What’s next for Lexington? Council candidates give plans for affordable housing, boundary

The Urban Service Boundary and the question of when it could expand will be one of the crucial decisions the upcoming Lexington-Fayette Urban County Council must consider, as well as the issue of affordable housing.

All 12 council seats are on the ballot Nov. 8, so the Herald-Leader compiled a set of questionnaires that allows voters to compare what the candidates in their district think about three major issues: crime prevention, the Urban Service Boundary and affordable housing, and environmental policies.

You can also see how candidates across districts would approach these topics, and how they might work together (or not) if elected.

In a digital survey, each candidate was given 200 words per question to answer these queries: Explain why or why not the city’s urban service boundary should be expanded. What new programs would you pursue to increase affordable housing?

Here’s how each candidate answered, in their own words. You can find the responses to public safety issues here, and environmental policy here.

Responses are arranged in alphabetical order by the candidate’s last name. Races that have an incumbent candidate are labeled accordingly.

District 1

Rahsaan Berry: “I believe we need to examine all the infill redevelopment and the land that is not developed before we try to expand the USB. These are the important questions that need to be made with planning and the comprehensive plan committee.

“I believe we need to look for ways to increase the affordable housing trust funds. This would help our city invest more in affordable housing to create more opportunities for our community.”

Tayna Fogle: “The Urban Service Boundary is important for our economy, for protecting the environment, and for preserving the beauty of Fayette County. The critical need for increased and improved housing, particularly affordable housing, must be our top priority, however. We must address all of our problems, including housing and the USB, as a community, bringing all parties to the table: LFUCG, developers, rural residents, urban neighborhoods, and impacted people. We may be able to preserve the USB if we dedicate ourselves to finding creative, collaborative solutions to our housing issues. Two ideas are:

“1. Increase the Affordable Housing Trust Fund. The $10 million added from ARPA funding is too little, too late.

“2. Prioritize infill redevelopment, as recommended in the 2018 Comprehensive Plan, but we must do it through a racial equity lens, avoiding gentrification and displacement.

“Simply expanding the USB will not magically solve our housing problems, but all potential solutions must be brought to the table and decisions made as a community so that we can ensure that everyone in Lexington has places to eat, sleep, travel, learn, work, and play.”

“Lexington’s affordable housing crisis is one of the most important issues facing our community. There are no simple programs or policies that will solve this problem. However, all discussions, ideas, proposals, programs, and policies must meet two criteria. (1) We must begin with a proper definition of ‘affordable.’ Affordable housing should comprise 30% of a family’s budget. For a family of four earning 50% of the median area income, this means ‘affordable housing’ would cost $1,050/month. For a family of four earning only 30% of the median income, ‘affordable’ means $633/month. The average rent for a two-bedroom unit in Lexington is currently $1,180. (2) We must engage all stakeholders, especially those who are impacted such as the homeless and working poor. I have been and am an impacted person, and electing me would be a strong first step in realizing this goal.

“Specific ideas include encouraging more landlords to accept Section 8 housing vouchers by streamlining the process and offering incentives; using zoning laws to incentivize long-term rentals over vacation rentals and prevent investors from outside Lexington from purchasing housing stock and driving up prices; and turning existing vacant buildings and lots into housing.”

District 2

Shayla Lynch: “I support a clear and transparent examination of this issue that will not deprive and displace communities of color and will result in thriving communities all across our county. I believe that we can arrive at an equitable decision that will take into account all interests and responsibly grow as a city and county.”

“Establishing a dedicated funding stream for the Affordable Housing Trust Fund is an important first step that we could take to increase affordable housing opportunities.

“Additionally, when we think about affordable housing we only think about single family homes, which is only one piece of this complex affordable housing puzzle. I worked with landlords and tenants in Fayette County for over 15 years and there were many common themes — lack of a written lease, failure to provide receipts for payments made, and undue retaliation. I support the recommendation made by the Housing and Gentrification Subcommittee of the Mayor’s Commission for Racial Justice and Equality, a committee I had the pleasure of co-chairing, that a Tenant’s Bill of Rights is needed to more firmly stipulate the expectations of the landlord-tenant relationship and remove many of the gray areas that currently exist.

“Lastly, to increase the equitable access to housing I am in support of amending our local Fair Housing ordinance to include source of income as an additional protected class. Having this additional protection in place will prevent individuals and families from being denied housing because of their lawful source of income — such as a housing subsidy or social security.”

