►
From YouTube: Interim Joint Committee on Local Government (7-19-22)
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
B
C
A
All
righty
first,
a
second
item
on
our
agenda
is
the
approval
of
our
minutes
from
the
june
21
meeting.
Hopefully,
everybody's
perused,
those
is
there
a
motion.
I
have
a
motion.
Second,
is
there
a
second
okay?
We
have
motion.
Second,
all
in
favor
say:
aye
aye
motions
are
or
the
minutes
are
approved.
A
We
have
a
array
of
guests
here
that
many
of
us
have
seen
before
today
to
review
and
answer
questions
regarding
the
american
rescue
plan
and
and
how
those
funds
that
have
made
their
way
down
to
state
government
and
local
government
and
how
they're
being
spent
and
used
and
we're
going
to
go
in
the
order
that
our
agenda
lays
out
today.
So
the
first
person
to
come
to
the
desk
will
be
mr
jd
chaney.
D
I
appreciate
the
opportunity
to
be
back
in
in
frankfort
and
members
of
the
committee.
You
know
if
you
remember.
Last
year
we
had
a
big
fancy
powerpoint
and
spent
a
lot
of
time
with
me
talking
about
how
these
arpa
funds
aren't
a
panacea
for
local
governments.
They're
still
not
a
panacea,
but
things
got
a
whole
lot
less
complicated
between
this
time.
D
So,
besides
a
handful
of
cities,
lexington
louisville
and
I
believe,
covington
all
of
the
city
awards-
were
under
10
million
dollars,
so
the
complicated
rules
are
are
out
that
we
testified
and
spent
so
much
time
talking
about
last
last
july,
we're
glad
the
treasury
listened
to
cities
and
counties
across
the
whole,
the
whole
nation,
about
the
difficulty
and
and
being
able
to
slot
them
into
some
of
them
very
specific
and
targeted
policy
oriented
objectives
from
from
treasury.
D
Just
to
summarize,
for
you
all
also,
you
know
where
the
cities
of
kentucky
land
931
million
dollars
between
the
two,
the
two
distributions,
931
million
dollars,
went
to
376
kentucky
cities.
If
you're
doing
the
math
you're
wondering
what
happened
to
the
other
50
or
so
cities,
we
have
416
in
kentucky.
D
Some
of
them,
as
you
know,
are
defunct
some
of
them
and
we
learned
that
they
were
defunct.
Some
of
them
did
not
accept
the
funding
at
all
and
that
was
redistributed
to
some
of
the
non-entitlement
communities,
but
the
376
cities
that
did
respond
and
wanted
the
money
931
million
dollars.
There
are
there's
a
division
among
cities
and
the
way
that
was
calculated
in
washington
and
the
way
that
was
distributed.
D
Entitlement
cities
were
able
to
split
up
a
chunk
of
the
city
allocated
money
from
congress.
Those
were
cdbg
eligible
communities,
kentucky
had
nine
of
them
and
that's
ashland
bowling
green
covington,
elizabethtown,
henderson,
hopkinsville,
lexington,
louisville
and
owensboro.
D
Together
those
nine
entitlement
city
governments
got
607
of
the
931
million
dollars
the
rest
of
kentucky
cities
shared
in
the
the
remainder
of
it,
the
324
million
dollars,
and
that
was
that
is
distributed,
and
that
was
sent
through
the
department
for
local
government
instead
of
directly
from
treasury
as
a
as
a
pass-through
of
what
congress
allocated,
and
that
was
split
based
purely
on
the
ratio
of
the
population
of
the
non-entitlement
communities
to
other
non-entitlement
cities.
D
A
lot
of
cities
have
delayed
allocating
their
funds.
You
got
to
keep
in
mind.
This
is
not
a
rush
to
spend.
We
have
encouraged
our
cities
and,
like
we
did
told
you
last
year
we
encourage
cities
to
hold
back
really
analyze.
How
they're
going
to
spend
this
money.
They
have
until
2024
december
31st
2024
to
determine
how
they're
going
to
spend
the
money
to
obligate
it.
They
have
to
spend
it
by
the
end
of
2025..
D
So
there's
not
kind
of
like
we
experienced
with
the
cares
act,
funding
a
rush
to
spend
it.
So
a
lot
of
cities
are
being
very
deliberate
in
how
they're
going
to
to
do
that,
and
so
the
the
final
rule.
As
I
said
before,
became
effective
april
1st,
the
reporting
period
went
through
march
31st,
so
we
we
didn't
even
have
reporting
that
reflected
the
final.
The
final
rule
honestly
at
this
juncture,
so
we
don't
have
a
great
inventory.
D
I
am
going
to
name
some
things
that
we
know
communities
are
doing,
but
we
don't
have
a
great
inventory
yet
of
what
kentucky
cities
are
doing
with
the
with
the
money,
our
non-entitlement
cities,
all
of
them
have
reported
appropriately
to
the
department
of
treasury,
as
required.
D
Ashland
ashland
cup
bowling,
green
covington,
lexington,
louisville
and
owensboro
have
to
report
quarterly
elizabethtown,
henderson
and
hopkinsville,
along
with
all
the
other
cities,
as
entitlement
communities
only
have
to
do
an
annual
report,
and
they
did
that
for
the
end
of
april.
D
As
I
said
before,
most
cities
hadn't
reported
how
they're
going
to
spend
the
funds
because
of
that
delayed
final
rule
and
the
first
reporting
period
ran
through
march
31st
with
an
effective
date
of
april.
First
of
the
final
rule
going
into
effect,
and
at
that
reporting
period,
cities
only
had
half
of
their
allocation
at
the
time
treasury
has
to
publicize.
So
we're
going
to
have
a
wealth
of
information
nationally
to
be
able
to
benchmark
what
kentucky
cities
are
doing
again
with
other
cities
across
the
country.
D
D
So
on
our
entitlement,
cities
of
the
four
cities
that
listed
their
uses
on
their
january
2022
report,
the
most
common
use
from
entitlement
cities
was
for
public
health
premium
pay,
which
was
authorized
under
that
interim
rule
response
to
negative
impacts
and
services
to
disproportionately
impacted
communities
were
the
four
top
categories
that
they
fit
in
under
the
old
interim
rule
before
the
final
rule
became
effective.
