2026 Candidate Questionnaire

By Fayette Alliance / March 24, 2026 / Blog

Fayette Alliance’s Candidate Questionnaire is designed to help residents better understand which candidates running for office in Lexington-Fayette County support smart, sustainable, and equitable growth policies.

Important: Primary Election Day is on Tuesday, May 19, 2026, and you must be registered to vote by Monday, April 20, 2026 to vote in the primaries.

Use the buttons below to ensure you’re eligible to vote and locate your Council District.

Once you’ve confirmed your registration and know your Council District, use the index below to read about which candidates you’ll be voting for in the upcoming local election.

Table of Contents

Mayor

C.E. Huffman

Housing

Studies show Lexington needs about 22,500 new housing units across all types to fill the housing gap in our city, but 75% of the needed units are at or below 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI).

What strategies and locations do you believe Lexington should prioritize for housing growth in order to address these needs?

Answer:

A variety of housing options must be made available. The LFUCG planning committee, with the council and mayor, need to focus on creating smart and strategic in-fill projects that allow a competitive market to give renters and buyers the ability to shop around. I will declare a housing emergency on day one, working with the council to prioritize the issue as a public responsibility and part of the services of general interest, furthermore making housing a basic human right in Fayette County.

I will also work to limit the corporate housing/rental market, create penalties for long-term rental vacancies of five months or more, use the tax code to incentivize creative in-fill “middle housing” ideas that are mobility-driven, and introduce rental control mechanisms to protect consumers. In addition, LFUCG must create a property owner resource support office that helps landlords access government services and cut red tape.

Furthermore, I will call for an immediate freeze on private student housing for the remainder of my tenure. My administration will determine a real-time capacity of the campus for students/employees/visitors and work with state officials to identify options to assist UK with growth.

On day one, there will be an overhaul of the Lexington Housing Authority board and I will join the board full-time. I will call for new leadership (director) in the first six months. I will fill the board with housing advocates. I will seek state/federal funding of a major public housing development in the downtown core area and an additional tower added for public senior housing in the Ballard-Griffith Towers area.

Expansion

The Lexington-Fayette Urban County Council recently adopted the Preservation and Growth Management Program, which created a data-driven method for considering future expansions of the Urban Service Boundary (USB).

What factors do you believe are most important to consider if an expansion of the Urban Service Boundary was proposed to the Council during your term?

Answer:

I’ll protect Urban Boundary expansion by requiring all new development to be considered for “infill” projects first before disturbing new, undeveloped land.

Infrastructure costs to taxpayers, as well as public mobility should be the highest priority when considering expansion. Any expansion MUST include investment in Lextran to make sure citizens have access to efficient and reliable public transportation prior to any new projects starting.

I disagree with solely relying on a data-driven process. I believe that data should GUIDE the process, but it must be paired with emotions and connections of people who are directly affected by the expansion.

Agricultural Preservation

Agricultural industries, and the farmland that supports them, have an economic impact of $2.6 billion every year on Lexington-Fayette County’s economy and support more than 16,000 jobs across all twelve council districts.

What policies do you support that promote Lexington’s iconic and productive farmland and protect it from irresponsible future development?

Answer:

I believe Fayette County has some of the most fertile farmland in the world. It must be protected. We need to reimagine what “farm life” could look like and encourage more young people to invest their energy into sustainability.

During my tenure, I will create the “Teach a Person to Fish” program. The program would work with the Fayette County Extension office to create a working farm attached to the Fayette County Jail….creating “farm-to-table” food sources (non-profit grocery options) for food deserts. The program will establish grocery stores/restaurants, food delivery for vulnerable residents, and help fill gaps at local food banks. Long-term goals include adding livestock, on-site butcher, winery, brewery, and distillery.

We can help inmates grow into careers, while paying $15/hr. during incarceration, rising to $20/hr. and health benefits after successful release. Jobs could include: physical labor of farm, agriculture/product management, logistics, research and development, restaurant and grocery management, finances/accounting, land management, sales, fleet management, marketing/public relations, animal management, safety and risk management, procurement services, human resources, etc.

I would also work with our farmer community to improve Farmers’ market access throughout the county. I believe there are enough producers to coordinate Famers’ Markets daily at different locations that are placed in recognized food deserts.

Mayor Linda Gorton

Housing

Studies show Lexington needs about 22,500 new housing units across all types to fill the housing gap in our city, but 75% of the needed units are at or below 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI).

What strategies and locations do you believe Lexington should prioritize for housing growth in order to address these needs?

Answer:

Across the nation this is a serious issue. As the Mayor who led this city through the pandemic and recovery, I am acutely aware of the need for Affordable Housing & Workforce Housing. Tackling housing issues requires sustained, intentional commitment. During my tenure as Mayor, I not only created the Department of Housing Advocacy and Community Development, I worked with my team to create a new ordinance, which the Council recently approved, to use Industrial Revenue Bonds, thereby using the LFUCG low interest rates, as an incentive for builders to build mixed-use developments which must include a percentage of Affordable Housing units. The most recent 2800 acre expansion of the Urban Service Boundary proposes that most of that land will be used for housing.

I continue to be a strong proponent of Infill/Redevelopment (I/R) inside our Urban Service Boundary. In my FY ’23 budget I first proposed $3M for loans (now forgivable) to pay for public infrastructure for I/R projects. This has been in my proposed budgets every year since then.

Expansion

What factors do you believe are most important to consider if an expansion of the Urban Service Boundary was proposed to the Council during your term?

