good afternoon,
everyone.
It is 1:00.
Welcome to the APRIL 28, 2026
general government and planning
committee meeting.
I'm calling our meeting to
order.
The first item of business on
our agenda is the approval of
the MARCH 10, 2026 committee
summary.
Are there additions or
corrections?
>> move to approve.
>> Chair: seeing none, I'll take
a motion to approve.
>> second.
>> Chair: second.
Any discussion on the motion.
All those in favor say aye.
>> aye.
>> Chair: any opposed.
That motion passes.
The next item on our agenda is
our charter review presentation.
Vice mayor wu, since this is
your item,ly turn it over to you
for the introduction.
>> thank you, chair.
First I want to thank civiclex
for the tremendous amount of
work that you all have done on
this.
It was very thoughtful, it was
very collaborative.
I also want to extend my
gratitude towards the city staff
, the council members, both
current and past council members
that offered up some of their
experience and wisdom.
And finally, I really want to
applaud the efforts of the
assemblymembers themselves, many
of whom are here right now, for
lexington's first civic
assembly.
This is really historic,
honestly.
and I'm so excited to be part of
it.
So thank you all so much for
participating in this process.
And as per the resolution that
we passed a couple months ago, I
want to reiterate council's
commitment to seriously
listening to and considering the
assembly's recommendations.
So, with that, I will hand it
over to richard.
Thank you.
>> thank you, so much vice
mayor.
We are so incredibly grateful to
be bringing these
recommendations to you all
today.
Planning this schlep has taken --
planning this assembly has been
a lot of work.
You will hear about the most
recent part of the timeline but
this is a culmination of over
three years of work, and I just
wanted to say up front how
grateful I am that you all have
agreed to respond meaningfully
to these recommendations.
It has been a lot of work for
both civiclex and for our
assemblymembers.
And so we are grateful for the
trust and the time that you all
are giving this process.
So, I'm not going to say too
much.
I'll turn it over to civiclex's
deputy director kitty anderson.
>> hello.
Thank you so much for having us.
I want to echo the gratitude
richard just expressed and beer
here to talk to you today about
the recommendations and the
process of lexington's first
civic assembly.
So just to recap, I know you all
heard about the assembly last
july and I'm sure you remember
every single word of richard's
presentation, but to sum --
summarize, a civic assembly is
an internationally recognized
model of getting everyday
citizens involved in government
and making decisions.
It's participatory decision
making.
To learn about an issue and
learn about it extensively,
deliberate and ultimately pass
recommendations on a specific
topic.
One of the really important
aspects of an assembly is the
assemblymembers themselves are
both randomly selected through a
process called a civic lottery
and also more or less
demographically representative
of the community they are
serving.
Assemblies can be facilitated by
governments, or in our case, the
third party organization of
civiclex and they really shine
on issues that public
institutions are having trouble
solving for themselves.
And we think charter review
might be an example of that and
we are excited to share what we
came up with.
So, I won't spend a ton of time
on the background.
But two key things I wanted to
highlight with our assembly
process.
It took three years as richard
mentioned.
One of the bullet points is
fundraising and grants
submissions.
This assembly was done
completely with grant money from
national and international
philanthropy.
We did not use a local
government money in this
process.
And the actual assembly itself
only took a month and it was a
complete whirlwind of a month
this MARCH, but as richard
mentioned, the planning was
almost a three-year process.
One of the most important
aspects of an assembly is who is
in the room.
And our selection process was
incredibly robust, informed by
professors at the martin school
at the university of kentucky.
I'm not going to touch on every
single demographic we used.
We actually tracked nine
demographics of our
assemblymembers and I wanted to
make sure the actual
representation was on the record
for you to see.
Suffice to say the goal, pie,
smaller wedge is based on census
data about lexington fayette
county.
We know that census data is not
an exact representation of
lexington but it's the closest
most accurate, most documented
reference that we have and in
most cases we were using A.C.S.
Data from 2023, but the full
methodology is available online.
As I just flip through these, I
want to emphasize we were
incredibly proud of our
selection process after mailing
out 10,000 postcards to 10,000
randomly selected addresses, and
a couple thousand reminder
postcards, we had 387
applicants.
And from that we were able to
build, I think, by all cases an
extremely representative panel.
And I think these charts
showcase that so you can see our
age breakdown, our race and
ethnicity breakdown matching
lexington according to the
census very closely.
Political registration is
important for assemblies because
it's important to have people
with different political
perspectives in the room and we
were a pretty close match on
that.
We also made sure to track
people who were not
recommending -- registered to a
political party and were not
typically voters.
Will you note we had at least
one person from every council
member.
12 districts is a lot of
districts.
I was worried we wouldn't get
there.
But we did and we have one
representative from every
council member.
And going through all of the
other categories, within 5% on
every single demographic.
This is a quick breakdown of the
process.
I will highlight orientation was
MARCH 1, not MAY 1.
Thank you to council member
ellinger for pointing that out.
This the is just the flow of the
sessions.
And with that, I want to turn it
over to the most important part
of this, which is the
recommendations themselves.
We will be hearing from four
assemblymembers about the
recommendations that they
proked.
There are three distinct
recommendations that could
potentially lead to three
distinct chapter amendments and
to start us off we have haley
smalls.
thank you.
>> hi everyone.
My name is haley small from
council member district 5 and I
want to talk about compensation.
We came to an 84.6 super
majority to increase council
compensation to a new cap of
59,987.
That is the average annual
income in lexington.
So that's where that number
comes from.
We want that number to continue
to increase annually with cpi
and to go into effect in 2030.
Why did we make this decision?
As an assembly we recognize that
the role of a council member has
changed in the decades since the
charter went into effect in the
70s.
We think the most effective
council members are spending
nights and weekends, lots of
energy and lots of time
innovating, thinking of ways to
make lexington a better place to
live for all of us.
W also recognize the lack of
competition for many council
seats.
Too many council seats are
running unopposed too often.
And so we think the crime
scene -- the increasing
compensation will better
compensate hard working council
members but also bring more
people into public office,
bringing more people from
different backgrounds into this
room.
I think that this proposal
represents what we, as an
assembly, want the council do
and to look like.
We want council to be more than
a rubber stamp.
We want you to be busy, we want
you to be active, we want you to
be innovative and imagine tiff
but we also want you --
imaginative, but we also want
you to feel what it is like to
be an average citizen in terms
of your compensation and so
that's why we tied it back to
the average lexington income.
So with that being said, thank
you for your time and I'm going
to pass the mic over to sophia
to talk about recommendation 2.
>> hello.
My name is sophia, I'm a high
school student at lafayette and
I was part of the assembly as a
youth representative.
Our second recommendation was
about council accountability,
and largely stemmed from our
discussions on compensation, ais
we talked with many former and
current council members and
realized that the duties of a
council member were not really
that well defined legally.
And that it was largely up to
the individual council member
how much time they invested in
the job.
So, as a result, we decided to
amend the charter to create
publicly viewable attendance
expectations and increase
transparency for the general
election as voters will have
more information about the
representatives to make informed
decisions when they're voting.
And it also aligns with our
recommendation on compensation,
as a more informed -- sorry, as a
council that is better paid will
be able to serve our
constituents more effectively
and this passed by 88.8% super
majority.
It was effective.
So I will pass the mic to cath
who will talk about our third
recommendation.
>> hello.