D
Those
four
cities
that
had
to
do
the
annual
report,
the
most
common
expenditures,
were
response
and
vaccinations
premium,
pay,
housing
assistance
park
and
recreation
improvements,
drinking
water
investments
and
provision
of
government
services,
louisville
budgeted,
20
million
for
premium
pay,
lexington,
13
million
covington
two
and
a
half
million
for
premium
pay
to
go
to
eligible
workers
who
perform
or
previously
performed
essential
work
during
the
pandemic,
as
defined
in
the
interim
regulation
bowling
green
another
entitlement,
community
plans
to
use
16
and
a
half
million
dollars
to
establish
a
fiber
optic,
cable
to
homes
and
businesses.
D
An
expansion
of
the
bowling
green
municipal
utilities
efforts
there
lexington
has
budgeted
10
million
for
affordable
housing
programs.
Those
of
you
that
represent
lexington
and
the
fayette
county
area
know
the
issues
related
to
that
louisville
set
aside
the
same
amount
for
their
court
eviction
diversion
program
to
help
low-income
residents
retain
housing.
Covington
set
aside,
3
million
for
various
affordable
housing
programs
to
assess
income
eligible
households.
D
Owensboro
has
promised
to
use
five
million
of
its
total
allocation
to
improve
stormwater
drainage
systems.
Two
and
a
half
million
to
replace
aging
water
tower
three
quarters
of
a
million
dollars
for
public
pool
upgrades
in
a
low
income
area.
Again,
a
lot
of
these
expenditures
are
tracking
the
old
interim
final
rule
that
were
slotted
in
those
categories.
Lexington
and
louisville
have
to
publish,
unlike
all
the
other
cities,
only
lexington
louisville
has
to
publish
an
annual
recovery
plan
that
outlines
the
proposed
use
of
funds.
D
They
have
to
incorporate
public
engagement
into
that
process
to
determine
how
to
use
the
arpa
funds
they
have
to
promote
equitable
outcomes.
Measure
of
performance.
Their
process
is
much
more
complicated
in
lexington
and
louisville
in
terms
of
making
those
expenditures
than
the
rest
of
kentucky
cities.
D
Now,
for
the
bulk
of
our
cities
across
kentucky,
as
we
said
before,
treasury
still
hasn't
released
those
records,
but
based
on
our
discussions
and
what
we
know
that
local
officials
are
talking
about
in
in
the
smaller
cities
across
kentucky
the
most
common
thing
that's
discussed
or
most
common
question
we're
getting
at
the
league
is
how
to
to
do
incentive
pay
or
premium
pay
for
essential
for
essential
work.
D
D
A
lot
of
them
are
doing
that
in
terms
of
not
a
bonus.
As
you
all
know,
under
section
3
of
the
kentucky
constitution,
we
cannot
give
bonuses,
so
it
has
to
be
in
consideration
of
work
performed
in
the
past
or
consideration
of
work
performed
in
the
future
again.
These
are
these
could
be
if
they're
permanently
added
to
pay,
create
a
structurally
imbalanced
budget
going
forward,
so
we're
being
very
diligent
in
our
cities
are
being
diligent
and
the
league's
being
diligent
in
our
counseling.
D
I
think
the
department
for
local
government,
the
same,
is
to
talk
about
the
fact
that
this
is
one-time
money.
We're
probably
never
in
our
lifetime,
see
anything
like
this
again,
so
building
a
budget
and
pay
solely
based
on
the
receipt
of
these
funds
going
forward
they're
going
to
have
to
have
a
continued
revenue
stream
in
order
to
be
able
to
continue
that
just
some
other
examples:
police
and
fire
equipment,
vehicles,
radios,
one
thing,
parks
and
recreation
improvement
seems
to
be
a
common
common
expenditure,
eminence
prestonsburg
for
sales
in
workland.
D
I
know
I
cover
some
of
your
all
cities
on
the
committee
are
providing
premium
pay,
ranging
from
70
cents
up
to
13
an
hour
on
a
go
forward
basis.
That's
the
cap
on
premium
pay
glasgow,
owingsville,
richmond
williamsburg
approved
premium
premium,
pay
on
a
look
back
basis,
so
they
look
back
over
the
pandemic
to
to
provide
not
a
bonus
again,
but
retroactive
premium
pay
for
the
services
performed
during
the
pandemic
for
their
public
safety
officers.
D
Those
totals
in
kentucky
at
least,
are
not
exceeding
about
two
thousand
dollars
per
employee.
Although
the
federal
rule
allows
you
to
go
up
to
25,
000
per
per
employee
kentucky
we're
averaging
out
about
2
000
at
this
point
on
the
premium
pay
central
city
sewer
line,
extensions,
refurbishing
water
tanks.
I
know
executive
director
williams
will
probably
testify
on
some
of
the
partnerships
with
the
state
and
what
the
general
assembly
allocated
a
lot
of
cities
are
leveraging
their
their
local
arpa
money.
D
Grayson
city
of
grayson's
allocated
a
quarter
of
a
million
dollars
to
become
a
gig
city
with
ultra
fast
fiber
optic
internet
access,
paducah,
four
million
dollars
for
stormwater
infrastructure
projects
back
to
richmond,
again
representative
fraser,
gordon,
providing
funds
for
employees
who
tested
positive
or
exposed
to
covid
to
provide
leave
time
when
there's
a
positive
test
to
be
able
to
pay
for
the
leave
time,
instead
of
them
using
sick
or
accumulated
sick
or
vacation
time.
In
order
to
do
it,
winchester
has
provided
premium
pay
of
329
000
for
covid
vaccine
incentive
program.
D
116
000
for
covid
related
employee
leave
kind
of
like
richmond
1.1
million
to
assist
non-profits
you're,
going
to
see
a
lot
of
a
lot
of
that
assistance
for
non-profits
a
lot
of
city
governments
perform
a
lot
of
their
public
services
by
partnerships
through
non-profit
organizations
and
and
some
cities
are
talking
pretty
extensively
about
that.
I
will
tell
you
as
well
in
addition
to
business
and
non-profit
aid
for
small
businesses,
a
lot
of
communities
are
talking
about
investment
again
in
the
infrastructure.
D
Non-Recurring
costs,
I
think,
is
really
critical
that
our
cities
not
structurally
imbalance
their
budget
with
these
one-time
funds
and
so
they're.