Answer:

Now that it has been approved, the Preservation and Growth Management Program has to be followed by the Council or future expansion consideration will not work well. I am committed to the process and we will insure that keeping the data is updated regularly.

Agricultural Preservation

What policies do you support that promote Lexington’s iconic and productive farmland and protect it from irresponsible future development?

Answer:

I have a long-standing, demonstrated commitment to balanced, sustainable growth, as well as preservation of our agricultural industries. Our working farms and Bluegrass landscape are critical to our economic health and quality of life. Not only is our farmland an agricultural economic engine, it also anchors an exploding travel and tourism industry. I continue to support the Purchase of Development Rights (PDR) program and its goal of 50,000 acres preserved for farming in perpetuity. I am committed to focus heavily on Infill/Redevelopment and use of vacant land inside the Urban Service Boundary. In short, I have and will continue to be a champion for our agriculture industries and farmland.

Raquel E Carter

Housing

Studies show Lexington needs about 22,500 new housing units across all types to fill the housing gap in our city, but 75% of the needed units are at or below 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI).

What strategies and locations do you believe Lexington should prioritize for housing growth in order to address these needs?

Answer:

Our current housing crisis is one of the most pressing issues our community is facing. The rise in housing costs and low housing supply contributes to the increase of those experiencing homelessness, widens the home ownership gap, hinders the ability to recruit new employers and leads to an overall decline in quality of life. As Mayor, I would advocate for a smart development model that focuses on building communities where people want to live and flourish and not just adding units. Families and households at or below 80% of the Area Median Income should have the same expectation of safe and affordable housing without fear of crime, deteriorating property conditions and housing costs greater than 30% of their income. My community development approach would ensure that where housing units are added, so are the appropriate jobs and amenities such as food options, health care access, educational opportunities and recreation that support the quality of life all Lexington residents deserve. My approach to address the housing crisis will be both urgent and comprehensive and include:

Itemize housing needs by category such as rental, low-to-moderate income, multi-family, entry-level housing, workforce housing and single family homes.
Identifying available land and existing housing that can be converted or repurposed.
Increasing density, housing mix and maximum building heights where necessary.
Proactive review and amendments of current zoning to allow development that fits the identified needs for housing and amenities.
Leverage of private, local, state and federal funding to add or convert housing units at a pre-determined minimum rate per year.
Ensure all development and economic investments focus on the inclusion of housing, employment and amenities that add value to the communities in which they are added.
Provide a transparent and public reporting tool to track results and upcoming projects.

Expansion

What factors do you believe are most important to consider if an expansion of the Urban Service Boundary was proposed to the Council during your term?

Answer:

The recently adopted Preservation and Growth Management Program rightly adds pre-defined metrics and processes to consider any future expansions of the Urban Service Boundary. The data to be collected and considered includes growth trends for population, average household sizes, vacant land reviews, and density averages. This data allows for a more objective approach to review the need for any additional expansions and will offer important guidance to Council in considering future expansions. Key responsibilities of our municipal government include housing and economic development, public infrastructure, and providing basic services in addition to public safety and fiscal management. To ensure these responsibilities are met for all Lexington residents I believe that in addition to the the data points adopted by the LPGMP, the following factors must be considered:

Status on fulfillment of current housing needs for the existing population. The focus on future growth trends is important, but the fulfilment of current needs is urgent and must be confirmed to have been addressed prior to calculating for future needs only.
Age, utilization and condition of existing infrastructure including roads, sidewalks, water, sewer, utilities, traffic management and public facilities. As density is prioritized, it is important to ensure our current neighborhoods are not suffering as they bear the burden of supplying the current and future needs identified.
Review of proposed development plans, approval percentages, timelines for approval and average timeline for project completion. Objective land use review must include the ability and timeline of development projects to come to existence and satisfy required needs.
Detail Segmentation of land identified in the Vacant Land Review to create a weighted scale for land considered vacant or underutilized that is also available for sale or development by the current owner. The balance of property owners’ rights and public need must be considered responsibly.

Agricultural Preservation

What policies do you support that promote Lexington’s iconic and productive farmland and protect it from irresponsible future development?

Answer:

Lexington has strong policies in place to protect the agricultural industries and the farmland that supports them including the Purchase of Development Rights Program (PDR) where the government has purchased development rights from the landowner; the Urban Service Area which limits the area that land can be developed for housing or commercial use; and strict Agricultural zones designed to prevent commercialization in rural areas. These protections have recently been extended by expanding the PDR program to apply to landowners of smaller-scale farms down to 10 acres and the adoption of the Preservation and Growth Management Program. In addition to the strong policies already in place, as Mayor I would support policies that increase economic support and opportunity to the agriculture industry including:

Supporting workforce development programs that focus on jobs training for the current and future needs of the agriculture and equine industries.
Increasing economic opportunities for local food producers within my community development plans by specifically addressing current “food deserts” within existing neighborhoods and prioritizing local food options in new developments.
Identifying new opportunities to increase agritourism through zoning updates and developing farm-to-table opportunities that benefit both local agriculture and the local hospitality industry.

Darnell Tagaloa

Housing

Studies show Lexington needs about 22,500 new housing units across all types to fill the housing gap in our city, but 75% of the needed units are at or below 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI).

What strategies and locations do you believe Lexington should prioritize for housing growth in order to address these needs?

