My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 2018 05 15
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
2018 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 2018 05 15
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/19/2022 3:14:35 PM
Creation date
6/6/2018 9:32:09 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Original Hardcopy Storage
9C1
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 2018 05 15
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
City Council <br />Meeting Minutes <br />May 15, 2018 <br />Page 4 of 10 <br />3. Building and other improvements are funded with all private funding from the <br />Foundation, plus grants <br />4. Building and other improvements are funded with City funding and grants <br />5. Building and other improvements are funded through a combination of sources <br />including City funding, private fundraising by the Louisville History Foundation, <br />and grants <br />Mayor Muckle wanted to see the city make a strong statement of support. At a base <br />level he wanted an ADA compliant bathroom. An assumption is made by the public <br />when items are donated that they will be taken care of. He wanted some commitment <br />of funds. <br />Mayor Muckle called for public comment and heard none. <br />Councilmember Keany noted he might be biased as he is liaison to the Historical <br />Commission and supported option 5 which included a combination of funds. He would <br />like to see the City set aside 2 million dollars and then let the fundraising or other <br />options come up with the rest. <br />Councilmember Maloney saw great value in the Museum. He liked the Love Louisville <br />program. As a Councilmember, he has to look at both sides of an issue. The last <br />citizen poll showed a low interest in the Museum. He feels hesitant to go forward <br />without more input. <br />Councilmember Stolzmann had heard it was difficult to raise funds if it is not known if it <br />will actually be used. It is easy to say go ahead if the funding comes from someplace <br />else. She noted the needs the City had been unable to fund recently. Expectations are <br />not being met on current maintenance items and needs are going unfunded. She felt <br />she could not support earmarking 2 million dollars but could support if residents report <br />they are willing to pay for this particular project. <br />Councilmember Leh noted a city survey is going out soon and he felt the tolerance for a <br />bond issue could be gauged with that. The capital improvement project dollars have to <br />be considered carefully. He wanted to balance all the projects with the need to get the <br />Museum project supported. <br />Mayor Pro Tem Lipton felt the first issue was whether there is 2 million dollars to commit. <br />to this project. He thought it would be good to get citizen feedback before moving <br />forward. The Council must support critical services and then make decisions in light of <br />all the requests they receive. He noted the City had funded a conceptual design and <br />now is being asked to fund a schematic design. He asked if the schematic design would <br />look at the other buildings on campus. Maintaining what is already on the campus is the <br />first priority. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.