Looking
at
public
space
public
facility
upgrades
that
have
been
delayed
from
an
infrastructure
perspective,
lots
of
discussions
about
sewer
water
and
broadband
and
using
those
local
funds,
we
have
some
economic
and
develop
economic
development
and
workforce
development
programs
that
are
being
discussed
to
provide
specific
job
training.
D
Some
communities
are
talking
about
skill
based
training
matching
using
the
funding
to
do
that.
As
we
know,
across
the
commonwealth
and
in
our
communities
we
have
a
tremendous
workforce
shortage.
So
a
lot
of
cities
are
investing
their
money's
in
that
and
then.
Lastly,
a
major
issue
that
we're
probably
going
to
be
talking
about
over
the
next
three
or
four
years
is
cyber
security.
D
Our
municipal
and
local
government
infrastructure
overall
is
very
vulnerable
for
cyber
security
and
attacks
and,
in
fact,
so
vulnerable
that
the
the
private
insurance
market
is
slowly
backing
away
from
even
defining
it
as
an
insurable
risk
and
so
being
sure
our
city,
governments
and
our
governments
protect
the
information
of
their
constituents
as
well
as
as
their
operational
impacts
from
cyber
security.
So
we
see
a
lot
of
cities
that
are
talking
about
upgrading
their
cyber
security,
their
their
infrastructure
information
technology
infrastructure
as
well.
D
D
We
have
a
lot
of
cities
that,
even
though
they
don't
have
to
that,
are
engaged
in
a
public
dialogue
that
are
getting
public
input
on
what
they
what
they
ought
to
do,
and
so
there's
not
a
rush
to
to
spend
yet
that's
it
chairman
mills,
I'd
be
happy
to
answer
any
any
questions
from
the
city
perspective.
If
you'd
like
sure.
C
Thank
you
jd
appreciate
the
presentation
and
I
had
a
member
of
the
committee
who's
not
here
today.
Who
is
watching,
though,
and
ask
a
question:
can
you
explain
the
entitlement
city
issue
a
little
better?
I
know
that
goes
back
to
cdbg
funding
and
all
of
that.
But
can
you
explain
what
qualifies
an
entitlement
city.
D
So
as
so
as
this,
the
the
arpa
original
legislation
weaved
its
way
through
through
congress,
which
is
it's
hard,
even
though
it's
hard
to
imagine
something
being
more
complicated
than
weaving
away
a
bill
weaving
its
way
through
frankfort
in
washington.
D
The
the
process
was
an
initial
agreement
between
an
initial
agreement
to
provide
local
government
funding.
Then
city
and
counties,
our
national
league
of
cities
and
the
national
association
of
counties
agreed
to
split
the
local
government
portion
equally
between
counties
across
the
nation
and
cities
across
the
nation
cities,
cities
national
league
of
cities
went
further
and
said
well
on
the
city
allocation.
D
We
need
to
ensure
that
that
the
money
goes
to
our
our
larger
cities,
those
with
lower
income
populations,
and
so
they
did
a
split
based
on
the
cdbg
funding
formula
and
that
that
qualification
has
generally
been.
Is
it
in
a?
Is
it
in
a
metropolitan
area?
One
and
two?
What
is
the
socio-economic
standards
of
that
community?
D
And
again
we
have
nine
in
kentucky,
so
their
formula
became
part
of
the
that
formula
and
and
the
three
quarters
of
it
essentially
went
to
the
entitlement
communities
using
something
similar
chairman
meredith,
and
I
got
the
exact
math.
We
can
get
your
your
member,
something
similar
to
the
cdbg
split
on
entitlement
communities
and
then
the
rest
was
done
via
population.
D
There
city,
there's
population,
plus
the
socio-economic
conditions
of
the
community,
end
up
being
in
a
metropolitan
area
as
defined
by
the
by
the
census,
but
it
it
did
produce.
I
mean
a
lot
of
owensboro
and
bowling
green,
for
example,
called
and
said
how
in
the
world,
did
covington
get
more
money
than
than
than
us
we're
we're
bigger
than
than
covington,
and
that
and
those
factors
did
did
play
in
when
you
look
at
how
how
that
came
out.
A
Jd,
I
have
a
question
the
you
know:
there's
a
large
amount
of
money
flowing
down
to
the
cities
from
this
arpa
funding
and
was
just
curious.
I
know
your
answer
may
be
that
it's
too
early
to
tell,
but
I'm
curious
if
this
large
amount
of
money
coming
into
the
cities
is
going
to
affect
future
revenue
needs,
tax
increases
will
enable
them
to
only
take
the
compensating
rate
this
year
or
next
year
versus
the
four
percent.
Has
there
been
any
talk
amongst
folks
that
you
represent
about
that
issue?.
D
It's
it's
temporary
money,
but
it
it
is
our
fear
that
we
will
have
some
some
legislative
bodies
perhaps
make
make
decisions
that
would
that
would
result
in
a
structurally
imbalanced
budget
going
forward,
for
example,
if
they,
if
they
permanently
put
in
premium
pay
and
use
this
money
for
premium
pay
to
enhance
salaries
in
a
permanent
way.
When
this
money's
spent
they're
going
to
have
to
continue
those
those
increased
wages
through
diverting
other
current
resources
or
by
by
looking
at
very
limited
resource
options.
D
As
you
all
know,
in
terms
of
revenue
looking
at
that,
but
you
do
have
a
lot
of
a
lot
of
community
cities
and
counties
both
that
haven't
taken
the
compensating
compensating
tax
rate
at
all.
So
so
some
are
delaying
the
the
impact
of
of
taking
the
compensating
tax
rate,
not
adjusting
occupational
taxes.
It
may
have
delayed
some
of
those
local
choices
related
to
revenue
in
most
communities,
probably
especially
keeping
up
with
the
wage
inflation
in
in
public
safety
and
public
works
positions
that
we're
all
trying
to
to
chase.
D
So
it
hopefully
I'll
say
this:
it's
too
early
to
tell.
Hopefully
it
doesn't
have
a
major
impact
in
decisions
being
made
that
create
structural
imbalances
going
forward
after
this
money's
money's
gone
because
it's
going
to
be
up
to
them,
especially
at
the
city
government
level,
to
figure
out
how
to
continue
to
pay
those
obligations
if
they
make
permanent
obligations.
A
D
You
know
it's
it's
more
and
more
difficult
to
get
people
willing
to
climb
down
in
the
ditch
and
repair
sewer
line
when
you
can
go
to
hobby
lobby
or
or
some
of
these
other
business
or
sling
lettuce
on
a
taco
with
taco
bell
for
the
same
the
same
wage
rate
so
from
even
though
we
don't
have
a
lot
of
attention
on
this.