Answer:

I believe we should first, focus on smart infill development by revitalizing underused and vacant properties throughout the city. Second, we should highlight mixed-income housing developments, particularly near job centers, transit routes, and existing infrastructure for convenience. Incentives and partnerships with responsible and transparent developers can help ensure a meaningful portion of new housing is affordable to residents earning below 80% of AMI. Third, we should ensure gentle density where appropriate, including duplexes, townhomes, and small multi-family housing in areas that already have access to schools, transportation, and services. Ultimately, solving our housing challenge will require collaboration between the city, nonprofits, neighborhood leaders, and the private sector with full transparency of such plans. We must increase housing supply while protecting affordability to ensure Lexington remains a place where teachers, nurses, first responders, and young families can afford to live, work, and build their future.

Expansion

What factors do you believe are most important to consider if an expansion of the Urban Service Boundary was proposed to the Council during your term?

Answer:

The most important factors to consider, in my opinion, are infrastructure capacity, housing affordability, and preservation of Fayette County’s world-renowned farmland and bluegrass landscape. Lexington’s farmland is not only an economic driver through agriculture and the horse industry, but also a defining part of our culture, environment, and identity. Before expanding the boundary, the city should first prioritize responsible growth within existing boundary through smart infill development, redevelopment of underused properties, and thoughtful increases in housing density where appropriate with the community’s input. Making better use of land that is already served by infrastructure helps meet housing needs while protecting the rural character that surrounds our city. If expansion is necessary, it should be transparent, strategic, data-driven, and limited to areas where infrastructure such as roads, utilities, schools, and emergency services can support growth without placing additional strain on taxpayers. Any decisions must carefully weigh long-term impacts on farmland preservation, environmental sustainability, and the bluegrass landscape that makes Lexington one of the most unique communities in the world. Protecting our farmland while planning responsibly for growth ensures Lexington can meet housing needs without sacrificing the natural beauty, heritage, and culture that defines who we are.

Agricultural Preservation

What policies do you support that promote Lexington’s iconic and productive farmland and protect it from irresponsible future development?

Answer:

I strongly support policies that protect our farmland while ensuring our agriculture industry continues to thrive for future generations. First, I support maintaining a strong Urban Service Boundary and prioritizing smart growth within the existing boundary through responsible infill and redevelopment. By using land within the city more efficiently, we reduce pressure to develop the farmland that surrounds and defines Lexington. Second, I support programs such as the Purchase of Development Rights program and conservation easements that allow farmers to protect their land permanently while continuing to farm it. These programs help ensure farmland remains productive while providing financial stability for farm families. Finally, we must recognize that preserving farmland is not just about protecting land today, it is about safeguarding the future. These landscapes support our food systems, protect natural resources, sustain our equine industry, and maintain the bluegrass heritage that defines Lexington. Our responsibility today is to be good stewards of this land so that our children, grandchildren, and future generations inherit a community where agriculture, natural beauty, and economic opportunity can continue to thrive together.

Council At-Large

Dan Wu

Housing

Studies show Lexington needs about 22,500 new housing units across all types to fill the housing gap in our city, but 75% of the needed units are at or below 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI).

What strategies and locations do you believe Lexington should prioritize for housing growth in order to address these needs?

Answer:

We need to increase our affordable housing trust fund, streamline approval processes, create a development liaison to improve communication & collaboration, adjust our zoning practices, and put a greater emphasis and incentives towards infill development.

Expansion

What factors do you believe are most important to consider if an expansion of the Urban Service Boundary was proposed to the Council during your term?

Answer:

The size of the expansion, the location, and then subsequent master planning to consider HOW we create the new expansion area (more mixed use, density, affordability, etc).

Agricultural Preservation

What policies do you support that promote Lexington’s iconic and productive farmland and protect it from irresponsible future development?

Answer:

With LPGMP we will rely on data & need to drive our growth, instead of subjective & arbitrary decisions made due to political pressures.

Christopher Shafer

Housing

Studies show Lexington needs about 22,500 new housing units across all types to fill the housing gap in our city, but 75% of the needed units are at or below 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI).

What strategies and locations do you believe Lexington should prioritize for housing growth in order to address these needs?

Answer: I believe we should and I support looking into infill development, we have a lot of property in Fayette county that could be utilized, without expanding outward to quickly.

Expansion

What factors do you believe are most important to consider if an expansion of the Urban Service Boundary was proposed to the Council during your term?

Answer:

I believe that we have a lot of areas in Lexington where infill development could occur. An outward expansion of the USB would cause infrastructure concerns, and by this I mean traffic, roads, utility, waste collection, etc. and the long term financial impact it would cause. I am also for the protection of our neighborhoods and farmland. Smart growth, sustainable growth.. not sprawl.

Agricultural Preservation

What policies do you support that promote Lexington’s iconic and productive farmland and protect it from irresponsible future development?

Answer:

I support preservation and growth management. I also do not support the expansion of the USB at this time. Lexington and Fayette County is unique and a place I love and I believe we should protect it.

Tate Ohmer

Housing

Studies show Lexington needs about 22,500 new housing units across all types to fill the housing gap in our city, but 75% of the needed units are at or below 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI).

What strategies and locations do you believe Lexington should prioritize for housing growth in order to address these needs?

Answer:

The Housing shortage is a city-wide crisis and must be addressed across the entire community.

Lexington has a sizable and ever-growing number of apartments, and a solid number of large single-family homes: what is truly lacking is the middle, the starter home– be it in the form of condos, townhomes, or triplexes. The inability for Lexingtonians to transition from renter to owner has put intense pressure on our rental market, driving up rental costs. This has left younger families unable to establish themselves and the older generation unable to find accessible and affordable housing.

The root of the solution then is to make it easier to build smaller but ownable properties. This can be done by expanding Lexington’s diversity of housing options. For example, South Bend, Indiana has had success with creating a catalog of pre-approved building plans that can be built affordably and quickly by-right. Through creative initiatives like this we can make it easier to build responsibly while preserving the style and charm of our neighborhoods, filling the housing gap.