Josh McCurn, incumbent: “As the city debates whether to expand, or not, the Urban Service Boundary, the conversation needs to be around several focuses, including the discussions of the Goal 4 workshop that is looking at when and where to potentially expand. Along that conversation, affordable housing, economic development and job growth, and how we’ve addressed infill and development in the past five years are all crucial parts to this topic.

“Affordable housing is a growing need in our city. As a graduating student, a retiree, or a family looking to live in Lexington, we have started seeing that many cannot find a location to live, especially affordably. This conversation continues towards job expansion and growth and seeing companies locate here. Lexington has focused on bringing and growing our job market for the past several years, but now is the time to begin growing up or growing out to find room for these businesses and any expansion.

“I have supported infill and development throughout my time on Council, seeing that we grow smart throughout the city and close to our rural areas. I will continue to focus on looking at the needs of Lexington and the best opportunities for our future.”

“Affordable housing is a growing need throughout Lexington, especially affordable housing for seniors. I have focused my efforts on partnering with developers to locate land, resources, and support to bring more affordable housing to our city. Through these relationships, I have worked to see an affordable housing development begin that plans to add restaurants, a walking trail, and a playground on site to help meet the needs of our community.

“I support annually funding the affordable housing fund and seeing that these funds go towards projects that help bring job growth, walkable solutions, and activities for our youth. Additionally, I have partnered with the Commissioner of Housing Advocacy to begin hosting homeownership courses. These courses work with our neighborhoods to answer questions, understand what to expect obtaining homeownership, and even solutions for difficult situations when you are in homeownership (I.e. repairs and financial planning). Meeting the needs of our city’s affordable housing concerns is a priority of mine and I look forward to continuing the work we’ve put forward already.”

District 3

Hannah LeGris, incumbent: “I do not support expanding the Urban Service Boundary at this time. The benefits of densification are numerous and supported by many livability indices. Densification simplifies the creation and maintenance of infrastructure, increases overall energy efficiency compared to rural development, and improves the value of the local economy. I will continue to promote realistic infill whenever feasible and advocate for equitable development by encouraging the LFUCG to incentivize under-utilized spaces within the Urban Service Boundary. Cities across the nation have been using infill for years as a primary means to provide for their growing populations and evolving needs. In Lexington we have the social and environmental obligation to do the same, preserving our rural areas, improving our under-developed urban spaces, and creating more places for residents to work, live, and thrive.”

“Lexington’s housing market is dramatically overextended and many residents have seen increased pricing, evictions, and housing shortages over the past few years. I am a strong proponent of creating more diversified, mixed-income, and evolving format housing to serve growing community needs. LFUCG has already taken important steps by creating the new Housing Advocacy and Community Development division, which focuses on helping people live in safe, well-maintained, affordable housing. I believe we should continue to invest in groups like the Lexington Community Land Trust, which increases housing stock for low-income buyers in an equitable and responsible manner.

“This year Council allocated a record amount — $10 million — to the Affordable Housing Fund. The Infill and Redevelopment Committee is also researching zoning reform as a way to create more affordable multifamily development. In addition, we can expand partnerships with REACH, Habitat for Humanity, and developers within Fayette County to support homeownership. Affordable housing is crucial to keeping people safe and connected to the community. We should use these and other programs to incentivize responsible redevelopment, containing our long term infrastructure costs and providing stability for residents.”

Kate Savage: “I support holding the urban services boundary, at least for now, to save our bluegrass landscape which is the source of our characteristic identity and agriculture revenue. We have enough land to meet our growth needs for some time provided we use it wisely. However, we need to be diligent in how we develop our urban areas so as not to be inefficient and wasteful of our resources. We need to make sure that infill and redevelopment follows the same high standard as our rural land. Preserving Lexington’s historic identity and quality of life is every bit as important. The better alternative to expanding the urban services boundary is to build up and not out, but we need to scrutinize our recently approved projects and ask whether they are in fact building up and not in fact tearing down modest housing to build back with commercial real estate. We need to be better stewards and better land managers than we have been to date. Vacant property, property standing empty and neglected needs to be evaluated. Likewise the status on property approved for development that has seen no forward movement for say, ten years, needs to be reviewed.”

