Town Council - Regular Meeting

Good evening. I would like to welcome everyone to the Town of Lexington Council work session this evening, August the 17th, 2026. Work sessions are less formal business meetings that enable Council to obtain information regarding issues from staff members and or consultants. Citizens are encouraged to observe work sessions. However, they do not include public hearing comments. Council does not take an action vote during a work session other than to place an item on the next council meeting. I am Hazel Livingston, the mayor of the town of Lexington, and I'd like to introduce my fellow council m To his left is Council Member Todd Lyle.

To his left is Council Member Jenny Michaels. Good evening. To my right is Mayor Pro Tem Todd Carnes. To his right is Council Member Gavin Smith. And to his right is Council Member Will Allen. At this time, I would ask Mayor Pro-Tim Carnes to lead us in our invocation for tonight.

Thank you, Madam Mayor. Let's pray. Father, we pause a moment here before you, before we try to handle the business of this town and ask for your favor on this town, ask for your favor on us as leaders, and we want a great, prosperous, peaceful life. just town, and we definitely need your wisdom to pull that off, so we ask for that. Thank you for all the things you've provided thus far, and we pray for these things, not only for our town, but for our state and our nation and our world. We pray this all in Jesus' name. Amen.

At this time, I'd like to ask Council Member Smith to lead us in the page. At this time, I will call the meeting to order. Council met in executive session prior to this meeting where we discussed the following matters. Three personnel matters, discussion of two contractual items related to information technology, discussion of a contractual item related to parks and community services, and discussion of potential property acquisition. No vote was taken. Do I hear a motion to ratify this report?

Mayor Pro Tem seconds it. Is there any discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor, raise your right hand. And it is unanimous. Are there any deletions of items from tonight's work session agenda? Okay, moving right into our business item tonight. Our first business item is from Planning and Building Director, Jessica Libran. First of all, welcome tonight and congratulations on your big pass and your test today. Thank you very much.

Does anyone have any questions of staff?

Yes, madam mayor, yes, Jessica that have we ever received a request like this. Previously to your knowledge in you just passed your the big national certification. Are there any there any standards of a certainly we have it in my 14 years. So I just is there any context there that you can deliver from your planning and zoning background.

In the correspondence we received, it states that International Paper Company had made somewhat a similar request, requested water and sewer utility access without annexation and was granted such. Is that accurate?

I know that annexation policy that we required people to sign came shortly after I came on council. It was actually because probably of Hope Ferry Plantation is what caused us to have that letter. So we started putting the letter in place then, Gavin, to where they had to sign that they would come in

Madam Mayor, can I just ask one clarifying question? So if we were, as council, to approve this, am I correct in stating that we would be creating an exception that had not been created before?

Okay, and that is because currently it is contiguous with town boundaries?

And if we did that, we would be setting it up for everybody to be able to request and do this, correct? Potentially, yes. Does anyone want to make a motion? So I guess that it dies for right now. Thank you, Jessica. Next up, we have the streetlight ordinance update from Administrator Bleaton.

With that, does anybody have any questions? I think this one is just for information for now, and then you'll be bringing it back for September work session. Yes, Mayor. Does anybody have any questions?

I'm sure you suspected. So I look back in my email correspondence, and for transparency purposes, I think, and correct me if I'm wrong, that I'm where this originated from. I was serving in my neighborhood, actually, Sterling Bridge, was HOA president at the time. We were going through our budget and I noticed a line item for streetlights and that triggered my memory that, hey, I believe we have an ordinance that we actually pay for this. Also for transparency, I no longer serve in that capacity. I'm not on the HOA board and I am just a resident. But obviously this has lingered, staff has cont

Understood. Thank you. And then one follow-up question. So I understand that some of the neighborhoods have more... ornamental fixtures as opposed to the standard light, which I believe is called a HPS, high pressure sodium light. And it costs a little bit more to operate that light. So have we set a precedent in any other neighborhoods for funding a portion of a higher or more ornamental light and then the neighborhood being responsible for the difference.

Okay. All right. Well, I know we'll look forward to receiving information back on this.

And I do want to acknowledge, I know you said the time frame of the email that the first correspondents and staff, we also had to depend on Dominion and their time frame of getting us back all of the lights, physically checking all of the lights and making sure we're responsible for all of them and what was on and what wasn't as far as our system. So that is some of the reason it took so long, I do believe.

I would be in favor of us not paying for streetlights of neighborhoods. I think they can pay for their own streetlights.

So I guess for a point of clarification, and we can come back with this later, but would that, Council Member Lyle, pertain to all the neighborhoods that we currently pay for and we stop paying for those, or we're just not taking any new ones?

Yeah, I was not aware until this recently that we were paying for any of those, and I feel like that's a due that is... Easily collectible and more rightly collectible by the members of that neighborhood. So just like any new neighborhood that's got amenities, they can collect a few extra dollars to pay for their streetlights and not the taxpayers who choose not to live in a neighborhood with streetlights. I feel like it's more appropriately borne by those who would benefit from it and not from everyone. Is it not a developmental standard though? I don't believe it is.