My name is katherine and I'm
here representing district 1.
Our other recommendation that we
made was for a mandatory charter
review.
I think you all can recognize
that if we don't keep our
charters regularlyley view --
reviewed they can quickly become
out of date and lose relevance.
We thought it was really
important to have a regular,
fair, public review and we
thought that should be done
every eight years.
Also done by a group of randomly
selected demographically
selected representatives.
We like the way civiclex picked
a group and so that was kind of
what we were thinking would be
another good idea.
That way -- I know one of the
last times we did a charter
review, it ended up being
appointing people who really
benefited from the review by
people who really benefited from
the review.
So in order to make sure that
it's fair, we thought a random
selection representative would
be important.
We also thought there should be
a time limit on the process.
As you know, these things can
drag on forever if they don't so
we recommended it take no more
than 12 months from start to
finish.
And I guess the reason why we
thought that that was important
is so that we can make sure that
our charter stays relevant to
all of the peep living in
lexington -- people living in
lexington and we agreed with an
88.8% super majority that that
was necessary.
And I'm going to pass it on to
bob, who is going to tell -- he
is going to represent the
dissenting voices.
>> hello.
My name is bob smith.
I'm from 5.
And like any question, any time
you have a question, you are
going to have opposing.
So I'm the opposing.
But it's nothing personal.
[Laughter]
So thank you for giving our team
the time to let you know our
thoughts behind our one month of
deliberation.
I will be giving our dissenting
report.
We had a lot of very thoughtful
conversations and voted on the
issues that you charged us with.
The first one will be I would
like to talk to you about is the
charter review process.
This probably had the shortest
amount of time in discussion.
It was easy that we came to this
conclusion.
It had more to do with time in
between reviews and what we were
allowed to review.
We all believe -- I believe,
thought that there should be
more timely reviews of the
charter.
In particular I was disappointed
we not allowed to review council
term lengths.
We were designated for two
particular things and that all
we could do.
And one of the things I really
want to talk about was term
lengths for you people.
I really people like we need to
increase it from two to four so
you spend more time doing the
people's business instead of
running for office.
So hopefully in the near future
that you guys let us have
another -- because we, as we
wanted to do the charter review
every year, we can do one
sooner.
By the bylaws, you can have a
special one sooner than eight
years and hopefully this is one
of the items that can be brought
up.
Second, accountability of the
council members was discussed
and dissent was mainly based
around how to set up guidelines
since we all felt there should
be more accountability.
It wasn't that we didn't think
there should be accountability
but how we came up with the
items.
Last was compensation.
I bet you would believe that had
the most discussion.
Dissent was based not wanting to
make the position appealing as a
life long job.
We don't need more 50 year
council members like in
congress.
And we really don't want to make
this so appealing that you think
this is a lifetime position for
you.
The founders of our country
perceive government positions as
a public service.
Men would leave their farms or
businesses for short-term and
then go back home.
We felt review every three to
four years would be more
appropriate keeping the cpi
index in place in the meantime
and at the end of three or four
years, we thought maybe there
should be an extra bump because
the way economic things were at
that time, that would be
appropriate to address that.
We also felt that a 50%
increase, which is what this is,
would have a hard time getting
passed in the fall.
So thank you for your time.
>> Chair: thank you so much to
our four assemblymembers.
I know firsthand how nerve
racking it can be the first time
you are talking to this u and
you guys did a wonderful job.
So just to close us out and talk
about next steps, all three of
these recommendations would
require a chapter amendment to
pass.
-- charter amendment to pass.
Civiclex is working with the
department of law what that
would look like and we want to
use the opportunity to talk to
our assemblymembers about it so
the language included in this
presentation is still very much
a draft but we wanted to go
ahead, go on record, let people
know what we are thinking about
and help you understand what
this might look like in the
actual charter.
The biggest kind of decision and
thing to figure out with the
amendment language is what
exactly would be a charter
amendment versus what makes more
since as an ordinance or
resolution.
That's an active question
because we learned a lot about
how charters are structural
documents.
They're meant to set out the
general kind of process of
government but not dictate
specific policy and we want to
make sure we are in line with
that with our recommendations.
So, with that, these are the
drafts that we have.
In terms of compensation, the
big open question that we have
with this is we know that the
spirit of the assembly is to set
compensation according to the
number 59,987 which is the
annual average wage as reported
this year.
And so we know that the spirit
of the assembly is to set that
bench mark now and by the time
231 rolls around and it is
implemented, the cpi will have
adjusted accordingly.
But we are not completely sure,
to be transparent,,000 talk
about that because we don't know
what the number will be.
-- MAY I take one more minute to
finish the recommendations.
>> Chair: let's do two.
>> even better.
That is the primary question to
answer with the compensation,
although we know the exact
spirit of the recommendation is
more about the freezing.
-- about the phrasing.
The second amendment around
council accountability would be
added on to section 47.07 which
is the rules and procedures
article.
The main thing to know about
this is that ultimately it's up
to council to set your own
standards of accountability.
That is what makes sense in the
charter.
There is kind of a separation of
powers question there.
This is more about just
requiring council to create an
ordinance around accountability.
It doesn't specify exactly what
would be in there.
I will say there are several
things that I think
assemblymembers feel extremely
strongly should be in the
ordinance and who would be happy
to engage throughout that
process.
The number one thing that we
heard throughout the entire
assembly was more transparency
around attendance and attendance
records.
And also just more understanding
of what the actual job
description of a council member
is.
So those I think are two things
that assemblymembers feel
strongly should be included but
ultimately that would be a
council ordinance.
And the final potential
amendment is around charter
review.
Again, I will flag this is one
where we are figuring out what
makes sense to be an ordinance
and what makes sense to be a
charter amendment.
I think cat did a great job
explaining what the assembly
feels are most important parts.
And one thing I will flag with
this is we think process wise
perhaps the best way to make
this happen would be to have a
standing board or commission on
charter review, that would be a
smaller boarder commission that
would include council members or
committee chiefs to keep a
running list of topics of
charter review and organize the
review that would happen every
eight years potentially.
So with that, I just want to say
thank you so much to the true
village that it took to pull
this assembly off.
We have many in the room.
We have a handful of
assemblymembers in the room.
Richard and lilly and haley and
the civiclex team.
This was the largest project
we've ever done.
We are incredibly proud of it
and we are curious to see what
you guys think.
Thank you.
>> Chair: thank you for the
presentation, for all the
presenters.
Colleagues go ahead and sign in
if you have comments or
questions.
Council member brown.
>> thank you, chair.
And thank you for the
presentation.
I just wanted to take the
opportunity to thank you all for
your work on this, all the folks
that, the community members that
volunteered and took time and
participated.
I think it was a great exercise
in civic engagement and look
forward to the conversation
about the recommendations and
how they move forward.
The one thing I will ask -- I
know you all were awarded grants
and didn't use any local public
money to fund this activity.
But what was the total cost so
far that you all have spent on
this effort?
>> yes, the total budget from
the grants was $220,000 to run
this assembly and that included
for the most part included
civiclex time but it's possible
we went a little over with the
hours we worked.
>> do you foresee if this was
something we instituted and did
on a regular basis permanently,
that's what it would cost to do
the whole exercise and would you
recommend doing it the same way
that y'all did this?
>> that's a really good
question.
I think that if the city was
going to be conducting a charter
review every eight years with a
randomly selected group of
residents, there would be a lot
of elements of this assembly
that I think we think would work
really well for that.