Expansion

What factors do you believe are most important to consider if an expansion of the Urban Service Boundary was proposed to the Council during your term?

Answer:

Land is Lexington’s most precious resource; ensuring that we use our land effectively is crucial. I would be cautious that expansion would solve the underlying problem of adding dwelling units. Lexington’s agricultural industry is a backbone to both our local economy and our identity: subtracting from it would be a major loss for the community at-large. Only once our stock of vacant land has been utilized would I support an expansion. In this case, it is important that expanded territories are treated equal to Lexington’s pre-existing stock, and that development leads to denser, walkable neighborhoods as opposed to detached and independent suburbs.

Agricultural Preservation

What policies do you support that promote Lexington’s iconic and productive farmland and protect it from irresponsible future development?

Answer:

I am dedicated to supporting our agricultural industry, a key and inseparable part of our community. Lexington’s farmland should not be treated disrespectfully. I believe we can make use of a multitude of policies, such as land use regulation or zoning reform, to support Lexington’s development interests without infringing on our productive and iconic rural acreage. It is important we give a voice to Fayette County residents beyond the urban service boundary and ensure that our most iconic economic sector remains strong.

James Brown

Housing

Studies show Lexington needs about 22,500 new housing units across all types to fill the housing gap in our city, but 75% of the needed units are at or below 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI).

What strategies and locations do you believe Lexington should prioritize for housing growth in order to address these needs?

Answer:

I support LFUCG’s annual allocation to the Affordable Housing Fund and led the effort in Council to tie that investment to a set percentage of the General Fund budget. I have also worked to strengthen the Public Infrastructure Fund and Industrial Revenue Bond policies to better support housing development. I support infill and redevelopment in areas where infrastructure already exists. I’ve also supported re-establishing a development authority to help spur strategic development across Lexington. Increasing housing at all price points will expand supply and ultimately improve both availability and affordability for our residents.

Expansion

What factors do you believe are most important to consider if an expansion of the Urban Service Boundary was proposed to the Council during your term?

Answer:

Future decisions about the Urban Service Area should be guided by the data-driven framework established through the newly adopted Lexington Preservation and Growth Management Program. That process is designed to take a comprehensive look at our community’s needs by evaluating opportunities for infill development and the use of vacant or underutilized land, while also considering population growth and housing demand. At the same time, it balances those needs with our long-standing commitment to farmland preservation and the importance of supporting economic development. Using this information will allow Lexington to make thoughtful, long-term decisions about growth that strengthen our urban core, protect our rural landscape, and ensure we have the housing and economic opportunities needed for the future.

Agricultural Preservation

What policies do you support that promote Lexington’s iconic and productive farmland and protect it from irresponsible future development?

Answer:

I remain a supporter of Lexington’s Purchase of Development Rights (PDR) program, which protects our farmland and helps preserve the rural landscape that defines our community. Just as important is supporting our local farmers and agricultural community, whose work sustains a vital part of our economy and heritage. Including the recent policy change to include small farms into the program to encourage more minority land owners participation in the program. The “A Sense of Place” initiative is a key component to sharing some of the stories of some of Lexington forgotten farmland workers and families that laid the foundation of our local agricultural industry.

I’m also encouraged by and support the recent investments in the growing Agri-Tech sector and new agricultural startups in Lexington. Supporting both farmland preservation and agricultural innovation ensures we strengthen our farm economy while positioning Lexington as a leader in the future of agriculture.

District 1

Tyler Morton is the current Councilmember of District 1, and the only candidate filed to run in District 1 for 2026. He has not completed a Fayette Alliance Candidate Questionnaire at this time.

District 2

Shayla Lynch is the current Councilmember of District 2, and the only candidate filed to run in District 2 for 2026. She has not completed a Fayette Alliance Candidate Questionnaire at this time.

District 3

Jon Larson

Housing

Studies show Lexington needs about 22,500 new housing units across all types to fill the housing gap in our city, but 75% of the needed units are at or below 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI).

What strategies and locations do you believe Lexington should prioritize for housing growth in order to address these needs?

Answer:

Unfortunately infill does not adequately answer our needs. My continuing involvement in many groups, advocating for increased housing opportunities, has indicated that a very high percentage of open areas within the Urban Service Area has been pre-empted by private investors & developers. It has been said we are currently short of 20,000 housing units. Of course, we could tear down many run-down & low income older areas and give in to “gentrification,” but that inevitably leads to some eventual destruction of traditional neighborhoods and poorer residents displaced with more wealthy occupants and likely increased homelessness [Several recent student apartments let us have made us aware of iconic neighborhood concerns such as what faced Prallyown.]Air B&B’s take away from housing stocks available to longer term residents.

So, for 19 years I have been in favor of concentrating new development (and zoning changes, if necessary) in the most logical area for expansion-toward Winchester, along the US60/I75 corridor [while preserving the traditional AfricanAmerican settlement at Utteringtown]. Businesses & developers should love this area because of its easy access to regional & interstate transportation [Note Bill Lear’s suggestion that we move our expansion limited Bluegrass airport to an interstate location].

Increased inventories of housing will inevitably reduce market prices for new owners & renters. Yes, regional ideas must be at the core of our future (50 year planning). [My Masters’ Thesis at George Washington University was about “regional” business.]
Along the way, there are many market based strategies to assist in easing our increasing housing crunch. Elderly developments, comprehensive housing/commercial developments, increased community loans, shared housing & commercial projects. Increased accommodations for our homeless persons, families & students is an our local imperative. But all will need a vast improvement in our mass transportation system.