“Addressing the affordable housing crisis requires a comprehensive, all-in approach from activists, organizers, nonprofits, philanthropies, the private sector, government and community members. There are several programs that could be explored more fully:

• Expanding Community Land Trusts
• Exploring new methods for building homes — possibly using 3D printers, eco-friendly hemp construction products etc.,
• Equity centered financing for homeownership opportunities. Models like Habitat/Community Ventures.
• Transforming underutilized spaces into affordable homes — hotels, motel, vacant lots, school lots or buildings like FCPS Admin building on Main, even churches who have a stake in their communities often command some land and might be encouraged to share their resources. Woodland Christian is considering exactly this adaptive use for 38 units.
• Protect what is already existing affordable multifamily rental properties. Too often we have seen demolition of these homes, especially apartment buildings, to make way for a gas station (Versailles Road) or a parking lot (Kroger on Euclid) for the higher rental yield.
• Incentive zoning.”

District 4

J. “Brack” Marquette: “Our city and region are highly attractive as a destination for study, careers, tourism, medical services, and retirement. Growth in population is inevitable. We must nourish a vibrant and diverse economy to complement our popularity and potential to be an exemplary place in which to live and work. The way we manage growth while strengthening our traditional and extraordinarily valuable agricultural industries will always be for us a difficult albeit essential balancing task. As a region we can accommodate population growth, new businesses and good jobs/careers, and the vitality of agri-business and the many unrivaled benefits it brings to our community. Where and how to grow in Fayette County must be a very careful, highly researched, and well modulated decision process involving all publics and built with the assurance that the quality compromises attained are not easily or casually undone. I believe we can have it all if we both protect and provide with equal wisdom and foresight.”

“Housing affordability within Lexington-Fayette must not disappear as it has in other thriving cities much like ours. Great and increasing is the housing cost pressure on low-income residents, many of whom provide the employment base essential to the economic vitality of our community. Few current solutions called ‘affordable housing’ actually are designed to address the needs of the lowest income residents. I have pledged to make this area of concern one of my top work priorities once elected, and I have the combination of government, banking, economic development, and legislative experience to forge a long-term plan to accommodate the thousands in our community who need safe, affordable homes.”

Brenda Monarrez: “Expanding the Urban Services Boundaries has been debated for decades. The need for additional housing whether affordable or otherwise is obvious. The last time the boundary was expanded it was with the understanding that affordable housing would be a priority; that wasn’t the result. There is a map that is supposed to identify areas where infill can take place, however some locations are not available. We can work to update the map and create incentives for infill, but developers must recoup their costs and still provide a service that is profitable for them. Infill is more expensive than undeveloped land. How much are we willing to spend on incentives? Consideration for costs for city/county services being provided to additional areas, whether it’s infill or expansion areas must be budgeted for. For example, our public safety services are already strained with the current number of homes available. Additional units added to the load, even when it’s done within the current boundary, is an issue. I am for any development, whether it’s infill or expansion, being well-researched and intentional. Planning must take into account urban services, schools, roads, traffic/transportation and environmental impacts, etc. because property taxes do not offset all of these.”

“I would like to develop additional programs that help create more affordable housing, building middle housing with sustainable, walkable communities and increasing housing affordability for all, especially the average-income Lexingtonians. More apartment complexes with added funds for rental assistance for low-income residents. Increasing funds available for down payment assistance programs to make homeownership affordable to first time homebuyers. Space for our aging population, having the ability to create space adding tiny living spaces to back yards. While the city did receive a grant through the ARPA funds for a specific project, we must continue to be proactive at seeking funds from the federal, state and private entities to continue to develop and fund programs on an ongoing basis. HUD and KY Housing are two agencies that provide such funds.”

District 5

Greg Ladd: “It should NOT be expanded in the next five years. We need to incentivize smart growth. Encourage mixed-use development. Formulate policy that balances the need for more housing to accommodate a growing population while also preserving our cultural trademark, the Bluegrass. Any expansion should be deliberate and presented with a feasibility study showing the necessary and infrastructure (eg. water & utilities) can be affordably maintained by future residents. Further, any new expansion must also have resources allocated and itemized for waterway health, reforestation, erosion control, and wildlife protection.”