I don't think every single piece
of it needs to.
Cost wise I think there are
various parts of it that would
make a lot of sense for the city
to do.
The mailing of 10,000, you know,
10,000 postcards to 10,000
randomly selected addresses, I
think the city could do that
even better than we do.
There are costs with venue,
things like that.
I also think because the topic
would be set as charter from the
beginning, the organization of
it would be simpler.
And I think the exact model is
based on what you think is best,
what the assemblymembers weigh
in on, but I see it as not -- as
kind of a hybrid model of what
we just did versus like a
traditional.
>> I appreciate that answer but
I think to some of that, as
government could have some
efficiencies, but I think the
way that you all kind of
separated this from coming down
here and having the conversation
and having that and making those
decisions kind of leave what
could be perceived as an
influence on the process and the
outcome.
And I do have another question.
So, today is just an update.
It sounds like you still have
some questions to be answered.
So we are not being asked to
make any decisions or take any
action today.
>> that's correct.
We will need to bring the full
amendment language and also the
ballot language that will need
to be voted on by council,
whether or not it will be placed
on the ballot.
And it seems likely that the
JUNE 2 work session will be when
we will be sharing that out.
>> okay.
You said something that brought
up another question.
So is the council vote to put it
on the ballot the only path
forward?
Do you also have a petition
process potential for these
initiatives as well?
>> yes, so in the charter, it
says there are two ways for an
amendment question or any
referendum question to end up on
the ballot.
It has to be paced by 3/5
majority of council members or
by a petition with the number of
signatures that is equal to 10%
of the voter turnout in the most
recent mayoral election.
I believe... Do not quote me on
that.
We are starting -- civiclex
decided that going through
council made sense because
charter review was in committee
and that's the path we are
currently planning to take.
>> thank you for your work on
this.
Thank you, chair.
>> Chair: council member
reynolds.
>> thank you, chair.
I want to especially thank
civiclex for taking this on.
I know it was a lot of work and
a lot of years of work and then
i want to thank all of the
members of the assembly.
I think it's super exciting that
you all were able to catch a
cross section of lexington, a
cross section that we don't
usually see here in chambers, a
cross section that we don't
usually interact with, and
really be able to civically
engage the average lexingtonian
and I I think that's really
important.
So I'm really thankful that you
all did this.
I was also like surprised and
pretty happy on my end, with
what you all came up with.
I think you all were super
thoughtful.
You went through a lot of
different scenarios and I
appreciate what you brought to
us.
I just have a few questions.
About the council compensation,
can you explain the rationale
why you decided to wait until --
I'm sorry, 231 to implement it?
>> yes, so there is article 4 of
the charter, there is kind of a
specific provision about how
compensation can be changed and
also the requirement that it
cannot be changed by council
members for the term that they
are in.
So essentially because we knew
this would be going on the
ballot potentially this
NOVEMBER, new council will be
elected in JANUARY.
If that new council is the one
to pass the ordinance that will
set the new level, we have to
wait four years after that for
at-large council members which
puts us at 231 for
implementation.
>> that was not my understanding
of that.
That's interesting.
What happens if some of the
council members that are here
now happen to still be on
council then.
>> my -- and I will defer to
MR. Cravens, my understanding
is it's just about the term.
The term that the ordinance to
change compensation is made, it
just can't take effect during
the sitting term.
>> so because we are in the
middle of a term right now.
>> correct.
>> and then for the council
accountability part, can you
help explain -- you said we would
have to set it up because we set
our own standards.
So before this could go on the
ballot, we would need to set up
our standard?
Or what would go on the ballot?
>> so the language would be
based -- the ballot language
would be based on the amendment
and the amendment is essentially
requiring that -- requiring
council to create an ordinance
with accountability standards
after the amendment is passed so
that would be essentially a new
mandate to create an ordinance
that would then be created if it
was passed.
>> and the idea behind it, the
main reason was just folks
wanting to be able to see our
attendance records more easily?
>> I think the big picture idea
was a lot of assemblymembers
just, as kind of the
conversation was evolving, there
was a lot of interest in
increasing compensation but from
the council members we heard
directly from in the sessions
and public input and research,
feeling like compensation is
increased, the assembly was
interested in increasing
accountability alongside that.
They go together quite closely.
And this was the best way, using
the charter, to increase
accountability standards.
>> so just saying we would like
council to come up with some
sort of transparency about the
work that they do, maybe it
being, you know, focus add
round -- focused around
attendance and what other roles
that we hold.
>> the ultimate accountability
of council members is elections
but wanting to have more
transparency around that for
informed voters to make
decisions.
>> that makes sense.
Thank you.
And then the last thing, so the
charter review, I think that
made sense and I like the
recommendation that we set
something up that is going,
ongoing.
So the hope from what you just
said to council member brown is
that by the JUNE 2 meeting we
would have formalized language
that we are voting yes or no
on...
>> to place on the ballot.
Whether or not to place on the
ballot, yes.
>> perfect.
Thank you, chair.
>> thank you.
>> Chair: vice mayor wu.
>> thank you, chair.
Thank you for your presentation
and all this great work.
I was especially impressed, if
you go back to some early slides
with the demographics, I was
especially impressed with how
this group almost overlaid
nearly perfectly on most
measures with folks in lexington
and I think that's one of the
things that we are always
looking for when we are thinking
about public engagement and
input is are the people in the
room actually representative of
the whole city or is it just the
people who are tuned in, who
have the time and energy to show
up all the time, right?
So that's really impressive and
I'm so happy that you all were
very conscious conscientious
about that.
One of the things that I love
about doing new stuff in
lexington is a certain level of
bragging rights.
So I know that civic assemblies
are not common in the united
states yet and we are at the tip
of the spear trying it.
I think that's really great.
Question about the charter
review piece, the second piece
of that amendment language talks
about creating standing charter
review board.
And you had mentioned it could
be council members.
Just so I'm clear, this body
would meet on a regular basis
between in the middle of that
eight-year cycle and basically
say here are some topics you
should look at.
And then from there we take our
hands off of it and the assembly
happens and the assembly process
and folks can choose to tackle
those specific issues.
Is that the intent?
>> the intent is that the actual
charter review is commissioned
of a randomly and
representatively selected group
of prosecutors and that this
standing board is keeping a
running list of topics and
potentially helping facilitate
that commission review, which
would be on the 12-month time
limit.
>> thank you for that.
There was some conversation
about the idea potentially
combining recommendations 1 and
2 into one ballot.
Can you speak to a little bit of
what the assembly was thinking
on that and why they're separate
versus together?
>> yeah, richard, do you want to
speak to that a little?
>> agree both of those
amendments really, I think, were
sort of tied together.
Kit talked about this earlier,
that, you know, many
assemblymembers thought that
compensation, you know,
shouldn't be increased unless
there is also an additional
level of expectations around
council member accountability
and attendance.
I think there were many people
on the assembly that would not
have voted for the compensation
increase if there were not also
this accountability piece.
I think there are a number of
reasons on this sort of
non-legal side, I guess I would
say, for why those could be
combined or separated.
Is ultimately we decided the
simplest thing to do in terms of
getting them on the ballot for
clarity for voters was to have
them be two sprat amendment --
separate amendments.
This is another great situation
to defer to the city's
department of law on what would
be the most appropriate.