Yet
the
the
public
works
area
are
generally
very
low,
low
paid
positions,
especially
in
our
smaller
or
smaller
cities.
D
So
the
recruitment
of
workers
that
are
willing
to
do
that
kind
of
labor,
very
labor-intensive
positions
is
is,
is
pretty
it's
pretty
intensive
and
we've
seen
that
with
public
safety.
We've
seen
that
with
public
safety
too.
D
Of
course,
all
of
our
cities
called
when
you
all
passed
the
state
state
budget
and
said
well,
the
state
gave
eight
percent
or
city
governments
need
to
to
step
up.
We
had
a
few
cities
that
were
able
to
able
to
keep
pace
with
you
all.
Of
course,
we've
reminded
them
that,
from
a
state
government
perspective
why
cities
were
given
two
and
three
percent
cost
of
living
adjustments.
D
The
state
wasn't
quite
as
aggressive
as
cities
had
been
in
the
past
couple
of
decades,
but
they
but
we're
having
we're
having
difficulty
keeping
up
with
those
with
those
wages
and
that
that
is.
That
is
why
you're
seeing
I
think,
a
lot
of
cities
migrate
or
local
governments
migrate
to
these
premium.
Retroactive
premium
pay
or
premium
pay
on
a
go
forward
basis
up
to
2024
to
to
kind
of
band-aid.
It's
a
band-aid
solution.
E
A
E
Could
have
a
committee
meeting
starting
at
nine
o'clock
on
monday,
through
four
o'clock
on
friday,
with
every
sector?
That's
having
problems
getting
people
back
to
work.
We
see
the
numbers.
There
are
plenty
of
jobs
out
there
that
a
lot
of
able-bodied
people
apparently
aren't
willing
to
fill,
and
as
we
wrestle
with
this
postcovid,
it's
it's
clearly
one
of
the
big
negative
effects
that
kovit
is
is
having
on
our
society.
What
are
you
hearing
from
your
cities
as
to
the
reasons
why
they're
having
trouble
filling
these
jobs.
D
The
way
the
wage
rates
are
are
definitely
common
and,
of
course,
leader.
I
would
not
claim
that
we
are
unique
in
in
this.
In
fact,
the
the
difficulty
in
the
private
sector
ends
up
impact,
impacting
our
local
budgets
through
the
receipt
of
occupational
taxes
as
well.
So
so
we
we
feel
the
private
sector's
pain.
So
we
don't.
We
don't
claim
to
be
unique
in
that
regard,
but
generally
it
is
the
wage.
D
It
is
the
wage
rate
that
we
hear
and
the
affordability,
the
smaller
city,
the
smaller
the
city,
the
less
of
a
tax
base
you
get
so
take,
for
example,
heinemann
in
in
in
nott
county.
You
have
you
have
the
mayor
essentially,
who
could
not?
Who
cannot
afford
under
their
budget,
to
hire
additional
public
works,
who's
out,
climbing
in
that
ditch
or
repairing
that?
That's
because
they
don't
have
a
the
adequate
tax
base
in
order
to
hire
them
and
they
don't
have
the
funds.
D
But
then
you
go
to
a
city
like
florence
or
bowling
green,
which,
which
has
some
natural
natural
growth
in
their
economy:
they're
a
they're,
they're,
better,
positioned
and
better
able
to
be
able
to
keep
track
with
the
with
the
wage
rate.
So
you
don't
have
other
attractive
positions,
but
we
do
have
like,
like
you
said,
just
difficulty
in
the
type
of
the
job,
the
difficulty
in
the
type
of
the
job,
the
the
labor
intensive
nature
of
public
works
or
in
the
police
sector.
D
E
E
D
I'm
in
the
local,
in
terms
of
local
government
employees,
I'm
happy
to
say
that
the
bulk
of
our
city,
employees,
are
back
on
the
job
in
order
to
provide
those
public
services
that
you
think
typically
provided
by
cities
that
that
does
not
permit
a
remote
remote
work
in
most
cases.
So
so
on
that
issue,
you'll
find
in
most
or
city
halls.
D
Opening
there
are
people
out
making
the
repairs
or
police
officers
who
never
went
home
or
firefighters
who
who
never
never
did
remote
work
continuing
to
do
that
so
local
government,
as
an
employer
and
not
is
not
seeing
a
lot
of
remote
work.
However,
it
is,
it
has
not
played
out
yet,
at
least
in
the
in
the
data
that
the
work
from
home
in
the
private
sector
with
regard
to
the
occupational
tax
does
impact.
D
You
all
are
very
familiar
as
members
of
this
committee
with
the
way
our
local
tax
system
works,
that
it
is
a
privileged
tax
for
working
or
occupational
tax,
whether
it's
payroll
or
net
profits
or
gross
receipts.
It's
a
private
on
the
business
if
it's
on
the
business,
it's
for
the
privilege
of
operating
the
business
within
this
certain
jurisdiction,
then
when
you
come
to
employees
it's
for
privilege
of
working
within
the
jurisdiction.
D
If
the
work
is
performed
outside
of
the
jurisdiction
levying
the
tax,
then
they
cannot
collect
that.
Well,
they
can
collect
the
employer
under
our
statutes
under
state
statute
collects,
but
the
employee
is
entitled
to
a
refund
for
work
performed
outside
of
the
jurisdictions,
and
we
did
see
with
state
government
in
particular.
D
When
state
employees
went
home,
the
personnel
cabinet,
I
believe,
switched
their
employer
employer
withholding
process
and
had
employees
say
well,
I'm
working
from
home
in
richmond,
I'm
working
from
home
in
georgetown,
where
frankfurt
would
have
collect
city
of
frankfurt
would
have
collected
that
tax
to
start
with
the
personnel
cabinet
started.
Withholding
and
remitting
to
the
jurisdiction
of
the
home
work.
Location
of
the
individual
frankfurt
was
was
very
much
impacted.
D
But
you
were
right
leader
there
that
if,
if
that
continues,
it
shifts
the
whole
the
whole
notion
of
the
way
occupational
taxes
are
collected,
not
where
the
physical
location
of
the
business
is
on
payroll.
But
where
the
employee
is
performing
the
work.