When I was on the Greenspace Commission in the late 1990s, the city hired specialist, Charlie Siemon, for $250,000. His proposal suggested that future developers pay fairly large amounts to the city as impact/infill costs to pay for fire, police, roads, utilities & other infrastructure programs in their developments. I have since come to believe these funds could be applied to pay for lower income (and homelessness) assistance, but, it seems the city is currently in the process of totally removing these impact fees from imposing on developers [contributors to Council & Mayoral campaigns?].

Expansion

What factors do you believe are most important to consider if an expansion of the Urban Service Boundary was proposed to the Council during your term?

Answer:

Again [see above my continuing emphasis on “Regional Planning.”]
The city of Lexington [and Fayette County which merged in 1974] has been extremely myopic and acting superior to the ideas & interests of the surrounding counties, since our then relatively novel “Urban Service” was formed in 1954.
At this moment in time, to continue to spend our efforts formulating zoning plans for only the boundaries of Fayette County seems foolhardy. To the extent possible, we should incorporate joint plans with our neighbors to preserve and protect valuable farmland and soils. [Note that the soil quality in the US60/I64 corridor discussed above seems to be of somewhat lesser soil quality, but that is for agronomists to calculate.]

What I have heard from city planners & others over the years is that local planning & zoning commissions in other counties are like little fiefdoms and would fight us every inch. My many years working with county judges, magistrates & commissioners [12 years on the MP- environmental & other federally funded projects in 15 surrounding counties-and other programs, such as the currently dormant Nicholasville Bypass/I75 Connector Road plan] puts a lie to that assumption. We are all together in a greater Lexington-the truckers used to call it “Metro City.” When our neighbors are lifted up, in general, so are we, and visa versa. Consider the fact that Fayette County did not have the usable open acreage for the Toyota plant, so they located both of Georgetown in Scott County, and that success continues to reverberate in our community.

I have given speeches in other nearby cities, advocating for “Charter” governments, an old law, which allows counties & cities to combine departments and county offices between and shared by several/many counties, perhaps regional jails.
If elected, I would love to devote my efforts to maintaining the hundreds/thousands of connections I have in counties outside Fayette and make new shared productive friendships.

Agricultural Preservation

What policies do you support that promote Lexington’s iconic and productive farmland and protect it from irresponsible future development?

Answer:

I have been emphasizing the reality that we have something really special here. Almost no one comes to see our [beautiful???] downtown. When out-of-town guests visit me, I cannot wait to show them the picturesque, iconic horse farms for which we are famous. As a sports team organizer and coach, I love parks, but our parks will take many, many years of development to compete with the larger planned [Olmstead] parks in Louisville and Washington, DC, maybe never. So let us joyfully appreciate what we have and work extremely hard to make sure this wonderful legacy continues.

Yes , we have just begun to realize the value of our Kentucky River Basin [again Fayette County is behind Jessamine & Franklin Counties in developing these treasures].

I wince with pain when every inch of our horse farm heritage is turned over to development-even though I understand that property owners have rights. This is why our Greenspace Commission & others worked so hard to begin our Purchase of Development program. Perhaps I have forgotten to mention that we ought to be more concerned as a city with our transient “backside” workers at Keeneland and other equine facilities. This will necessarily involve considerate dealings with all immigrants (especially those in families of the undocumented, whose breadwinners & their children must constantly fear deportations].

Griffin VanMeter

Housing

Studies show Lexington needs about 22,500 new housing units across all types to fill the housing gap in our city, but 75% of the needed units are at or below 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI).

What strategies and locations do you believe Lexington should prioritize for housing growth in order to address these needs?

Answer:

As a candidate with affordable housing experience, I’ve seen firsthand the neighborhood and individual benefits of homeownership and stable rental housing. Lexington wants and needs progress on housing. Let’s think big, adopt successful methods from our peer cities, and deliver. According to local affordable housing providers, construction costs have risen dramatically and need has increased, while subsidies have remained flat and become more competitive. Pre-2020, the average subsidy per unit was around $15,000. Depending on the scale of the project, affordable housing providers now need to spend an average of $25,000 to $50,000 per unit to build. We must increase the subsidy to close this gap and spur production. I support increased funding for Lexington’s Affordable Housing Trust Fund and believe that Lexington should thoroughly investigate tools such as larger revolving loan models and other strategies that cities have used to make affordable housing developments more financially viable to build. We also need to better understand what is holding back the production of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs), whether it is permitting, financing gaps, or cultural adoption. Solutions such as pre-approved ADU plans and subsidies, which have been successfully implemented in cities like Seattle and San Jose, can help while supporting important goals like aging in place. There are tremendous benefits in this gentle density approach.

I have been involved with Fayette Alliance since its founding over 20 years ago, as a longtime supporter and former board member from 2011 to 2017. I share Fayette Alliance’s view and actively practice the principle that Lexington should build up, not out. This means using the research and policy tools already in place to identify opportunities for thoughtful infill, including underutilized commercial corridors, transit-oriented development, ADUs, and surface parking lots as well as upzoning, our new B-6, Corridor Node, and parking reform. This type of infill is about creating housing supply while preserving our signature industry’s vital land.

Expansion

What factors do you believe are most important to consider if an expansion of the Urban Service Boundary was proposed to the Council during your term?