>> thank you for that.
i can see the arguments for both
and it's a proven fact that when
there are too many ballot
measures on one particular
ballot, they don't always do
well.
People kind of skip it.
And looking at this year's
sample ballot in NOVEMBER, it's
going to be a long run, one,
right?
We have all 15 council states,
national, state, mayor, who
knows what page the ballot
initiatives will be on but they
will be at the end.
Speaking to the strapped
amendment language, it's my
understanding that what you want
from council in sort of
finalizing and crafting these
amendments is to follow the
spirit of what the assembly is
setting out to do.
And I feel that we are
relatively clear on that.
The language you are giving us
today is nowhere near final
language, right?
We are going to work with law,
work with you all and the
assembly to figure out what
makes sense.
The question of when things
start, what that eight years
looks like, right?
>> yes.
>> and the other piece, too,
that I'm thinking about is both
with the review and the account
bit lang -- accountability
lapping winning, you are
basically charging us with
creating the structures.
You are not telling us what the
structures are necessary.
>> I correct.
We wanted to build the hoof all
structure with the amendment
language and then allow the sort
of specifics to be determined by
council.
I think our assemblymembers have
a lot of thoughts they would
like to share with you all about
what those specific requirements
would be, what would go into
ordinance and resolution.
But in terms of actually putting
that on the ballot, and in the
charter, and our conversations
with the department of law, it
seemed that restricting what is
in the amendment to the sort of
macro structural pieces is what
would be most in keeping with
the tradition of the charter.
>> thank you.
Thank you, chair.
>> Clerk: council member lynch.
>> thank you, chair.
Thank you to civiclex for doing
this.
This was huge.
Very excited that it was super
successful.
Thank you to all the
assemblymembers for volunteering
your time and your expertise and
thanks to the volunteers and
everyone that made this assembly
happen.
I'm just excited it has gone so
well and thank you for the
representations you have put
before us.
My questions are about the
demographic information.
You all did like an outstanding
job of getting a great cross
section of folks in our city.
I think should all of this move
forward, I would love for us to
continue to work with you all to
see how you all did this so that
we can replicate it for not only
the charter review board or
commission, but in other ways
throughout government, because
as you know, vice mayor and i
are working on making sure
boards are equitable and true
representative of the true
population.
I would love to get the formula
and do a deep dive on that.
I look forward to working with
you on that in the future.
My two questions are on the
housing status.
7% of the group were other.
I was just curious what other
was.
Was that unhoused or marginally
housed?
>> I believe it's yeah, living
with family or friends, between
you know, living situations,
things like that, which is not
tracked in the census.
And actually housing status is
not really in the census either.
So we just went with the rate of
owned occupants and rented
occupants.
Rented units in lexington that
was our benchmark number.
But that's what that other is
referring to, is alternative
housing statuses.
I think we had somebody apply
that lived in a parsonage.
So they wrote that in.
Things like that.
>> thank you.
My last question is regarding
the political registration.
On the gold pie there was a gray
section that was not represented
in the actual...
>> yes, that is, I believe that
is other parties.
Like a combination of green
party, things like that.
And that was something we just
did not have applicants to.
So that was, yeah,...
>> kudos to you all and thank
you for all of your work.
This is awesome.
thank you, chair.
>> Chair: I'm going to call on
committee members first and then
non-committee members.
Council member sevigny you are
next.
>> thank you, chair and thank
you so much for the
presentation.
Thank you all for spending your
time working on this.
It's really cool to have a group
of people who really, this is
some of you the first brush of
being asked these kinds of
questions and you had to get up
to speed and that's great.
Thank you for all of that.
My questions are around a couple
of things.
One is, I generally believe that
the questions that are at the
end of the ballot are like the
hardest to get to and, to be
honest with you, they take a
huge initiative by some
organization to get people to
actually vote on them or even
think about them.
I don't know who -- like we
certainly wouldn't do that.
Like it's kind of -- I'm kind of
curious if you thought about
things like that.
And then the other thing that I
wanted to talk to you is, I kind
of feel like if we took the
accountability measures and we
did an ordinance of our own by
talking with you about
accountability measures, and
then we put them into place,
proo irto putting something --
prior to put something on the
ballot, we should be able to
check a box that says like, hey,
we are doing some
self-accountability and we are
making it a very public
dashboard for you.
we've agreed this is important.
I don't knowsly know that all of
them need to be a ballot
initiative.
I absolutely know that the
income salary one has to be.
But the other ones, I think, if
we show good stewardship, and if
we put those out there in an
ordinance form, it can be part
of our policy.
Let me just ask you, did you
think about that even deeper or
what?
>>
>> so, yes, to answer your
second question first, I won't
always defer to law.
I wish one of us was a lawyer,
but as far as I know, I don't
see any reason why council
couldn't adopt accountability
measures in advance of the
ballot initiative and I do think
many people might think that
would be a gesture of good
fades.
I think the assembly was
interested in mandating council
produce an ordinance on
accountability as that's kind of
an extra level of chops, you
know, potentially for future
councils.
One of the things we talked
about.
This is not just for lexington
now.
It's for lexington in 20, 30, 40
years.
I think that is why the assembly
was interested in having that
being mandated in the charter.
And then to the question of the
ballot question and campaign,
it's a really good question.
And as each of you know,
civiclex does not advocate for
issues and we are not going to
start on this.
i think we, as you know, cover
local elections and can
certainly cover what will be on
the ballot, and I think/hope
that some of the assemblymembers
might be interested in helping,
you know, inform people about
these and potentially
campaigning on them.
Our assemblymembers are not
civiclex staff.
We have one assemblymember who
is committed to campaigning
against the issues, which is
also great.
That's what we are here to do.
>> I would think we would have
both.
>> indeed.
Civiclex, we are committed to
educating about what will be on
the ballot but beyond that, we
will not be running I campaign.
>> one more thing was and I did
speak with richard before this,
so I kind of was trying to get --
what was in their head about 9 --
I know you picked a current
average.
I don't believe the way this
reads, like I think you picked a
number and in five years that
number, if you look at just the
2% cpi, is going to be about
$6,000 short, and to me that
doesn't seem fair.
Like it seems if I were going
for a ballot initiative, that
would start, I like to start
with something that is fair.
And I think we are already
putting people at a disadvantage
and I don't particularly like
that.
So, tell me kind of how you got
to this, if you don't mind?
And I only have about 30
seconds.
I don't have another question.
Just keep it succinct, thanks.
>> yeah, I think I will say we
are actively trying to figure
out how to put that on the
ballot and we also do not want
to be misleading.
And also legally cannot be
misleading.
There has been a recent mercy's
law case about misleading ballot
language and we do not want to
stray in that direction.
What I can say is we know the
spirit of the assembly was to
set the new baseline at that
$59,987 and to adjust it
according to rubber dollar every
year.
As it is right now in the actual
charter it says council salary
is $6,000.
We are still figuring out a way
to frame that that is not
misleading but we know that is
the spirit of the
recommendation.
>> thank you very much.
That's all I have, chair.
>> Chair: council member curtis.
>> thank you, chair, and thank
you, kit and richard and all the
participants and everybody
involved for being here today
and the work you put into the
civic assembly.
It is a remarkable thing when we
are able to inform our decisions
through more democratic means
and that is at the core of what
you are doing and it's very much
appreciated from my perspective.
I don't have questions for
y'all.