“I would make the Community Development Block Grant Program with HUD a top priority. This provides the funding mechanism to build affordable housing. Additionally, I would draft an ordinance allowing local banks to carry an otherwise ‘high risk portfolio,’ but backed by the city with a third-party beneficiary like Habitat for Humanity. This is a wonderful organization that helps honest but unfortunate people purchase a home. As a bankruptcy attorney, I’ve seen this work successfully for dozens of clients. I would also file an ordinance that creates a progressive ad valorem tax for qualifying citizens to fight gentrification.”

Liz Sheehan, incumbent: “We are currently reviewing our Comprehensive Plan (the document required by state law to guide our long-term growth), where we are facing this question head-on. As a researcher, I firmly believe in working from shared, objective data. The Sustainable Growth Task Force recently collected data about land usage that will now be annually updated. Additionally, in the 2018 Comprehensive Plan, our community recommended the establishment of a process for making expansion decisions. The ‘Goal 4 Workgroup’ convened by the Vice Mayor has been creating that process with a variety of local stakeholder groups: elected officials, agricultural and real estate communities, economic development experts, city planners, water quality professionals, and our mapping team. This process and data should be used to support an evidenced-based decision about the Urban Service Boundary. Whether or not this leads our community to expansion, I will continue to support programs that preserve our agricultural areas and jobs, such as the Purchase of Development Rights (PDR) program. Lexington is unique because of our agricultural industry and the beautiful rural landscape. Any decision with the potential to affect these spaces must be made with great care and consideration; once an area is developed, that can never be undone.”

“Addressing our affordable housing shortage has been a primary focus of my first term in office. With the help of the Mayor’s administration and my Council colleagues, we were able to dedicate historic funding to our affordable housing fund (which has created nearly 3,000 housing units since the program was launched in 2014) and rental assistance. We must continue to prioritize the leveraging of local, state, and federal dollars to increase the supply of accessible and affordable housing. We must also expand our efforts to keep people in their homes; this year the Office of Housing Advocacy and Community Development began implementing programs to assist residents in addressing Code Enforcement violations in order to help low-income individuals avoid liens and possible foreclosure on their homes. They also used some of the $2.5 million we receive annually in Community Development Block Grants to assist with home renovations. Moving forward, I will continue to advocate for the construction of diverse housing options, a dedicated funding source for our Affordable Housing Fund, expansion of models like our Community Land Trust, and an increased focus on homeownership for Lexingtonians.”

District 6

Denise Gray: “My support of any expansion of the Urban Service Area would be contingent upon a plan with the input of all Lexingtonians, city planning, and other experts. Any plan regarding the expansion or any change with the Urban Service Area must be a well-thought-out, strategic plan that keeps the city’s future in mind, especially regarding natural resources and other environmental issues. It must also put the community’s news first.

“We have proof of what happens when we make expansions to the Urban Service Boundary. Doing so doesn’t necessarily mean developers will develop affordable homes. The proof is in the pudding that this is not the case. So let us be smart. Let’s be strategic and, most importantly, prioritize the people’s needs.”

“Currently, the city has the Affordable Housing Fund, which allocated $2 million to the fund. The $2 million was matched through the American Rescue Plan Act, which gave $10 million to the fund. I want to see more funds allocated to the fund. This fund seeks to assist our educators, first responders, and those in the service industry as a means to afford housing in our city.

“There have been reports of landlords who have refused to accept housing vouchers, and I would like to speak with landlords regarding the rationale for rejecting these guaranteed funds. If we are serious about ensuring affordable housing is an issue, we must be willing to have the hard conversations.”

Charlie Rowland: “I do not believe there is a need to expand the urban service boundary at the current time. We have too many priorities that need to be addressed within the current boundary. Particularly with high inflation and rising interest rates, tax dollars budgeted by Council will not go as far as they did even 6 months ago. Councilmembers need to be stewards of our citizens’ tax dollars and expansion would increase costs for taxpayers. We need to prioritize investment in historically disinvested neighborhoods and make sure our tax dollars are spent in a way that ensures everyone has access to affordable housing, nutritious foods, and community services where they currently live.

“In keeping the current boundary, Council needs to be more proactive in encouraging infill development. We need to lower regulatory hurdles for developers with projects within the current boundary. We need to reevaluate our zoning and permitting laws and regulations to ensure that they promote infill development and address the housing and commercial needs of the community.”

“We need to find additional, dedicated revenue for the Affordable Housing Fund. We need to better work with and incentivize developers who are investing in affordable housing projects and including affordable housing components to new developments.