Answer:

Every day, other neighborhood parents and I bike our kids to school in the Ashland Walk n Roll bike bus. My life happens downtown and in the neighborhoods around the Third District, in Woodland Park, and on UK’s campus, where I’m completing my master’s in Public Administration with a graduate certificate in Urban & Environmental Design. I can walk to the Disco Kroger on Euclid. My friends and everything I need are close by. I’m living the 15-minute city, and the quality of life it creates is real. I feel so connected to Lexington, and that’s why I’m running for council, because that connection to place is what every Lexington resident deserves.

Smart growth, planning, and good design can create that same connected experience in more neighborhoods across Lexington. The key factor in considering boundary expansion is whether we have fully utilized the land within the current boundary. We have not. The Preservation and Growth Management Program explicitly sets this standard: an expansion should be triggered only if Lexington is failing to meet growth needs due to a lack of available land. I support infill development. Sprawl costs more to build and maintain, all at the expense of our existing neighborhoods, and further compromises the quality of life a walkable 15-minute city can create.

Agricultural Preservation

What policies do you support that promote Lexington’s iconic and productive farmland and protect it from irresponsible future development?

Answer:

Growing up between my dad’s farm on Briar Hill Road and my mom’s rural houses in Winchester and Sadieville, I developed a deep, personal understanding of what this landscape and its economy mean. My first job was weed-eating what seemed like never-ending fence rows and mucking horse stalls. In addition to operating a horse nursery, my dad was a practicing equine vet. I vividly remember going on rounds with him, traveling in an old Volvo station wagon weighted down by a wooden vet cabinet full of medical supplies. Being picked up after school generally meant going to the Keeneland barns first, or stopping at the equine labs on North Limestone and at UK’s Coldstream Campus. That world shaped how I see Lexington, protecting it is personal to me, and the data agrees it’s worth protecting.

Lexington’s farmland generates $2.6 billion in annual economic activity, helps attract an additional $1.7 billion in visitor spending, and draws permanent residents from around the world. The stability of a vertically integrated signature industry anchored by a major land-grant university is a genuine competitive advantage for our region. In 2024, I co-led the Yes For Parks campaign to create a dedicated capital fund for our public parks, including rural parks. I support building a regional trail network that connects residents to this landscape daily, because people protect what they know and love. I support Horse Country. The PDR program has permanently preserved 304 farms and 33,332 acres, reaching 66% of its 50,000-acre goal. In doing so, PDR has helped protect 16,000 jobs in our community. The most powerful farmland protection policy we can enact is also the simplest: reduce market pressure on the rural landscape by concentrating growth through smart infill development on existing infrastructure.

District 4

Brenda Monnarez

Brenda Monnarez has not completed a Fayette Alliance candidate Questionnaire at this time.

Emma Curtis

Emma Curtis is the current Councilmember of District 4 and is running for re-election in 2026.

Housing

Studies show Lexington needs about 22,500 new housing units across all types to fill the housing gap in our city, but 75% of the needed units are at or below 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI).

What strategies and locations do you believe Lexington should prioritize for housing growth in order to address these needs?

Answer:

I believe that, first and foremost, Lexington needs to prioritize high-density infill and redevelopment projects within the Urban Services Boundary. We have thousands of acres of property that are currently undeveloped or underdeveloped that exists within the USB that are ripe for opportunity, but we have lacked the willpower to embrace high-density development on a citywide level.

Additionally, I believe that we need to refine our definition of “affordable housing” within LFUCG. It’s not enough to build more housing, we have to build more housing that those in need of housing can realistically access. We need to understand that 80% of AMI is still not “affordable” for most folks who are in need of housing.

Expansion

What factors do you believe are most important to consider if an expansion of the Urban Service Boundary was proposed to the Council during your term?

Answer:

I am deeply grateful for the legislative process that gave birth to the Preservation and Growth Management Plan. I was proud to support and participate in it.

That being said, if an additional expansion of the USB were to be proposed during my second term on Council, I would oppose it. The most recent expansion still in its infancy, with the groundwork just now being laid for development in the expansion areas. I believe it’s too soon to even begin to have discussions about an additional expansion.

Agricultural Preservation

What policies do you support that promote Lexington’s iconic and productive farmland and protect it from irresponsible future development?

Answer:

I grew up on my family’s farm and understand firsthand how vital our agricultural industries are to the success of our city and county. I support the goals outlined in our Rural Land Management Plan, continued investments in the AgTech sector, and policy safeguards to prevent any potential large scale rural solar developments from encroaching on productive farmland or polluting our soil.

District 5

Nicholas Wolter

Housing

Studies show Lexington needs about 22,500 new housing units across all types to fill the housing gap in our city, but 75% of the needed units are at or below 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI).

What strategies and locations do you believe Lexington should prioritize for housing growth in order to address these needs?

Answer:

The housing data is clear. Lexington needs about 22,500 additional units, and most of those need to serve households at or below 80 percent of Area Median Income. That tells me we cannot rely on one housing type or one approach.

As a local builder, I see firsthand what makes housing possible and what makes it stall. Homes get built when zoning allows the right product, infrastructure is in place, and timelines are predictable enough for projects to make financial sense. If we want attainable housing, we have to create an environment where it is actually feasible to build it.

I believe Lexington should prioritize growth inside the Urban Service Boundary first. We added roughly 2,800 acres in 2023. We should evaluate how that land is being planned and developed before talking about another expansion. We also have underutilized land and commercial corridors inside the boundary that can support additional housing if zoning allows a broader mix of types.

That mix matters. Townhomes, duplexes, cottage courts, accessory dwelling units, and small lot single family homes all have a role to play. If our regulations only produce large lot housing, we should not expect affordability to improve.