I just have to take a second and
just express my appreciation for
being willing to dive into these
thorny subjects because they are
often times ones where were we
to get into discussions about
them solely on our own accord in
this legislative body, there
would be a question that I
think, at least with the ones
that y'all explored this go
around, hopefully the first of
many, that would raise questions
about conflicts of interest, our
ability to hold ourselves
accountability.
-- accountable and as you have
seen over the past sever years,3
you cannot always trust council
members to hold themselves
accountable so increasing any
sort of accountability public
trust is a tangible good and we
are lucky to have y'all here and
I'm looking forward to working
with y'all and supporting
whatever language comes forward.
So thank you.
Thank you, chair.
>> Chair: council member morton.
>>.
Thank you.
I also want to give my sincere
appreciation and gratitude to
civiclex for hosting and spear
spearheading this and all the
members vfd.
There was a list of thank yous.
So I will give my gratitude to
everyone involved with this
process and yes, you can put it
back up there.
>> it's an important list.
>> thank you to anyone listening
and in the crowd who took part
in it.
Regarding -- I don't have any
questions.
I will just speak my thoughts
regarding council compensation.
Me specifically I'm a firm
believer no matter what position
you are in, you should be paid
your worth.
That's just what I believe.
Period.
On the other hand, these council
positions are pretty broad
positions, baded on, you know,
the philosophy of the council
members, based on discretion and
based on what we decide, what we
want to do, how much time we
want to spend and we know a lot
of us spend a lot of time, full
time on some of these, you know,
on this work.
See so I'm interested in, you
guess, pushing it to the ballot
and see what the constituents
say.
They know their council members.
They are represented by council
members and know the work that
has been put in recently and in
the past and I'm interested in
seeing the decision they make.
I won't speak personally, I was
a legislative aide so I worked
in the 1st district and made
double almost what I'm making
right now.
So I totally understand the
divide.
And I understand both sides of
that topic.
Regarding council
accountability, I'm a strong
believer in transparency and
accountability and you know,I
think what, me specifically,
I'll speak for myself again,
when I ran, one of my number one
principles was accessible
leadership.
Being attentive, available and
showing up, showing up in the
community, showing up to council
meetings and showing up to
boards and all the different
things that we are on.
Some of the information is
already available.
It's just not plastered out
there and I don't think there
should be nothing wrong with
showing attend ansz of council
members showing, what we are
doing.
I think a step further and going
to show the legislative items we
are work on and the commitments
we have in the community in our
district because then as you
stated, it goes back into the
number one recommendation to
show, yo have increased the
pay, what work are they actually
doing.
How much time are they actually
putting in.
I don't think there is ever an
issue to are me specifically
when it comes to transparency,
or ctbility for this role.
And -- accountability for this
role.
And I would support there is
nothing wrong and it could only
benefit the city to ensure there
are regular opportunities to
reflect and evaluate and make
the updates to meet the evolving
needs of our community.
I look forward to this moving
through the process and the
residents to be the ones to make
the decision hopefully.
Thank you.
>> Chair: thank you.
Council member eblen.
>> thank you, chair.
My questions have been answered
by the questions from my
colleagues.
I want to thank you for this
process.
I came into this role as a big
fan of civiclex.
I think the way it was thought
out and the commission members
who put a lot of effort into
this and your recommendations
were outstanding.
Thank you for the work and I'm
just really impressed by all
that went into it and especially
what came out of it.
so thank you.
>> thank you.
>> Chair: I want to take a
couple of moments to share my
thoughts and comments and then
I'm going to turn it over to
vice mayor wu to wrap things up.
But again, I extend my thanks to
everyone who has been involved
in this.
I have -- I'm really excited
about the level of engagement
that we have gotten from the
community on this.
So you heard a couple of us
already say like we tend to hear
from the same people over and
over again.
And and it's great and we want
to hear from them, we also want
to hear from the broader
community.
I'm interested to do a year from
now, where are they now on our
civic assemblymembers.
Like did you stay engaged or
like how did you get involved in
local government in other ways?
Did we get you into a board or a
commission?
Or participate in some other way
with our local government?
But I would also be interested
to see if there is a way for us
to engage over 300 people that
returned their postcard that
said they would be willing to
give of their time in this way
because we definitely want that
broader caption, like vice mayor
wu was talking about, the pie
charts and how well represented
the assembly was based on the
data that we have about our
community and my researcher
heart was like, yes.
I love to see it.
But I would like to see that in
all of our issues that come
before council when we get
feedback from the community.
I want to see the data that
looks like that when we are
looking at the demographics.
I applaud ow that effort because
I know it was not small.
I want to see how we can keep
people engabbinged that spent --
engaged that spent all this time
learning about government and
keep them involved.
And then.
I will be interested to see how
the conversation and definition
around attendance goes on the
accountability piece we have our
standing committee meetings,
work seases and budget meetings
that are fixed.
Quite often we also serve in
council member seats on boards
and commissions.
So likely that be a part of the
attendance reporting?
Like how will we define that
piece.
I will follow along I think
that's interesting.
If we are going to talk about
this at the JUNE 2 work session,
we will need to discuss how this
moves from committee to work
session.
So I'm going to turn the mic
over vice mayor wu to discuss
what actions we MAY need to
take.
>> thank you, chair.
Just adding to chair sheehan's
comments about partnerships, I
feel like we have activated 30
something potential community
champions for lexington.
So I hope this is not the last
time you will show up in council
chambers.
We love for you all to get on
boards and commissions.
We have 70 boards and
commissions in the city.
anything you are interested or
passionate about, there is
probably a board out there for
you and you are always welcome
to contact me or the rest of
council on questions and kind of
how to manufacture in that
direction.
I want to address one comment
council member sevigny made
about the accountability piece
of it.
Like could we not just do our
own thing in terms of creating
our own ordinances and
resolutions.
I like the idea of putting
something on the ballot that
gives us a little flexibility
and also holds us account.
Changing the ballot is harder
than changing an ordinance.
It can be undone fairly easily.
As opposed to a ballot
initiative if we didn't like
that particular item in the
ballot, you know, hopefully in
eight years, somebody will make
a different kind of
recommendation.
So I like things being codified
that way.
Before I make my motion,
MS. Anderson, can you talk us
through, if this item moves out
of committee today, can you give
us a quick timeline all the way
to election day in NOVEMBER?
>> yes, so working backwards,
election day is novemberment
deadline for questions in the
ballot is the first week of
AUGUST.
I believe this year it is AUGUST 3 or 4.
And that is when the language
has to be turned over to the
count clerk to end up on the
ballot.
So council would just need to
make their final -- your final
vote to meet that deadline.
In terms of crafting the
language, I think that we are
still interested -- this is
really the first time we have
convened the assembly since our
final session.
And we are certainly also
willing to help work on the
language, but that would be the
ultimate timeline.
>> I appreciate that.
I think with that timeline, if
it is the intent of this council
to potentially put things on the
ballot, my recommendation would
be that we do it before summer
break because we are not back
the first week of AUGUST into
session.
So with that in mind, I move to
accept the recommendations of
the civic assembly regarding
council compensation council
accountability and charter
review as set forth in today's
presentation and refer the
amendments regarding the same to
full council on work session
JUNE 2.
>> second.
>> Chair: we have a motion and a
second.
Any discussion on the motion?
Council member brown.
>> thank you, thank you, chair.