Right, but that's not a requirement that we pay for. Just like we require a developer to put sidewalks in a neighborhood, we're not going to offer to pay for them. We're just going to make that a requirement. Correct. So we can require streetlights, but that doesn't mean we have to pay for it. It's a decision the developer makes. And just like a pool, if you don't want to pay for a neighborhood pool, you don't buy a house in a neighborhood with a pool. Or if you don't mind paying for one, you buy one that has a pool. You don't mind that cost. But I just don't think the taxpayers who don't live

I guess my follow-up question to that then would be, I've been on council for three years, and every year comes before us the next agenda item. what, number four, I guess, tonight, or number three. And if my recollection serves me correctly, we've all voted in the affirmative to pay for Pilgrim Point streetlights. So to say that we didn't know, I think we did know. We're not just paying for one neighborhood's streetlights. Just wanted to offer that point of clarification.

So should we hold the next item until we get this ordinance updated so we can make sure we're treating everybody the same? You most certainly can, yes.

Okay. And then the other thing is when I was talking to you about this one day, at first you didn't think there was a precedent, but it is not uncommon for municipalities to pay for streetlights in communities.

So I've received several calls from some neighborhoods that want to add more lights to their neighborhood, and I reached out to you. What do we do? going back to revisiting this ordinance, I think we're going to have to look at it more as of We might need some guidance from Dominion on how far apart they ought to be. Yes. Because to your point of lot sizes, we certainly can't put this subdivision with a light every six houses and just apply that standard to every size subdivision. Because some of those lights will be so bright you play football. Yes.

Well, I just, I'll look for y'all to bring us back a bunch of information. Sounds like it's going to open up a Pandora's box when we start on this one.

Madam mayor. Yes, sir. I just want to ask one further thing. So we require by ordinance currently a streetlight per six lights or per six lots. Um, if I'm correct, um, And if we did away with the town paying for said streetlights and there's not an HOA, who bears the cost of that?

Because we require it. Somebody's got to pay for it. I don't know who pays for it. And maybe there is a reasonable answer to that. I don't know. I'm not... the development world but I guess my next question would be to follow up on that moving forward if we have new neighborhoods come into town but there is not going to be an HOA how do we enforce those streetlights being maintained do we require them be on private property and we require that property owner to pay for them? What is our mechanism to make sure that individuals are in compliance with the ordinance? I think that could be opening

So with you saying that, and I'm not picking on Sterling Bridge, but just with him saying that, when we rewrite this and we decide to keep moving forward and stuff, if they are in somebody's yard, are they going to stay there and that homeowner is going to pay for it, which is what used to happen, or it goes on the homeowner's bill, or do they have to have them moved?

I would be very opposed to forcing a homeowner to move a light that we as the town approved. And I suppose, and Jessica, you could tell me if I'm wrong on this, but we approved that in final plot approval, right? Where all those are at. And I mean, do we have any say so in that? Do we look at that? Now we're just forcing more costs on a homeowner. I feel like they should kind of be grandfathered in and fix this moving forward.

Madam mayor, yes, can assess whoever looks into this can can they take a look at solar.

Yeah, how far is that technology down the road? I would think that technology is far enough down the road that solar street lights would be a great long-term viable solution. But I don't know, but we should look.

And I'm sure you're going to hear a lot of opinions from up here. So do we have to make a motion to, since that was an FY, but our next item, do we have to make a motion to table it or can we just table it? or move it to our next work session to go along with the ordinance.

Madam Mayor, this is asking for reimbursement, right? Correct. Yeah, I'm not in favor of retroactively imputing some penalty on some neighborhood. Any recommendation that I would have to shift that cost to the homeowners would be some date in the future, give them due process rights, and then let it carry forward. So I don't know that we need to punt this one because this is a back pay issue, right?

My advice would be, again, based on habit and custom, that we should carry that forward until we put them on notice that we're not going to do that. I understand. That's my point. I understand. Thank you. If we're going to make a sweeping decision to update a 20 plus year old ordinance based on changing the the electronic means, LEDs versus incandescent or solar. All these changes should be some line in the sand going forward. My advice would be that we don't punt on this. Is this Pilgrim Point? This is Pilgrim Point. Yes, this is Settler's Point and Pilgrim Point. That's the two neighborhoods

This is Pilgrim's Point, and they've been being reimbursed since 2009.

Yeah, so I would be in favor of not telling them, surprise, you're not getting reimbursed after the fact. I think that should be a going forward issue. So they can make an informed decision on whatever decision we make.

Yeah, so I don't necessarily disagree with Councilmember Lyle. I mean, this is the policy that's on the books. We've made exceptions every year I've been on council. But my question would be, are we going to apply the same standard to the neighborhoods such as mine or the other neighborhoods that have applied that are waiting for a decision? I mean, I don't know when each plat was approved for my neighborhood. I can figure that out. But the ordinance is very clear that when the plat is approved. The town assumes responsibility for operating costs. I can't remember the exact language. Basically

So from what I understand, Gavin, is you would not meet this, and this is what I've been listening, and correct me if I'm wrong, but your neighborhood would not meet the current ordinance, so you would have to request, say, half just like they got approved in 2009.