This is not about restricting builders. It is about aligning land use policy with what the data shows we need. The city’s job is to set clear rules, plan infrastructure responsibly, and create a predictable process so the private sector can respond.

We can protect farmland and improve housing supply at the same time. But we have to be disciplined about how and where we grow.

Expansion

What factors do you believe are most important to consider if an expansion of the Urban Service Boundary was proposed to the Council during your term?

Answer:

The Preservation and Growth Management Program was created to make expansion decisions data-driven, and I support that approach. Discipline matters when you are talking about permanent land use decisions.

That said, Council just approved approximately 2,800 acres for inclusion in the Urban Service Boundary. If elected, my immediate focus would not be on expanding again. It would be on performance. Are we using the land we just opened in a way that actually addresses Lexington’s housing needs?

If an expansion were proposed during my term, the first factor I would consider is whether the recently added acreage is producing results. Are we creating attainable home ownership opportunities? Are we allowing a mix of housing types that reflect the 22,500-unit need? If we are not getting the outcomes we expected, simply adding more land will not fix the problem.

Second, infrastructure capacity must be evaluated honestly. Roads, sewer, schools, emergency services, and long-term maintenance costs all matter. Growth that outpaces infrastructure creates strain that residents ultimately pay for.

Third, fiscal sustainability has to be part of the conversation. Residential growth should be measured against long-term service costs, not just short-term construction activity.

Fourth, farmland protection remains essential. The Bluegrass region is not replaceable. Any proposal would need to clearly demonstrate that prime agricultural land is being preserved to the greatest extent possible.

Expansion should never be treated as a shortcut around zoning reform or process improvements. Before we grow outward again, we should prove we can grow smarter within the boundary we have.

Growth is coming. The responsibility of Council is to ensure it is intentional, financially responsible, and aligned with long-term home ownership opportunity in Lexington.

Agricultural Preservation

What policies do you support that promote Lexington’s iconic and productive farmland and protect it from irresponsible future development?

Answer:

Lexington’s farmland is not just scenery. It is a working economic engine that supports thousands of jobs and billions of dollars in economic activity. It is also part of what makes Lexington distinct. Once it is gone, it is gone.

Protecting farmland starts with discipline inside the Urban Service Boundary. If we do a better job with infill, redevelopment, and allowing a broader mix of housing types where infrastructure already exists, we reduce pressure to push outward unnecessarily.

I support maintaining strong agricultural zoning protections outside the boundary and ensuring that any future expansion proposal meets a high standard of review. Prime farmland should not be treated as a land bank for short-term development decisions. I do not support speculative expansion that treats farmland as the easiest answer to housing pressure.

Infrastructure alignment matters as well. When growth is coordinated with existing roads, sewer capacity, and public services, we make better use of taxpayer investment and avoid creating long-term fiscal strain that can lead to further outward pressure.

We should also continue supporting policies that preserve working farms and sustain the agricultural economy, including programs that help maintain the viability of equine and crop production operations.

Housing growth and farmland protection do not have to be in conflict. If we are intentional about where and how we grow, we can protect the agricultural economy that defines Lexington while still creating attainable housing opportunities within the city.

Stephanie Hoelscher

Housing

Studies show Lexington needs about 22,500 new housing units across all types to fill the housing gap in our city, but 75% of the needed units are at or below 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI).

What strategies and locations do you believe Lexington should prioritize for housing growth in order to address these needs?

Answer:

Lexington should focus on missing middle housing in the urban and adjacent suburban cores. According to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, in 2025 we permitted 507 single-family units, 545 5-plus-family units, and nothing in between! Large apartment complexes can be affordable, but if they are located outside the urban core, they can create transportation insecurity.

We know that two-thirds of the households in Lexington are one- or two-person households. We should focus on creating conditions that encourage duplexes, triplexes, and other missing middle housing to better accommodate these smaller households.

Expansion

What factors do you believe are most important to consider if an expansion of the Urban Service Boundary was proposed to the Council during your term?

Answer:

How much missing middle housing has been constructed within the USB since the last expansion? The June 2024 approval of the Urban Growth Management Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment (UGM ZOTA) was intended to increase housing stock diversity and density and improve affordability. If we are still falling short of constructing the missing middle, we should re-examine whether the UGM ZOTA went far enough to accomplish those goals.

Additional clues might be found in requests for variances and conditional use permits. And, have we taken other key steps that cities like South Bend, Indiana, have taken to simplify the permitting process and create a cadre of incremental builders?

Agricultural Preservation

What policies do you support that promote Lexington’s iconic and productive farmland and protect it from irresponsible future development?

Answer:

I grew up in a factory and farm community in northern Appalachia. I spent part of my childhood tossing hay bales onto a wagon and green beans into jars on my grandparents’ farm. I know the importance of agriculture because I lived it firsthand.

I support funding Bluegrass AgTech and the Lexington Mobile Market. Bluegrass AgTech, for example, recently funded a startup that is attempting to convert invasive carp into fertilizer. In the face of Middle East conflict, global uncertainty and climate change, we must prepare to grow more of our food closer to home.

Michael McLaughlin

Housing

Studies show Lexington needs about 22,500 new housing units across all types to fill the housing gap in our city, but 75% of the needed units are at or below 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI).

What strategies and locations do you believe Lexington should prioritize for housing growth in order to address these needs?