Just to be clear.
This is not accepting the
recommendations as presented.
This is just moving it forward
to the full council to consider.
>> that's correct.
>> thank you.
>> Chair: can we clarify because
you say I move to accept the
recommendation.
>> I think -- I mean ultimately
like this committee can't make a
final vote on putting things on
the ballot.
so I'm okay with that language
if it is the understanding of
council that we are moving it
out of ggp, into full work
session for that discussion on
whether or not we want to move
these potential ballot measures
forward.
>> Chair: and then to be clear,
the JUNE 2 reportout we might
have changes to the language
that could be presented to the
full council during that report
out discussion and then JUNE 4
and 9 would be first and second
reading if it passes on JUNE 2.
MR. Cravens.
>> yes, I think accepted in this
context means you are receiving
their recommendations.
You are not actually approving
their recommendations.
You are accepting them.
And just so you are aware, what
I would like to do to facilitate
your conversation on JUNE 2 is
have a draft ordinance with the
changes that we worked on with
civiclex to kind of capture as
best we can and resolve some of
the discussion points talked
about today so that we are not
just talking a vacuum on JUNE 2.
We have something we can
actually act upon or you can act
upon.
>> thank you for the
clarification on the language.
Any other discussion?
All those in favor?
>> aye.
>> Chair: any opposed?
That motion passes.
Thank you everyone.
And I just want to add one quick
thanks as well to lex tv because
I know that they worked very
hard on live streaming and
making the session are available
to folks outside of the meeting.
so thank you.
Okay.
Our next item on our agenda is
the landlord and tenant advisory
groups presentation on how this
initiative is going.
This is council member lynch's
item in committee.
I'm going to turn it over to
director lanter and council
member lynch will give us some
closing remarks toward the end.
Take it away, director or
commissioner, sorry.
>> did you want to do an
introduction?
Great.
I will begin with the
presentation that is
significantly less interesting
than the charter.
I appreciate you all having us
out to talk about this.
The landlord-tenant advisory
group this is a straightforward.
You MAY recall something we have
been working on in our office
really since the inception phs
office almost four years ago and
that is just to make sure that
we are building feedback loops
into the divisions so that the
work they do is informed by both
of these groups because those
are the two groups that their
work impacts the most and also
that we are hearing from them,
what their needs are in the
community.
2023 we originally had this as a
more inform al group, and they
met quarterly.
The landlord and tenant groups
each met quarterly.
It started when we had some
requests for more tenant
representation on boards and
commissions which itself is a
complex issue that we can talk
about that we have been working
on.
The biggest barrier to that
often is memberships on boards
and commissions as all of us
know, can be very time consuming
and require a lot of meetings
and not always conducive to
people's personal schedules and
family schedules so we tried to
make this as simple and easy for
these folks as we can to be
heard and to influence our
policy as an office not formally
reporting and the agenda is fed
by the division so they feed up
into the commissioner's office
and back down from the meeting,
the feedback that we get from
the two groups.
Just taking a look at the
landlord advisory group.
This one started out with a
group of 12.
And we worked really hard to try
and choose the different sort of
sectors of the market to make
sure that the different types of
landlord were represented.
The issues that a corporate
owner with 400 units faces are
significantly different than a
rental units.
And we, we are successful at
building a group that
represented all of them.
These are some of the topics
that the group has looked at.
Basically everything you can
think of.
We have spent some time on with
both the landlord and the tenant
groups.
As you can see, it is most more
focused on building and property
maintenance, code enforcement.
Code is there every time talking
to them.
We have had other divisions come
in, planning has come in and
talked to them about the urban
growth management zota and so
it's just a great way to reach
that group without having to,
you know, do it so informally.
More recently we are looking to
kind of revitalize this group.
As you can imagine, they can be
difficult to get together.
We have tried different meeting
times.
We feed them, buy them lunch.
And we get good attendance from
certain groups, not so good
attendance from others.
What I have tried to do is
branch out and so for the groups
that we are not seeing which
tend to be the larger ones, the
more corporate entities that
don't come in, I'm going to
them.
And so we recently joined the
central kentucky apartment
association's advisory committee
for public advocacy.
I sit in on all those meetings
to hear what their issues are
and bring them back to the
group.
We MAY not be able to meet with
everyone in the group but we are
still hearing them.
And we are going to revitalize
that membership because some of
our folks have fallen off and we
are replacing them with new
groups and we'll get the new
group kicked off this summer.
Probably healthy, to be honest
with you, that we do flush out
the membership every so often.
Flush out is probably not the
best word.
Transition or turnover, for
fresh ideas and new
perspectives.
Tenant advisory group, same
approach.
We wanted to represent as many
different groups as possible
within the subset of renters.
So you've got families with
children but you also have
people who experienced
homelessness, seniors, people
who live in housing authority
property.
We tried to account for every
possible angle for a renter;
which can be difficult.
You can imagine we had our
biggest attendance challenges
with this group.
We have tried offering night
meetings, food, child care.
We have offered everything you
can offer and we tend to get
about 50 to 30% attendance on a
good day.
So that was extremely
challenging.
We had one meeting that we went
to and none of the members
showed up for the meeting.
None.
So we went to the organizations
that work with the tenants and
said can you give us people or
staff to come talk about these
issues?
It's not as pure as a pure
tenant advisory group is because
it's largely organizations
although we have added folks who
are grassroots as we have
encountered them.
We have a very low barrier to
you joining us in this group.
It's very informal but we do at
least get people to come and so
we are getting some productive
conversations out of those.
The last one was actually quite
good.
And we are going to continue to
work with that group to bring in
more actual tenants and make
sure the tenants they work with
to make sure they're all
represented.
they have met now five times.
This is the newly reconstituted
group.
You both fell off at different
points along the way and had to
be picked up and rejuvenated and
we are still in the process with
one of them.
The landlord group although we
are very much in communications
with those members.
Happy to take questions but that
is where we stand as of today.
>> Chair: colleagues sign in if
you would like to have a comment
or a question.
Council member brown.
>> thank you, chair and thank
you commissioner for the
presentation.
Was today's presentation fyi, to
let us know your efforts.
>> an update on how it has been
going.
>> okay.
Commissioner, what do you think
moving forward?
Do you think these groups need
to be codified in some form of
an official board or commission
to maybe give recommendations.
>> I would caution against that.
We are having a hard enough time
pulling it together in an
informal basis.
Formalizing it would make it
more difficult and would create
an obligation for the office and
if the group doesn't meet, I
have to find them and pull them
together and reschedule it to
meet the ordinance requirement.
I think the informal nature of
it allows it to be more flexible
with memberships, with topics,
all of the things because so far
we have not been able to get
either of these groups into
enough of a routine that I would
be comfortable saying that if
you codified this, I could
promise you in two years it will
be running like a train.
The two groups themselves are
not super engaged with the
government.
You have to really massage that
to get it.
>> would you rather leave these
as unofficial ad hoc groups that
you bring together and have the
opportunity to bounce ideas off,
and policies and get feedback%
and see if it is something you
can grow?
>> that's worked well for us so
far.
>> let me ask this.
In regards to because it sounds
like you are really having a
hard time convening the tenant
group and you tried everything
as far as bringing them here.
Have you tried going out to them
like having them attend a
meeting in a public accessible
space?
>> we have and we actually do
that.
