposed by like sign?

Motion carries item 5C.

And order transferring properties owned by the city of Winchester to Jennings McDonald.

Is there a motion?

So moved.

Motion by Commissioner Toole.

Is there a second?

Second.

Second by Commissioner Cox.

Any discussion?

All in favor, aye.

Any opposed by like sign?

Motion carries item D.

In order of approving funding from the downtown development investment fund, Main Street support grant and the amount of three thousand dollars.

Is there a motion?

So moved.

Motion by Commissioner Toole.

Is there a second?

Second by Commissioner Shenault.

Any discussion?

All in favor, aye.

Aye.

Any opposed by like sign?

Motion carries item E.

In order approving funding from the downtown development investment fund, Main Street support grant in the amount of three thousand dollars.

Is there a motion?

So move.

Motion by Commissioner Toole.

Is there a second?

Second.

Second by Commissioner Cox.

Any further discussion?

All in favor, aye.

Aye.

Any opposed by like sign?

Motion carries.

Item F.

In order approving funding from the downtown development investment fund, Main Street support grant in the amount of two thousand one hundred dollars.

Is there a motion?

No move.

Motion by Commissioner Chenault.

Is there a second?

Second.

Second by Commissioner Cox.

Any discussion?

All in favor, aye.

Aye.

Any opposed by like sign?

Motion carries.

Item G.

In order approving funding from the downtown development investment fund, Main Street support grant in the amount of three thousand dollars.

Is there a motion?

Second move.

Motion by Commissioner Tool.

Is there a second?

Second by Commissioner Cox.

Any discussion?

All in favor, aye.

Aye.

Any opposed by like sign?

Motion carries.

Item H.

In order approving funding from the downtown development investment fund, main street support grant in the amount of two thousand five hundred and eighty-seven dollars and fifty cents.

Is there a motion?

I'll make that motion.

Is there a second?

I'll second.

support grant in the amount of three thousand dollars is there a motion so move motion by commissioner toole is there a second second second by commissioner cox any discussion all in favor aye aye any opposed by a like sign motion carries item h in order approving funding from the downtown development investment fund main street support grant in the amount of two thousand five hundred and eighty seven dollars and fifty cents is there a motion i'll make that motion is there a second second second by commissioner cox any discussion i'd like to clarify that this is a business grant not a building grant yes that's all just careful all in favor aye aye any opposed by like sign motion carries item i an order declaring certain city of winchester property to be obsolete and surplus is there a motion second motion by commissioner cox second by commissioner tool any discussion all in favor aye aye aye any opposed by like sign motion carries uh brian while we've got this in my hand here this is for uh obsolete icebreakers and salt spreaders you can just warm out then right yes okay what i figured okay uh we've already uh had comments for the mayor commissioners city manager and city attorney in our last meeting uh did anyone sign up for comments from the general public no i didn't even push list out there i forgot the list is there anyone else that wants to make a comment okay if not um you've already adjourned this meeting but we'll do it again is there a motion to adjourn so moved motion by commissioner tool second by commissioner cox any discussion all in favor aye aye any opposed by a like sign spend the night here okay good we are adjourned ma'am i uh have i ever been unfair to you my motion