It
could
have
a
tremendous
tremendous
impact
where
you
have
the
infrastructure
of
the
business
located
in
downtown.
E
There
excellent
answers
to
my
questions.
Thank
you,
of
course,
I'm
old-fashioned.
I
think
people
need
to
get
back
to
work,
but
you
know
I
I
might
be
too
old-fashioned
and
what
I
think
we're
gonna
have
to
watch
and
see
if
this
becomes
a
permanent
trend.
I
hope
it
doesn't,
but
you
know
sometimes
trends
become
a
permanent
part
of
society
and
that's
going
to
be
an
issue
for
local
governments
to
wrestle
with.
A
Alrighty
with
that,
we
will
end
our
questions
for
mr
cheney
at
this
point
and
we'll
bring
up
miss
sandy
williams,
the
executive
director
of
the
kentucky
infrastructure
authority
and
miss
williams
in
your
opening
comments,
if
you
could
remind
us
how
kia
actually
works
with
dlg
and
that
relationship
just
as
a
review.
Thank
you.
F
Thank
you,
mr
chairman
and
committee
members.
I'm
sandy
williams
executive
director
with
the
kentucky
infrastructure
authority.
Thank
you
for
having
me
here
today.
I
am
prepared
to
speak
briefly
on
the
status
of
the
arpa
funds
that
were
excuse
me
that
were
appropriated
to
the
kentucky
infrastructure
authority
for
water
and
sewer
projects,
I'm
sure.
As
the
as
the
committee
remembers
in
the
senate
bill
36
from
the
2021
session,
there
was
250
million
dollars
appropriated
for
water
and
sewer
projects.
F
We're
calling
that
round.
One
of
the
arpa
funding
that
the
round
one
funding
was
split,
150
million,
which
was
allocated
based
on
a
county's
population,
50
million,
which
was
allocated
for
consent,
decree
projects
and
unserved
water,
drinking
water
projects
and
49.9
million
to
be
used
to
supplement
a
project
grant
where
the
cost
was
greater
than
the
county's
allocation.
F
F
20
million
was
committed
for
consent,
decree
projects,
and
I
will
remind
the
members
that
that
was
for
lexington
louisville,
northern
kentucky
sanitation,
district
number,
one
and
winchester
and
30
million
is
was
set
for
unserved
drinking
water
projects,
again
100
committed
and
the
final
49.9
million
to
supplement
a
project
grant.
We
will
be
using
that
to
supplement
projects.
I'm
sure
you
have
all
heard.
Construction
costs
are
increasing
and
we
will
be
using
the
final
49.9
million
as
the
as
the
project
bids
come
in.
F
F
The
round
two
funding
from
the
22
session
house
bill,
one
again:
250
million
for
water
and
sewer
projects
there
were
there
were
no
breakouts
for
use,
so
all
all
250
million
is
available
based
on
county
population.
F
F
We
will
use
the
same
process
we'll
use
our
project
profile
in
our
water
resource
information
system,
as
the
application
and
the
the
button
is
live.
So
if
a
utility
chooses
to
apply,
they
can
coordinate
with
their
area
development,
district,
water
coordinator
and
select
22
hb001,
cleaner
water
program
fiscal
year,
2023
as
their
funding
source
for
their
project
and
and
go
ahead
and
start
applying.
A
Oh
representative
donald,
he
has
a
question.
Thank
you,
mr.
C
Chairman,
could
you
repeat
that
form
again
the
22
for
applying
for
the
funding.
A
A
Thank
you,
miss
williams.
You
hit
on
something
that
I've
asked
a
couple
of
questions
about
over
the
last
few
months.
We've
we
all
know
projects
are
escalating,
but
sometimes
when
we
know
that
it
seems,
like
all
the
projects
automatically
start
escalating.
So
when
you
start
getting
requests
into
your
office
for
supplemental
to
make
up
that
difference,
are
we
requiring
that
those
projects
have
multiple
bids?
A
Are
we
are
we
allowing
a
single
bid
project
to
just
state?
Hey,
my
costs
are
going
up.
I
need
more
money.
How
is
that
dealt
with
in
your
office?.
F
That
is
a
very
good
question.
We
are
requiring
that
all
the
projects
follow
krs-45a,
okay,
so.
A
All
right
any
other
questions
for
miss
williams.
Well,
these
these
funds.
I
know
folks,
all
over
the
state,
are
talking
about
these
funds
and
making
plans
and
there's
definitely
a
need
out
there
that,
hopefully
we
will
see
the
fruition
over
the
next
couple
years
with
better
water
systems
and
sewer
and
things
of
that
nature.
So
if
there
are
not
any
other
questions,
we'll
ask
for
you
to
kind
of
stay
around,
maybe
we
might
have
another
few
questions
pop
up
here
at
the
end,
but
thank
you
for
your
presentation.
Thank.
F
A
Next
is
mr
jim
henderson,
with
the
tech
association
of
counties.
Mr
henderson's,
regular
in
our
committee
as
well
so
welcome
jim
floor
is
yours.
G
Good
morning
and
thank
you
chairman
mills,
it's
always
good
to
follow
jd,
because
some
of
what
he
says
I
can
just
say,
ditto,
a
lot
of
those
generalizations
would
apply
to
the
county
situation
as
well.
G
I
did
put
a
very
short
slide,
which
I
think's,
maybe
four
slides,
two
of
them
an
intro
and
a
close,
so
basically,
two
slides
of
substance
in
there
for
you
to
look
at
if
you
want
to
reference
any
of
that
just
with
the
the
timeline,
but
thanks
for
including
me
in
the
conversation
today,
I
might
explain
just
briefly
how
counties
were
treated
a
little
bit
differently.
G
As
jd
talked
about
the
city
allocations
out
of
arpa,
you
know
in
the
american
rescue
plan
act,
65.1
billion
jd
referenced.
The
split
on
the
local
government
allocation
federally
65.1
billion
nationally
was
given
in
direct
flexible
aid
to
every
county.
In
america
there
are
3069
counties
across
the
united
states,
and
so
every
county
got
a
direct
allocation
that
wasn't
true
in
the
cares:
act,
the
precursor
legislation
and
that
really
kind
of
drove
naco.
Our
national
association's
focus
on
on
really
lobbying
in
this
legislation
to
be
a
direct
allocation
to
counties.
G
G
We
asked
for
a
direct
allocation
in
kentucky
of
that
large
amount,
and
we
were
fortunate
as
a
state
to
get
a
significant
portion
of
that.