I didn't add it to this
presentation, but I know you all
are aware we have our landlord
and tenant rights and
responsibilities forum that take
place throughout the district.
Those have been enormously
successful.
And they serve a similar
function in that we are still
engaging with the populations
and presenting programs to them
and we are hearing feedback from
them.
I go it way better attendance at
those than I do the formal
committees and groups.
Part of that is because we are
going out in the community but
we tried that with the tenant
group.
we held that out in the
community and nobody showed up
for that.
A lot of it is how are you
engaging with them.
If we say do you want to be on a
big formal government committee,
they MAY not be as interested in
that but if I say I'm going to
have a forum where you can be
heard on housing, that seems to
have more appeal.
>> I can see that, where folks
are invited to be part of this
more official group and they're
not comfortable with speaking
about their personal
situation...
>> I think that's a lot of it.
Because a lot of people, their
experience as a tenant and
things they would want to talk
about in a group setting are
very personal things.
It has to do with your finances,
medical history sometimes,
things that you MAY not want to
openly share about.
>> I'm interested in seeing what
my colleagues say.
I appreciate you taking the
initiative and convening the
groups and trying to get
feedback and elevating the
voices as we deal with housing.
Thank you, chair.
>> Chair: council member curtis.
>> thank you, chair.
And thank you, commissioner
lanter for all of your work on
this, council member lynch as
well.
I have been very impressed by
the flexibility y'all have shown
in just making this work one way
or another.
I did have a quick question for
you, commissioner, if you might
be willing to expand on
something which was you talked
about the importance of having
not just the property owners but
property managers showing up to
the landlord group.
Could you speak to the
significance of that and to the
changes that, you know, come as
a result of that?
>> that's actually a really good
point because those are two very
different constituencies, you
know, and in some cases very
small property the owner MAY be
the property manager but in most
cases the average citizen deal
when they're renting, are
dealing with the property
manager.
They MAY never know who the
owner is.
So what we really like to do is
engage with whoever the person
the tenant is interacting with.
Is it the owner?
Great.
If not the property manager.
Property management is a whole
different ball game.
A lot of changes in that
industry.
It's very difficult, short
staffed, under funded.
A lot of times just getting
their time can be difficult,
too.
But we've had a really good
experience working with the
central kentucky apartment
association.
They have been very
collaborative and they represent
a lot of those large property
managers and they feed into that
group so we are getting a lot of
good feedback from them.
>> I'm glad to hear that,
speaking as a renter myself, I
can tell you I have interacted
with my property managers
several times and I have never
once actually met a landlord
that I have had in person.
I think that is often left out
of the discussion and I
appreciate you all highlighting
that.
Building off what council member
brown had to say, I do just want
to add that when we are having
these conversations about
tenants showing up and what not,
there is a fundamental inkwik
between -- inequity when between
tenants and landlords when it
comes between the economy of
money and time and energy so I
don't want anybody in the public
or on this legislative body to
mistake the difficulties with
attendance for that group as a
lack of need or lack of interest
from tenants in the community
because I can tell you for a
fact that is not the case and
I'm sure commissioner lanter and
council member lynch, not to put
words in your mouths, I'm sure
would you say the same things.
So I want to make sure that we
are considering that.
>> absolutely.
I think it was clear but I want
to make sure and reiterate the
two groups are very separate and
distinct for that railroad
reason.
We did not want to put the two
in the room together and say
okay y'all, fight it out.
That wouldn't work well.
We keep them very separate.
>> thank you.
I appreciate your dedication to
this work, commissioner because
we are better for it.
Thank you, chair.
That's all.
>> Chair: council member
reynolds.
>> thank you, chair and thank
you, commissioner.
I really appreciate your
willingness to try to make this
work in one way or another, and
to include the voices of both
the landlords and the tenants.
I will echo -- I feel like over
my time on council, one of my
greatest challenges has been
communicating with tenants.
It's really hard because
sometimes you don't have access
to leaving flyers at their door,
you don't have access to
gathering people from an
apartment complex.
It's just really challenging on
a lot of levels.
I see a little bit of your goals
in here with the groups, but do
you have like a specific goal
and mission that maybe or maybe
is there a way to incorporate
that a little bit more firmly
that would make people feel like
they really have a buy-in both
on the tenant and landlord side?
>> yeah, I think it's good you
brought that up.
One of the things that tiffany
and I talked about as we
reconstitute it and bring life
back into the groups was
specifically that.
And I think groups work best
when that comes from them.
So our first agenda item with
each one in the landlord one we
haven't done this with yet is
what do you want to know and
what do you want to talk about?
What do we want to discuss?
I will put things on there that
I know we need to hear from and
feedback, but we try to make
sure that it is driven by what
are the issues that the tenants
themselves are facing.
Often what that ends up look
looking like in the meeting is
very specific complaints.
Tenants talking about, I had
this issue or I had this issue
because it's very difficult for
an individual to sit back and
have a policy conversation when
their water heater doesn't work
or their A.C. Doesn't work.
And so what I'm trying to do is
work through the context to say,
okay, you are telling me your
water heater doesn't work and
that there is mold in your
apartment.
I think what we are hearing for
the purpose of this meeting is
the property manager is not
responsive.
So let's talk about how do we
work on responsiveness of
property managers opposed to how
do I fix your water heater
because that's not something we
can personally do although we do
try to help when we can.
>> I think that makes a lot of
sense.
I also think that when we are
asking people to have a buy-in,
whether it's a time, an hour,
four times, you know, a year or
whatever that is, if they don't
have a clear understanding from
the very beginning of what their
time and energy is going to help
with or change or I think it
could include time where you
talk were what are their needs,
but something that catches their
attention to even be a part of
it, then I often see it doesn't
work because often times
neighborhood associations, you
can say come to this
neighborhood association meeting
and we will have pizza.
We will have child care,
whatever, but why are they
coming?
They don't know why, going to
the neighborhood association
meeting, why taking their time
what that is going to do to make
a difference in their iferred
lives and these people are busy.
These people are working a lot%
of hours and they need to know
their why.
Why should I be there
specifically, in addition to
having a chance to talk about
whatever you feel like is a
concern.
So that's a suggestion that I
have because I think people want
to do good things, but we are
all so busy and tired, that
unless there is I specific
reason, we might not be willing
to buy into whatever that is.
>> I think you are absolutely
right.
I think I understand what you
are saying.
There is a big difference of
asking someone to come to a
general government business
meeting about housing.
If you reframe that ask as would
you like to tell me about the
problems you are having as a
renter and with your landlord,
you are giving them a chance to
discus something specific they
can connect with.
But I think you are -- what you
are saying there has to be an
outcome.
There has to be a goal.
>> it can't just be a general
come tell us how to make things
better.
I think you are right.
I think that is part of the
issue.
Hey, do you want to be on our
feedback group.
Without them knowing what the
group is going to talk about,
there is less interest.
>> exactly.
Thank you.
Thank you, chair.
>> Chair: vice mayor wu.
>> thank you, chair.
Thank you, commissioner for all
of this work.
In the list of the organizations
for tenant advisory group, you
said there are 12 organizations.
I count nine here.
Kentucky tenants is a part of
this advisory group?
>> they have been.
They have not participated
regularly once it got going.
But they're invited.