“The most important step we can take in the near term to increase affordable housing is to better advocate for Lexington on the state and federal level. Even if we allocate additional revenue to the Affordable Housing Trust, increases at the city level will only be a drop in the bucket for addressing Lexington’s affordable housing needs. We need to better leverage city funds from outside sources. Currently, despite being the second largest city in the state, we are missing out on affordable housing funds provided by the Kentucky Housing Corporation due to a lack of advocacy on behalf of Lexington.”

District 7

Joseph Hale: “Depending on why we are to expand the USB will make this topic easier to give a definitive answer to. If part of the reason is to develop for affordable housing, opportunities for small and minority businesses, and jobs then yes. If it is to put more money in these big developers and corporations pockets then no.”

“I think infill development is a great start to remediate land and property in our city for affordable housing. I would stand behind the mayor in this plan.”

Preston Worley, incumbent: “I believe it is time to strategically and intentionally expand the Urban Service Boundary. Housing affordability, not just affordable housing as defined by HUD, as well as ready, affordable economic development land, is not sufficient with the current available land (as proven by market trends.) Attracting new jobs and providing adequate affordable housing for Lexington residents will not happen without increasing the available stock of land.”

“Both in my law practice and on Council I have supported many affordable housing initiatives; specifically the Affordable Housing Trust Fund, into which our city has invested over $24 million since it was created. I supported the most recent investment of $10 million from the American Rescue Plan Act as well as millions in rental assistance and homelessness prevention. I will continue to support and fight for expansion of the Affordable Housing Trust Fund. Additionally, I support the creation of infill and redevelopment subsidies and incentives to make development more affordable, which in turn allows housing units to be sold or rented more affordably.”

District 8

Fred V. Brown, incumbent: “The urban service boundary has not changed since 1996. I have supported infill development, good planning and zone changes. I have not supported expansion just to promote housing developments; however, I support a balanced approach to expansion and the need to promote growth in both housing and commercial development. This need can be met by expanding the land around our interstate roadway. I have and will continue to support our PDR program which has protected our service boundary.”

“I will continue to support the programs and assistance to the office of affordable housing. General fund of $2 million are in the current budget along with an allocation of $10 million from federal funds. New programs include housing assistance, transitional housing pilot program (thru community action), and supportive services to unhoused persons who are homeless.”

Kenya Williams: “I believe that the Urban Service Boundary should only be expanded if it is going to help alleviate the cost of housing in the city.”

“I would pursue programs that would create fair value for square footage and space.”

District 9

Whitney Elliot Baxter, incumbent: “Protecting our landmark horse farms is important to the identity of our community, but there are logical corridors for expansion that could give the city a little breathing room. Identifying these areas parcel by parcel will ensure that we are expanding our growth area in a thoughtful way. However, expanding to just expand is not a solution either. We must review and revise planning policies to ensure we are allowing the appropriate type of growth to sustain Lexington for years to come.”

“As a Real Estate Professional, I know that increasing affordable housing stock can only be achieved if we are able to diversify and expand the areas in which we can build or redevelop. Loosening the belt around our city will help reduce gentrification by allowing new developments to spread out instead of concentrate in specific areas. I voted in favor of the city’s new Housing Advocate and to allocate more than $24 million to affordable housing this year. I will continue to support affordable housing by allocating funds and fostering relationships with organizations like The Housing Authority, Community Action Council, and the Urban League.”

James J. Lombardi: “I hold the opinion that the Urban Service boundary should be expanded. Currently the housing market in Fayette County is experiencing a shortage of homes on the market. New home construction has slowed to the point where demand has outpaced the supply. There are a number of factors contributing to the current problem. However, one needed solution seems to be expanding the urban service boundary for development.”

“I recommend expanding the urban service boundary for development. With expanded areas for development neighborhoods can be constructed with varying price points at affordable levels. Every neighborhood in Fayette County does not need to be on a one to five acre lot with a 4,000 to 6,000 square foot home. Simply put, developers can provide starter and mid range affordable homes in newly constructed neighborhoods if the urban service boundary were expanded.”