The
intent
by
many
federal
legislators
was
for
a
significant
portion
of
that
to
go
directly
to
local
governments
and
in
many
states
it
just
didn't
work
out
that
way.
So
again,
we
were
fortunate,
but
from
the
national
discussion
it
was
really
important
in
this
legislation,
at
least
for
our
association
nationally
to
lobby
for
direct
aid
directly
to
counties
begin
because
so
many
did
not
get
that.
G
You
all
also
know.
Some
of
you
know
that
we
couldn't
have
had
a
better
representative
at
the
national
level
on
behalf
of
counties.
During
all
this
time,
boone
county
judge,
executive,
gary
moore,
was
actually
president
of
naco.
During
the
time
this
legislation
was
passed,
and
so
he
was
very
instrumental
in
seeing
that
direct
allocations
to
counties
occurred
in
that
bill
and-
and
I
often
like
to
reference
and
as
jd
said,
we
testified
last
year.
G
I
think
we
said
this-
you
know,
judge
moore's
role
and,
and
many
of
us
in
county
government's
role
was
not
necessarily
to
argue
the
merits
of
whether
or
not
there
should
have
been
a
2
trillion
bill.
But
if
there
was
going
to
be-
and
there
was
going
to
be,
then
it
was
important
to
see
as
much
of
that
money
into
the
hands
of
local
governments
as
possible,
and
so
that
was
judge
moore's
focus
when
he
lobbied
to
get
that
allocation.
G
So
in
the
slide,
it
talks
about
a
little
bit
of
an
overview,
one
of
those
slides
about
the
amount
that
came
into
kentucky.
So
I
think
we
got
867
million
or
so
of
direct
allocation
to
counties
in
kentucky
and
some
of
that
blurs
with
jefferson
and
fayette.
They
got
a
city
allocation
as
well
as
a
a
county
allocation,
but
all
120
counties
also
got
an
allocation
in
addition
to
the
cities
inside
those
counties.
G
As
jd
mentioned
earlier,
the
first
rounds
of
money
were
released
for
counties
and
again
different
a
little
bit
different
with
the
counties
they
had
in
may
of
last
year,
counties
had
to
apply
directly
to
u.s
treasury.
A
lot
of
counties
had
never
dealt
directly
with
the
federal
government,
with
funding
had
been
accustomed
to
working
through
some
state
agencies.
It's
kind
of
a
double-edged
sword
honestly
to
have
gotten
the
direct
allocation.
It
was
fantastic.
G
It
kind
of
took
a
layer
of
bureaucracy
out
in
terms
of
all
of
that,
but
there
were
a
lot
of
counties
that
just
had
never
dealt
directly,
and
so
they
relied
pretty
heavily
on
us
as
an
association
to
at
least
give
guidance
to
give
some
answers
to
questions,
and
we
we
did
that
have
done
that
over
the
past.
G
16
months
briefings,
in-person
training
guidance,
but
again
last
may
a
year
ago,
just
just
a
few
months
after
the
bill
passed
in
in
march,
counties
could
apply
directly
to
the
u.s
treasury
and
draw
down
the
first
50
percent
of
their
allocation
and
they
could
not
get
their
second
50
percent
any
sooner
than
a
year
later,
and
so
really
last
may
into
june
in
to
july,
and
even
I
think,
a
few
counties
were
as
late
as
august
still
making
that
first
draw
and
at
that
point
again,
as
jd
mentioned
about
the
rules,
there
wasn't
a
lot
of
clarity
about
what
you
might
could
use
some
of
these
funds
for
and-
and
I
dare
say
out
loud
this,
which
is
usually
a
an
internal
signal
to
not
say
it
right,
but
you
know
I
think
there
were
counties
struggling
at
that
time,
whether
or
not
they
thought
they
could
put
this
square
peg
in
a
round
whole.
G
I
mean
whether
or
not
they
would
have
expenses
or
or
things
that
fit
the
federal
guidelines
that
they
could
actually
spend,
that
much
money,
which
sounds
like
a
a
good
problem
to
have
right,
but
even
in
those
early
interim
rule
areas
that
you
could
spend
money
for
things
like
public
health,
like
reimbursement
for
coveted
related
expenses,
a
lot
of
those
have
been
covered
in
the
cares
act.
A
lot
of
counties
have
been
able
to
qualify
some
of
those
things
in
that
first
round
here
in
kentucky
negative
economic
impact
was
another
one.
G
It's
hard
to
quantify
some
of
those
things.
You
know
we
hadn't
really
seen
it
fast
enough
to
to
say
this
is
what
it
was
the
premium
pay
was
was
authorized
then,
and
broadband
and
water
and
sewer
were
one
of
the
earliest
eligible
expenses.
G
Again,
you
would
think
well
that
certainly
most
counties
could
could
use
it
for
that,
and
and
many
could
surprisingly,
there
are
a
lot
of
counties
and
there
may
be
counties.
You
don't
expect
that
have
pretty
good
broadband
coverage.
Many
of
our
some
of
our
eastern
kentucky
counties
where
they
have
rural
phone
co-ops
actually
have
fiber
optic
to
every
house,
so
some
of
those
county
officials
were
struggling.
You
know
if
I've
got
to
spend
this
on
broadband.
We've
already
got
broadband,
and
so
again
putting
these
things.
G
G
So
again,
in
the
early
days
there
was
some
question
about
what
they
would
be
able
to
use
these
funds
on
under
those
very
limited
rules.
Again,
as
jd
mentioned
earlier,
has
to
be
had
to
be
obligated
by
december
of
2024
not
spent
until
december
of
2026.
So
caico
like
klc,
advised
a
lot
of
our
counties
just
take.
Take
it
easy.
Don't
don't
don't
be
in
a
big
hurry?
Think
this
through?
G
Let's
make
sure
that
we
know
and
try
to
make
really
sound
investments
with
one-time
money
again
much
like
I
know
you
all
have
had
to
struggle
or
figure
out
to
do
with
some
of
the
state
one-time
money
that
has
come
but
january.
G
202
really
was
when,
when
the
the
light
bulb
went
off
or
the
the
manna
fell
from
heaven
or
whatever
the
term
is
that
you
use
that
that
the
u.s
treasury
said
that
they
were
going
to
create
this
presumption
of
lost
revenue
for
any
county
that
had
less
than
a
10
million
allocation
went
into
effect
in
april,
but
in
january
they
they
gave
that
that
guidance
that
that
was
going
to
happen,
that
that
was
a
game
changer
for
a
lot
of
our
counties.