>> and thinking about kind of
your role in sort of
facilitating both these groups
who have obviously a lot of
friction and conflict, kind of
inherently, have you been able
to or do you feel like it's your
role at all to not necessarily
mediate but to convey the
complaints or challenges or
issues that one group has sort
of like citing the other because
I know landlords will complain
about their tenants as well for
all these reasons and vice
versa.
Have you felt like that's a part
of your role?
Should it be a part of your
role?
Are you able to do that?
>> that's a really excellent
question because we've dabbled
in that with these two groups
and it doesn't always go well.
If tenants are giving me a
consistent theme of something
they're complaining about and I
go to landlords and I say hey,
tenants are saying you guys are
doing this, x, y, z.
They just immediately go into
defensive mode of no we are not
or the tenants are not telling
you all the facts amend of.
And the reverse is true as well.
Like if I go to the tenants and
say well the landlords are
saying you guys destroy their
units or whatever, they give me
the exact same thing.
There is such a divide between
the two, just trying, a
government office trying to
mediate two esoteric groups is
really hard.
I think we have had more success
in trying to do that in a
smaller one on one or two on one
kind of setting.
We have had conversations emerge
from the groups that led to
that.
But probably what I would say is
one of the things we've learned
not to do is that because it has
led to some hurt feelings.
>> to build on what council
member reynolds was saying, kind
of, I feel like you were
speaking to kind of what is the
purpose or mission of these
groups have there been any
concrete recommendations from
the groups, towards lfucg or our
policies, things like that.
>> a good example would be the
housing stability program which
I will be presenting on next
week.
The lalled program that -- legal
aid program that provides access
to council.
That program was designed with
these two groups.
As this program was originally
built, both groups gave feedback
on the program design as it was
built.
Both groups have things in there
that they asked for, both groups
have things in there that they
did not ask for.
that has been an enormously
successful program.
One could argue one of the
reasons it was successful is it
was informed by the two groups
it impacts the most.
>> I appreciate that.
Coming off the heels of the
assembly, the work they, did
bringing the recommendation to
us, woo we decide what to do
with it.
I was thinking about that, too.
Would there be a process formal
or informal if members of a
group or majority of the
landlords or tenants say you
know what needs to change is
blank, something we would
effectuate, I would be
interested in to see is there a
process for that?
Is that just you bringing a
recommendation to council saying
hey, we've heard a lot about
this issuing tisch.
I think there are some tweaks we
can make to, I don't know, code
enforcement regulations whatever
it is: I would be interested in
see that because would I hate
for your time being used as just
sort of the person receiving
complaints from one group or the
other.
I definitely take your point
`about these complaints do lead
to you thinking about either
widespread issues or common
issues with either group.
I just want to make sure that
your time is used well and the
folks in these groups are not
just using it as a venting
session that MAY or MAY not be
productive.
>> that's a serious risk.
It happens.
We have had some of the members
complain about the other members
saying they would just come in
to vent ayou will their
grievances with the government.
That's true and that's part of
the reason we are doing some of
the gasps with the membership,
to be more productive.
But there are two ways that
things come out of this.
Most of it is incidental.
It's quick things that we can
fix.
They're saying oh, the process
for getting a new hrbie is this.
Before the end of the day, I
have called manage many and we
fixed it because it was a minor
miscommunication.
A lot of that emerges from both
groups that we can make tweaks
here or there and make their
lives easier and respond to
incidents.
And then what I try to do over
the course of the conversations,
that's where I look for the
larger policy recommendations.
I think the process, to your
speaking to and we have to watch
for, those two groups rarely
agree.
If you have an exit policy
strategy, have you to make sure
it accounts for the fact that
the two of them are saying we've
reviewed this and we have two
very different opinions about
it.
>> I appreciate it.
It's very challenging work but I
appreciate you doing it.
>> council member sevigny.
>> thank you, chair and thanks
so much for the presentation.
I've got a few ideas.
And I appreciate what you are
doing.
One thought is have you done
anything virtually?
Have you done virtual a lot, too
or not?
>> not with these groups.
That's something we have
considered.
>> that's one thing.
And then have you guys thought,
landlord registration concept is
kind of -- it doesn't get a lot
of excitement in general have
you thought of a tenant
registration system that would
strictly be optional that you
could push and we could push to
gain tenant information so that
you have a tenant pool but they
tell you who the property
manager is.
Like where they live, who the
property manager is and how to
contact that property manager
and if they know the owner.
Or if we can find the owner from
the address through a cross
references.
I'm just kind of wondering if we
are -- if we enter it from that
level, like say you had a pool
of -- say a thousand tenants
signed up.
You would at least have a pool
of people that you might say
hey, I'm curious on the landlord
content: you might have a
survey for them.
There might be something to fill
out the survey you entered into
a 50-dollar gift card trying to
think of things to drive it from
the other direction, to get the
tenants to opt in.
>> a quick response process.
And then you have a way to kind
of at least pump hey, I would
like to know if tenants are
feeling x and you send it out
and see what response you get
seems super simple.
I think crowd sourcing any type
of information we all
unfortunately we have next door
and we can look at that.
So it's just another crowd
sourcing concept and you might
do it as a bulletin board.
>> just want to make sure we
have all the technological
pieces in place to make everyone
comfortable as far as personal
identity and that kind of stuff
and they can use they don't have
on give a last name if they
don't want to.
So just a thought.
I just think it would help you
get some tenants.
And you might be able to get
some information.
Thanks.
Appreciate it.
>> Chair: council member that
sounds similar to what we do
with engage lexington, right.
We can most feedback
opportunities, people register
and give us some of their
information.
And then they can respond to
different particular inquiries
for feedback.
I think when you say registry,
sometimes it feels bigger than
that because when we talk about
short-term rental registry or
any kind of like long-term
rental registry it's a much
bigger program but I can see
what you are saying there.
>> to give you an etch how the
two groups differ, in very
distinct incidents, the tent
groups -- the tenant group has
strongly asked for a rental
registry, which there are legal
questions around and the
landlord has simultaneously
insisted that we never do a
rental registry.
I have two groups that say don't
do what the other one says.
>> thank you, commissioner for
the presentation but I'm going
to turn it over to council
member lynch who had some
remarks to wrap us up.
>> thank you, chair and
commissioner lanter, medicines
masden for taking this on and
working with both advisory
groups.
Thank you for staying the course
both groups voices need to be
heard thank you for the
facilitation and I will keep
this item in committee for an
annual update.
>> Chair: colleagues, the last
thing on our jabbed is items
referred to committee.
Does anybody have any domestics
they would like to make about an
item or remove an item council
member reynolds you are up
first.
>> would I like to remove
planning and development study
recommendation eight and
recommendation 10.
That looks like it is item 3-z
and 4 on the items referred list
so moved.
>> second.
>> Chair: motion and second.
Any discussion on the motion all
those in favor say aye.
Any opposed?
Motion carries.
>> is that all for yours,
council member reynolds.
>> yes.
>> Chair: council member brown.
>> thank you, chair.
Since we just discussed the
efficiencies in our development
process and compliance of house
bill 443, I'm comfortable with
removing that item if we need to
get some updates, I think we can
put this item back in committee.
A motion and a second.
Any discussion on the motion?
okay, all those in favor say
aye.
>> aye.
>> Chair: any opposed?
That passes as well.
I don't see anyone else signed
in.
I'm going to say my window for
item discussion is closing: it
is closed.
Thank you, everyone.
Now that we are at the end of
our agenda I am going to adjourn