Remarks by Josh Cooperman
56 remarks on the record, newest first · Page 1 of 3
“One question with regard to subcommittees, task forces, so on. You mentioned engagement with outside entities. Could you elaborate on what you mean there?”
“Okay. And I mean, so on the one hand, you know, OSAP has talked about having a full meeting with another board. And then they also talked about, you know, having casual conversations with board members from other.”
“Okay, thank you. Sorry, I guess I have another question. As we're developing or as the boards are developing their work plan, if council wants the board to engage on something, say it's related to something from our work plan, do we have, I don't know, do we have a process or some idea of a process for how we would say, oh yes, we want this board to work on this during the year?”
“Okay. And a couple more questions. Since the boards won't adopt their work plan until March, April, is the idea that the work plan would sort of run through the beginning of the next year?”
“Okay. And then one more. I'm just wondering, you know, the process that's outlined for updating a work plan mid-year seems like it could be excessively slow.”
“I don't have an opinion at the moment on terms for the Planning Commission. I'll have to think about that a little bit more. On the potential merger of PPLAB and RAB, I think I would probably also be interested in maybe waiting a year. I think my main concern there is that if we combine them as they currently are, they would have a whole lot under their purview. Yeah, I'm just not sure how one board is going to cover the golf course, senior services, recreation and parks. And so I'd like to think through a little bit more what that would look like. But then, you know, depending on what…”
“commission or board by Commissioner board decision yeah I guess one way to think about it is if you look at in the packet the example work plan for a board or Commission it's it's fairly structured you know, just with engagements like trainings and discussion of, you know, discussion of the work plan itself, discussion of possible recommendations to council on budget, legislative agenda, those kinds of things. And those all seem like fine things for the work plan. It just feels like it could leave very little room for a board to engage on other topics that the board thinks are important to…”
“Yeah, that gives more comfort. And I agree that, you know, that additional structure is definitely beneficial. I mean, I can think back to when I was on the sustainability board that, you know, well, I think the board benefited because I was mostly paying attention to what was going on. But, yeah, I mean, other people had no idea when we would have to weigh in on the budget or anything like that. And so having that advance notice is really important.”
“Is there a benefit to having people with expired license plates come to the municipal court as opposed to a broader regional court?”
“Okay. I also wanted to ask about the fine schedule. What is our current fine schedule like and how does it compare to say state recommended fine schedules at the moment?”
“I mean in particular. I'm curious why we think that like in one case and more than four times Maximum fine is appropriate for Louisville whereas the state thinks that you know 500 is sufficient As just an aspect of that question And just a comment on that in most municipalities the fines tend to be higher than what the state tables show and Okay. And then, again, related to that same question, maybe it doesn't apply to fines, but I feel like there was a recent state law which prevents lower courts from imposing harsher penalties than state courts. And maybe that doesn't apply to fines, but…”
“Okay. Thank you. Let's see. Do I have any other question? I guess just one comment. I would have found it useful to have a full copy of the 2024 state code included in the packet, as opposed to just the changes that we've made to that code. Thank you, though.”
“Maybe a question for staff. Do we think it's possible for the prosecutor to be present at the second reading to answer questions?”
“Thanks. Um, it's my first question is what do you say is the primary factors driving the number of units?”
“that's very helpful so I had one other question which maybe I've answered for myself but I assume that you put the parking in the front because if you had to if you put in the back you'd have drive aisles that would take up a lot of space yeah yeah okay no that's fine okay and then I had maybe two questions for staff So the first, right, you mentioned that there are no residential design standards for this particular location. Does that include like lot coverage standards?”
“Okay, and so then is the proposal compatible with those lot coverage standards at the moment?”
“And then my other question, so we recently approved some amendments to our inclusionary housing ordinance, right? This project would be all affordable, but I'm curious what the interplay might be between the incentives in our inclusionary housing ordinance and a project like this.”
“I appreciate it I Will just echo the comments that my fellow council members have made I'm excited about this project And especially the all-electric nature of it Yes”
“Just briefly, Likewise, I agree that not much has changed about this particular situation over the last several months. So I haven't really had any basis to change my decision about how I voted then. So likewise tonight, I'll probably be voting no.”
“Should we provide feedback on each board as you go or would you prefer that we wait? I think we should do it as we go.”
“Sure. I'll just say I tend to support the idea of having the Planning Commission act as the board of adjustment. Okay.”
“Council Member Cooperman. Thank you. The last bullet point in the current description is very broad, and it doesn't really get reflected in the proposed description, whereas the last bullet point in the proposed description is kind of different, I would say, from what's in the current description. I was just wondering if you could say a few words about that.”
“First, I'll follow up to the mayor's comment. If the ballot measure 2B passes, there's that added flexibility for how you can use the other 70% of the revenue, which could be museum-related things. So I guess I could potentially see that sort of changing the status of this board, you know, if they are somehow going to be deciding on how some of that funding gets used. I don't know.”
“Right. Okay. My other... question. So in the current description on this one, there's a third bullet says promotes public awareness of the history of Louisville and its surrounding community. And I feel like that didn't really make it through into the proposed description. And there are actually a couple of other places where something similar happens, like with the Cultural Advisory Board and I forget where else, where there's sort of a public-facing element to the current description which is sort of asking the board to Kind of promote what they represent for the city and I felt like those…”
“Yeah, I don't know if I would necessarily want to make it a requirement, but I also wouldn't necessarily want to rule it out for board members who are interested.”