All
but
18
counties
in
kentucky
got
less
than
10
million
dollars.
G
So
really
that
that
was
the
lion's
share
of
our
members.
Who
had
this
freedom
really
to
qualify
the
money
under
that
one
qualify.
One
of
that
one
stipulation-
and
then
you
know
my
staff
tells
me
not
to
tell
these
little
anecdotal
stories
and
jokes,
but
I
I
relate
to
those
things
you
know,
then
it
became
kind
of
like
the
gambler
putting
money
in
the
plate
at
church.
G
You
know,
I
remember
a
pastor
back
home
used
to
struggle
about
whether
or
not
they
would
take
proceeds
from
winnings
from
from
gambling,
but
once
it
goes
in
the
church
and
it's
prayed
over,
it's
clean
right
and
so
the
kind
of
the
same
analogy.
With
this.
Once
the
money
was
qualified
as
lost
revenue,
then
it
was
clean.
It
could
really
then
be
used
for
about
anything,
because
that
was
the
qualifier
and
so
again
all
but
18
counties
were
able
to
to
use
that
if
they
wanted.
G
As
the
as
the
federal
qualifications
and
again,
I
said
as
jd
said
many
times
here
today,
but
he's
covered.
A
lot
of
this
april
was
the
first
reporting
for
the
for
the
quarter
and
and
most
of
those
those
counties
other
than
the
18
will
only
have
to
report
annually.
So
there
is
no
reporting
mechanism
at
the
state
level
and
there's
certainly
no
obligation
for
them
to
report
anything
to
us.
G
We've
certainly
learned
about
what
counties
are
doing
or
planning
to
do
with
the
money,
but
but
other
than
that
relationship
that
we
have
with
our
members.
There's
not
a
reporting
mechanism
that
we
see
other
than
what
goes
to
treasury,
and
I
actually
did
look
at
it
last
night
until
my
eyes
got
kind
of
glazed
over
and,
as
nobody
would
hear,
be
surprised,
there's
nothing
very
simple
about
looking
at
a
federal
website
and
trying
to
find
user
friendly
information.
G
It's
you
know,
excel
spreadsheets
buried
deep
in
tabs
deep
inside
other
tabs
that
you
have
to
know
the
questions
to
ask
to
know
where
to
look.
And
finally,
I
did
find
I
mean
it's
pages
and
pages
and
pages
and
pages
of
an
excel
spreadsheet
that
was
just
put
out
in
the
last
week
or
so
so
we
will
try
to
look
at
some
of
that.
It
does
show
some
of
those
quarterly
reportings
for
april,
but
again
just
quickly
perusing,
almost
every
county's
qualification
for
the
federal
funds
that
they
used
is
the
lost
revenue.
G
So
again
it's
opened
it
up
quite
a
bit.
G
The
second
round
of
funding,
which
is
is
just
now
becoming
available
is
is,
is
trickling
in
now
so
again,
counties
all
got
their
their
first
half
a
year
ago
or
so
and
now
they're
able
to
to
pull
down
the
second
tranche.
Another
word
that
I
don't
use
normally
that
I
had
never
heard
before
arpa,
but
that's
the
federal
description,
the
second
tranche
of
money
coming
through,
and
so
still
there
are
a
lot
of
counties
debating
or
deliberating.
G
I
should
say
about
what
to
use
the
money,
for
they
really
are
trying
to
figure
out
what
the
best
use
is,
and
you
know
in
all
fairness,
there
are
a
lot
of
political
pressures
on
county
officials
just
like
there
was
on
the
legislature.
I
know
during
the
session
on
what
to
do
with
that
money.
You
know
there
are
a
lot
of
different
ideas
that
have
that
have
come
in
and
chairman
mills,
you
asked
earlier
of
jd
about
the
the
kind
of
the
unintended
consequences
that
that
might
happen
for
local
governments.
G
It's
really
hard
to
talk
about
some
of
your
pressing,
ongoing
operational
needs
and
those
things
are
not
going
to
be
fixed
by
these
funds,
and
yet
the
citizens
see
that
you're
getting
two
or
three
million
dollars
or
in
some
counties
you
know
much
more
than
that
and
they
don't
really
see
those
as
different,
and
so
it's
it's
somewhat
challenging
to
have
had
this
opportunity
for
some
of
our
counties
to
figure
out,
because
it
is
one-time
money,
it's
much
like
the
the
the
cities
and
the
state
looking
counties.
G
I
will
talk
a
little
bit
about
a
few
of
those
that
some
of
you
all
know
and-
and
I
really
hope
and-
and
I
think
this
is
true-
that
you
know
best
better
than
I
do-
even
probably
what
some
of
your
county
officials
are
doing
or
talking
about
doing
these
funds.
G
I
hope
this
is
something
that's
being
talked
about
in
your
community,
that
you
have
a
relationship
with
your
county
judge
or
fiscal
court
and
that
you've
been
in
conversations
with
them
about
this,
and
I
hope
they
have
been
with
you
and,
and
so
I'm
not
sure
I
can
tell
you
things
about
your
specific
counties
that
you
might
not
already
know,
but
a
lot
of
the
counties
are
investing
in
broadband.
G
G
Your
your
judges
over
there
been
working
for
a
while
on
a
on
a
regional
approach
and
while
a
lot
of
counties
have
invested
in
the
broadband
or
made
the
commitment
to
invest
in
the
broadband
there's
also
been
some
reluctance
on
the
part
of
county
officials
to
go
ahead
and
commit
broadband
to
commit
these
dollars
to
broadband,
because
there's
so
much
other
potential
broadband
money
out
there,
and
so
any
reasonable
county
official
who
knows
he's
got
two
or
three
pots
of
money
will
be
thinking
about.
How
do
I
best
leverage?
G
All
this,
and
I
know
I
think
scott
county
is
a
great
example
leader
there,
where
they've
been
working
on
a
broadband
project.
Maybe
early
on
thought
arpa
might
be
the
way
to
do
that,
maybe
finding
some
other
ways
freeing
up
some
of
the
arpa
money
for
other
investments
in
the
community.
So
again,
a
lot
of
counties
are
focused
on
broadband
warren.
As
you
know,
chairman
meredith
judge
buchanan
right
out
of
the
gate.