District 10

Ross Mann: “There is a moral incumbency to provide affordable housing in Lexington. We must decide as a local government and a community if we want density or expansion (or some combination of both). I will not be a part of anything that injures the character and composition of our beautiful horse farms, or the agricultural community. There is green space along the I-75 corridor, and an opportunity for smart and responsible growth along Richmond and Winchester Roads. We must consider that expanding the Urban Service Boundary would be a vast additional burden on the city’s overall budget. However, we must also consider the necessary growth to meet our housing needs with the expansion in our healthcare sector, as must accommodate the 3,000 or more new employees who will be working in that area of Lexington. Providing this housing will cut down on traffic congestion, fuel consumption, and is a green-friendly approach to solving these issues. If such growth necessitates expanding the Urban Service Boundary without endangering farmland or harming agriculture, I could support such an initiative.”

“1) The first thing I would do is partner with our legislators in Frankfort to pass laws dealing with out-of-state private equity investment in single family residential dwellings that first-time home buyers cannot compete with.

“2) I would also seek to partner with the Fayette Co. School Board for a property tax ceiling for low income earners to prevent displacement when outside investors come in and buy up proximal real estate, driving up home values.

“3) We need smart and responsible infill development of abandoned properties and vacant lots and spaces that do not harm the beauty and character of our local neighborhoods.

“4) We must explore smart and responsible growth along the I-75 growth (with guardrails in place).”

Dave Sevigny: “The Comprehensive plan is the document that the city uses to navigate land use in our city and its direction will be completed prior to my entering office. The 2018 version called for a study to be done that would create ‘triggers’ around when the USB might need to be expanded. The trigger study isn’t complete (expected completion Nov. 2022 prior to 2023 Comp Plan adoption). If we want to use the document’s methodology to support land use in Fayette County, it needs to be obvious what those trigger points are, so that all stakeholders work within the same framework. All of us should want this study to be completed with solid recommended solutions so that all parties in land use discussions can find common ground. I believe the USB has probably one expansion left sometime in the next 20 years. An innovative idea would be to investigate creative land swaps within and outside the USB, as it is very apparent that not all vacant land within the USB is actually for sale thus not changing the number of acres within the USB, just replacing it with land that is of little agricultural value but lies outside the USB.”

“There is no real silver bullet when it comes to affordable housing in this post COVID world. I’ve knocked on a lot of doors and I can’t tell you the number of extended families that are living together because of the lack of affordable housing options. I’m a fan of denser living (I live in a multiunit condo). The 10th District has a great mix of single family and duplex neighborhoods that coexist really well together. I think local government’s role is to legislate in a way that creates a reasonable ROI for a developer to invest in products that increase the financial diversity of the housing inventory and provide an opportunity for everyone to be able to live in our community. One resource that I think could be leveraged is land owned by faith communities. It seems logical to work with these organizations to provide eased restrictions for housing options on their grounds.”

District 11

Rock Daniels: “The urban service boundary is something that has been discussed for decades. As a city we need to have growth but it needs to be smart growth, so we need to take a good look at what areas of our city need to grow the most. I am absolutely not in favor of just opening up the urban service boundary for free development.

“We are one of the only major cities that I know that does not either sit on a body of water or have a major interstate run through the city. I personally feel that growth with multi use developments and high density housing should go towards the interstate on Richmond Road.

“We also have two major hospitals out Winchester Road. By implementing more high density housing we will be able to attempt to make more affordable housing throughout Fayette county. As we grow we need to make sure that we remain walkable, bike-able, with plenty of public transportation.

“I am for smart growth over suburban sprawl. We need to do it in a way that is good for everyone, not just the few that can afford to live in our city.”

“The first thing I would do is put more money into affordable housing through the trust. What we are doing is simply a drop in the bucket and we need to help people create more affordable housing throughout our city.

“We also need to help bridge the gap between programs such as section 8 and market value. Right now there are a lot of landlords who don’t accept section 8. Some do not want to accept it and others don’t because it’s not paying what the free market will. I feel that our city could help bridge the gap of what the tenant pays, section 8 pays and what market radius.

“Lastly, we don’t do a great job at moving people who are in the 60-80% median income of Lexington out of tenancy and into homeownership. Often times these individuals remain tenants for a lifetime and help create generational wealth for others while establishing generational poverty for themselves and their family. By assisting these individuals and purchasing their home, we’re able to lock in a fixed rate at which they will pay for up to 30 years and will no longer pay anything aside from taxes and insurance.”