Retroactively, yes. But if we change the... For yearly. But retroactively, there's an amount, arguably, I mean, I'm sure someone disputes it, arguably... that is owed to many neighborhoods across town, not just one. This isn't just about my neighborhood to be very clear. I mean, I've heard from several neighborhoods that didn't even know this existed, but when you go look at the code of ordinances, it does. Now, I think you make a very valid point. What is the standard light now? Because back then it was one light, now in modern day times, that standard light is different.

Just to be clear, it's not just my HOA. Any HOA that comes to the town and says, you accepted our subdivision on this date, but we have never received reimbursement, and I don't know, there's probably some statute of limitations or something there, I don't know, but you accepted on this date, we've never received the benefit of this what the ordinance says, we'd like to be reimbursed by that. Would this council have to take up each one of those decisions?

This is not what this neighborhood is doing though, right?

I don't think we ever paid them retroactive. We paid them starting from 2009, if I remember correctly.

I wasn't on council. There are letter states that in 2009 they appealed to the town council for the first time and we've been doing this since 2009 for them. So I would, I think staff needs to, as far as the rest of the subdivisions need to go, staff needs to figure out how many lights that would be, what that would cost the town and the council would have to decide if we had the funds to, or if we had the ability to fund that.

I thought, Kathy, they used to years ago. They may not anymore.

I'm thinking, Gavin, maybe we're confusing these two. Do we hold this up since we've done it since 2009 while we're getting all the other straightened out so we can do the other neighborhoods because this is not a back payment here?

I have no objection to moving forward with Pilgrim Point. Although we haven't advanced to that agenda item, to the best of my knowledge. I would say I have no objection to that. I just would like to make a point here that we did not, to your knowledge, Kathy, and sorry to put you on the spot, we haven't gone out and evaluated if their street lights are HPS instead of LED, right?

I do think they were evaluated years ago.

I guess I was saying, Gavin, that the back pay or the retro pay or whatever, that would be discussed at a later time, not with this one right here.

Yeah, I mean, I don't discount that at all.

Okay. Okay. I was just making sure we were clear on that. Yes.

Mayor, we've made a motion and a second to put this on the agenda, but... Last point of discussion I'd like to make is could we possibly reach out to them and ask them for a copy of their bill so we can see what they actually spent for this particular neighborhood that we are considering at our next council meeting?

Any other discussion? If not, I'm going to ask for that. All those in favor of putting the Pilgrim Point reimbursement for streetlights on the agenda, raise your right hand. And it is unanimous. Item number four is Utilities Director David Wyman, discussion of proposed cross-connection control program. Hopefully it will go smooth.

Has anybody make a motion? Gavin makes a motion. I'll second. Councilman Michael seconds it. So to clarify, let's see, I see you're in here about six months. They can get their own person though and just give you proof, right? And then if their irrigation is not going through or coming from the town water, do they have to have one?

Okay. Anybody have any other questions? Well, you got off easy this time. All those in favor of putting this on the agenda, raise your right hand. And it is unanimous. Next up, you're up again as proposed updates to town ordinance govern the cross-connection control program.

Does anyone make a motion to put this on the agenda? Mayor Pro Tem makes the motion. Councilman Smith seconds it. Is there any discussion on this? There is none. All those in favor, raise your right hand. And it will go on the agenda.

With that, any questions from the public regarding items listed on the agenda?

Oh, I'm sorry. How did I miss that? Kathy, come on up here and tell us what you got.

Yeah, just give me a second. Yeah, I guess it's for informational, so it's not anything we vote on. I'd just be curious to know what that fee was in 2021, last time we did it. It was $90,000. That's the one thing that went down since COVID.

Yeah, yeah. Don't mention it. All right. Yeah, I mean that... It's just that's a big deal. So I don't want to be in a position where he walks in here one night and throws all this up on the board and we're asked to make some kind of decision. I would respectfully request that this gentleman do his work and make some kind of presentation to us that's for informational purposes only. And 30 days later, we'll take up some type of conversation about it. And maybe 30 days later, we actually take action on it. It's always rushed. We only do it every six years. And it's going to be a harder decision.

Okay. Now, any questions from the public regarding the items listed on the agenda? Questions from the news media which we don't have? From council?

Mayor, story time in the park is tomorrow, August 18th at 10.30 a.m. We have a fun late morning plan for families with story time, a phone party, and a special visit from Chick-fil-A Cow. We'd love to see families from across our community come out and join us for a morning of stories, smiles, and fun. If you haven't been, you need to come join us. It's a lot of fun. A reminder that the Market at Ice House takes place every Saturday morning. Stop by to shop local vendors offering fresh produce, flowers, handmade goods, and more. There will be another vision plan public input meeting on August