It's
been
a
big
issue
for
warren
county
committed
about
10
million
dollars
of
their
allocation.
G
I
think
their
allocation
was
20,
something
27
million
christian
county
committed.
I
think
13
million
to
a
to
a
county,
wide
fiber
optic
project
davis
county.
I
think
they
committed
another
10
million
and
a
lot
of
this
we've
just
gotten
from
even
their
local
press.
The
things
we've
learned
through
press
coverage,
oldham
county,
I
think,
put
about
eight
and
a
half
million
dollars
into
broadband.
But
of
course,
boone
kenton
and
campbell
worked
together.
G
Boone
leveraged
an
incredible
relationship
with
cincinnati
bell
up
there
and
and
we'll
be
putting
broadband
into
every
house
in
into
boone
county
one
of
the
faster
growing
counties
in
the
state,
so
you've
seen
those
examples
of
investment
in
broadband
barron
county.
A
great
great
collaboration
project
worked
with
their
water,
of
course,
is
another
easy
one
for
people
to
say
if
we
don't
know
for
sure
what
to
do
to
put
it
in
water,
baron
county
worked
with
the
glasgow
water
company
to
put
a
million
dollars
towards
bro
or
water
improvements.
G
I
know
that
my
home
county
simpson
county,
I
was
proud
to
see
our
city
and
county
work
together
to
take
both
of
their
allocations
and
invest
in
a
public
safety
communications
upgrade
something
that,
quite
frankly,
in
my
time
as
judge,
we
talked
about
it's
hard
to
think
about
spending
that
kind
of
money
on
radios
for
our
law
enforcement.
We
knew
we
needed.
It
was
a
big
ticket
item.
Our
city
of
franklin
and
simpson
county
have
allocated
a
roughly
a
million
dollars
a
piece
towards
a
major
improvement
in
their
public
safety.
G
Webster
county
had
kind
of
a
unique
project.
The
county
had
never
had
a
county
park
early
on.
You
know
that
was
one
of
the
eligible
uses,
even
before
it
loosened
up
is
if
you
could
tie
back
in
some
kind
of
physical
activity-
and
you
know
it's
it's.
You
know
it's
a
long
way
around
to
do
it,
but
there's
a
way
to
connect
all
that.
That
was
eligible
under
the
federal
guidelines
and
they're
working
on
a
major
park
improvement.
G
I
think
judge
henry
and
the
court
may
have
allocated
all
of
their
arpa
funds
towards
that
project,
something
that
they
would
have
otherwise
not
been
able
to
do.
A
lot
of
counties
have
actually
spent
some
of
their
money
to
purchase
some
one-time
equipment.
That's
really
expensive.
In
public
safety
like
an
ambulance,
ambulances
are
extremely
expensive.
G
Premium
pay,
as
as
jd
mentioned,
is
also
something
that
has
been
talked
about
among
counties.
I
will
say
early
on.
We
cautioned
counties
about
that,
and
our
role
is
not
to
tell
the
county
what
to
do.
We
work
for
the
counties,
but
to
be
very
careful
about
creating
this
expectation
on
wages
that
might
not
be
able
to
be
sustained
after
this
money
runs
out.
A
lot
of
counties
did
more
of
a
of
a
one-time,
rather
than
a
wage
change.
More
of
just
a
lump
sum
again.
G
There
are
some
tricky
ways
to
call
it
something
other
than
a
bonus.
I
shouldn't
use
word
trick
either.
I'm
not
very
politically
correct,
I'm
sorry,
mr
chairman,
but
but
there
are
qualified
ways
to
give
one-time
monies
to
to
public
safety,
frontline
workers,
others
who
were
deemed
to
be
essential
workers
that
wouldn't
constitute
a
bonus
from
the
perspective
of
what
the
auditors
might
call
that.
G
A
lot
of
counties
are
still
waiting
and-
and
you
might
be
surprised-
I
hope
you're-
not
that
we
know
this
it's
an
election
year
and-
and
you
might
be
surprised
that
some
county
officials
who
are
not
going
to
be
seeking
re-election
or
who
know
there's
going
to
be
a
significant
change
on
their
fiscal
court
or
the
decision
makers
may
very
well
wait
to
let
the
next
administration
have
input
on
on
that.
G
I
personally,
as
a
former
county
official,
appreciate
that
perspective
at
the
county
level,
because,
obviously
you
know
this
money
is
going
to
wait
out
serve
any
one
term
again.
Our
role
has
been
advisory.
Assistance
answer
mostly
questions,
but
again,
ultimately,
these
dollars
went
straight
to
the
county,
because
the
belief
was
that
county
officials
would
know
best
how
to
spend
these
funds.
I
think
I've
covered
as
much
as
I
intended
to.
G
B
Thank
you.
I
I
recall
hearing
that
we
definitely
could
not
use
our
funds
for
roads,
but
this
new
rule
that
you
said
kind
of
just
presumes
the
revenue
loss.
Does
that
mean
that
this
essentially
goes
to
the
general
funds
and
that
those
things
could
be
money
laundered
or
whatever?
You
want
to
call
it
some
legal
way
to
cover?
I.
G
Talked
about
cleansing
it.
I
don't
know
that
I
use
those
terms.
The
the
short
answer
is
probably
yes,
that
there
are
many
uses
that
a
county
could
deem
that
these
funds
were
eligible
would
be
spent
for
once
they
qualified
as
lost
revenue,
but
the
funds
do
have
to
be
kept
in
a
separate
fund.
G
G
Most
of
the
counties
that
we've
talked
with
are
very
focused
again
on
making
investments,
but
certainly
I
think
an
argument
can
be
made
that
a
road
or
a
bridge
would
be
a
critical
investment
in
infrastructure,
but
most
of
the
counties
aren't
doing
that.
At
least
the
ones
that
we've
talked
to
most
of
them
are
focused
a
little
bit
more
on
those
other
areas.
So.
A
Tim,
thank
you
so
much.
Thank
you
for
your
input
and
all
of
the
folks
that
came
today
to
give
information
is
very,
very
well
timed
information,
there's
just
so
much
so
many
dollars
floating
around
out
there
and
it's
good
for
us
to
all
be
prepared
to
answer
questions
from
our
constituents
when
they
ask
ask
those
out
on
the
street.
So
if
there
are
not
any
other
questions,
our
next
meeting
will
be
august.