Jennifer Reynolds, incumbent: “Since I have been on council, my understanding of this issue has changed somewhat. First, if we want areas to be developed and redeveloped, we need to provide the infrastructure and atmosphere for developers to be able to do so. At the same time, we cannot force anyone to develop their land. The city has decided to maintain the Urban Service Boundary and put a lot of guidelines in place about how to infill. Many residents say they want to maintain the boundary; however, they get upset about infill projects and often work to block them. So I have a dilemma: Do we continue to support the USB or expand it? We need to look past the notion that we fully maintain the boundary or get rid of it completely. Let’s look at addressing growth with a more hybrid approach.”

“Building more housing and particularly, more affordable housing, is vital in Lexington as we need more of all types of housing options. On Council I was part of the vote to spend over $20 million of ARPA funds on housing needs, including the office of Homelessness Prevention and Intervention, shelters, and $10 million for the affordable housing fund. The new Housing Division in the Mayor’s Office will help get people housed and keep them housed. I think we need to incentivize developers to build affordable housing that will benefit all. The reality is that we need more available housing instead of people preying on low-income households by buying housing and reselling it for three times as much money, which inflates the market and contributes to gentrification.”

Brittanie C. Price, write-in: “The first thing we need to do is repair what structures need to be repaired and demolish unsafe buildings and allow more housing opportunities that are affordable to working poor. I would like to see adequate housing even for the homeless while keeping our historical structures intact. I would like to see people live closer to the downtown area if we can slow down the growth of our city by downsizing and make a little more room in in our downtown area inside the circle. As technology increases the city can start expanding and create different sections of each district that has more green spaces, trash pick-up, new structures, grocery stores, access to clean water. Basically, only expand what the city needs. I don’t want my district to be too crowded.”

“I feel that landlords are taking advantage of the poor. They are fixing up their property and this causes renters who are poor to end up homeless and have to move to poorer neighborhoods. Also as rent goes up, the families have to decide whether they are going to pay for medication or food. Oftentimes, the poor end up getting evicted and have to spend their savings on cheap motels and the Sheriff’s Department has to serve papers on them and they end up homeless. Everybody should have the right to affordable housing. Also, a lot the lower class families are affected by lead poisoning and their house is in need of repairs on the structure, because the landlord does not fix up their property. I feel there should be laws of what landlords can do. Also, make it easier to own a house.”

District 12

Raymond Alexander: “The city’s urban service boundary should be expanded while protecting our horse industry. Lexington needs more land area for development and growth. Increased development and housing will attract more potential businesses and companies as long as we maintain a safe and thriving city.”

“For one thing, at this time there really is no affordable housing due to inflation and mortgage rates. With the expanded urban service area, Lexington would have the opportunity to build more homes which would help with supply and demand, making homes more affordable.”

Kathy Plomin, incumbent: “The 12th District is directly and significantly impacted from any expansion of the urban service boundary. The USB divides our urban service area from the rural service area which is located within the 12th District. The urban service boundary was created in 1958 to protect our rural assets that are recognized world-wide and define our enviable brand that translates into significant economic impact. We are currently in the process of developing and approving the Comprehensive Plan which occurs every five years. During the Comp Plan process the expansion of the USB is usually on the table for consideration. I am opposed to any expansion of the USB at this time. There is a delicate balance that our community must recognize and respect because of the intrinsic value that our rural area brings to our city and county. With that said there is currently a workgroup , of which I am a member, looking at land use outside the USB so that that IF and WHEN we expand that these areas might be considered.”

“Like most cities across the country, affordable housing is a challenge in Lexington. This became very evident during the Covid Pandemic as jobs were lost and housing prices and rents soared. We need to look at zoning opportunities and other related policies to provide more land for affordable housing within our city. This property needs to be in areas that can access public transportation and health and human services that are needed by this segment of our population. The city has made affordable housing a priority and has leveraged over $36 million through our affordable housing office. In addition significant ARPA funds were earmarked for affordable housing and rental assistance. One of the outcomes from the pandemic was the reality that many in our workforce could work from home rather than an office. Currently our vacancy in office space is close to 20% and as leases are coming due for renewal, companies are re-thinking the need for large office spaces. Most of these office buildings are conveniently located near major corridors and should be creatively explored for future affordable housing options”

This story was originally published November 7, 2022 at 8:00 AM.