Answer:

Lexington’s housing shortage is real, but the solution should focus first on growth inside the Urban Service Boundary. As the Fayette Alliance has highlighted, Lexington still has significant vacant and underutilized land within the existing urban area. Prioritizing infill and redevelopment allows us to add housing while making better use of existing infrastructure and safeguards the rural landscape that defines Fayette County.
Because roughly 75% of the housing need is at or below 80% of Area Median Income (AMI), we must prioritize housing types that working families can actually afford. That means encouraging missing-middle housing such as duplexes, town homes, accessory dwelling units, and small-scale multifamily developments, not just luxury projects. Also, “Co-housing” arrangements and housing options that support the goal of helping our neighbors age in place.

Strategically, Lexington should focus growth in three areas. First, major corridors and commercial areas—such as aging shopping centers and underused retail properties—offer opportunities for redevelopment into mixed-use retail and housing near jobs and services for those who desire such arrangements. Second, vacant, underutilized infill sites and expansion areas already inside the Urban Services Boundary throughout the city should be prioritized before considering expansion. Third, redevelopment should consider transit, parks, and daily services, where residents who choose to can reduce transportation costs and improve quality of life.

At the same time, redevelopment must include protections against displacement so longtime residents can remain in their neighborhoods and benefit from new investment. This is especially important to me in areas of the 5th District, being able to stay in the home you have is also an important definition of affordable housing.

Lexington needs more housing, but we need the right housing in the right places—growth that supports affordability, protects the character of neighborhoods, and safeguards what makes our community unique.

Expansion

What factors do you believe are most important to consider if an expansion of the Urban Service Boundary was proposed to the Council during your term?

Answer:

The recently adopted Preservation and Growth Management Program provides an important, data-driven framework for evaluating potential future expansions of Lexington’s Urban Service Boundary. If an expansion were proposed during my term, I believe several key factors should guide the Council’s decision.

First, we must prioritize infill development and redevelopment within the existing Urban Service Boundary. The current framework emphasizes making the best use of land already inside the boundary. Using existing land and infrastructure more efficiently, strengthens our neighborhoods and helps control costs for taxpayers. I support reconstituting an Infill and Redevelopment Committee either at the planning commission or council level.
Second, we must carefully consider Fayette County’s agricultural land and rural economy. Fayette County’s rural land is not only a defining part of our identity but also a major economic driver through equine operations, and tourism. Protecting prime soils, agricultural operations, and conserved lands must remain a central consideration in any expansion discussion.

Third, infrastructure capacity and fiscal responsibility must be part of the decision. Expanding the boundary requires extending sewer service, roads, utilities, and emergency services. Those investments must be evaluated carefully to ensure they are financially sustainable and do not place an undue burden on taxpayers.

Fourth, expansion decisions should be tied to real housing needs, including housing affordability and a mix of housing options for working families. Any proposal should address housing needs in a meaningful way, particularly affordability and diverse housing options. The Planning Commission and Council must evaluate whether proposed development will actually meet the needs of working families in Lexington. Finally, decisions about growth must remain data-driven and community-informed. The new program calls for ongoing analysis of population trends, housing demand, and land availability so that expansion decisions are based on this available data.

As someone who believes in pragmatic, fiscally responsible leadership, I would approach any proposed expansion with a focus on balancing growth, our rural character, and protecting the character of our neighborhoods in every district while keeping Lexington prosperous. Central to my campaign, and my commitment to the 5th District of Lexington is listening to what neighbors say they want and supporting solutions shaped by neighbors. My priority would be ensuring that growth decisions reflect the voices of neighbors while maintaining the quality of life that makes Lexington such a special place to live.

Agricultural Preservation

What policies do you support that promote Lexington’s iconic and productive farmland and protect it from irresponsible future development?

Answer:

Agriculture is an important economic driver and a defining part of our identity. Managing our use of rural land is therefore both an economic priority and a quality-of-life issue. It is not just about preserving scenic views—it’s about safeguarding one of Lexington’s important economic engines and the industries that depend on it.

I support maintaining an Urban Services Boundary (USB) as Lexington’s most effective tool to safeguard against losing our unique Bluegrass identity and the productive farmland that supports our equine industry, local food systems, and rural economy. Growth should first occur inside the Urban Services Boundary, where infrastructure such as roads, sewer, and emergency services already exist.

Lexington still has substantial opportunities for infill, redevelopment, and better use of vacant or underutilized land within the boundary. Encouraging responsible density and mixed-use development in appropriate areas allows our city to grow while protecting the rural land that makes our community unique.

I also support policies that strengthen the agricultural economy itself—such as supporting agritourism, farm-related businesses, and programs that help farms remain economically viable for the future.

Lexington is prosperous and in these deliberations we must be financially cautious as we address the needs of Lexington, live within our means, make smart investments that keep Lexington prosperous — without placing additional burdens on taxpayers.

Finally, decisions about future growth must be data-driven and transparent, ensuring that any land-use changes are based on real infrastructure capacity and long-term planning.
Land use policies are paramount for supporting our economy, job creation, quality of life and have outcomes far outlasting any council member’s tenure. My commitment to the 5th District is that I will always help lead Lexington solutions supported by 5th District neighbors.

Lexington’s rural land is not just open space—it is a vital economic asset and a global symbol of the Bluegrass region. Safeguarding it while guiding growth will ensure Lexington remains both prosperous and distinctive for generations to come.

District 6

Tyler Pyles

Housing

Studies show Lexington needs about 22,500 new housing units across all types to fill the housing gap in our city, but 75% of the needed units are at or below 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI).

What strategies and locations do you believe Lexington should prioritize for housing growth in order to address these needs?

Answer:

I believe the best approach to addressing the need for housing growth is to plan and adapt a hybrid model for development consisting of both single and multifamily dwellings, focusing on not only total number of units, but the affordability, location, and effects they will have on the community around them. A focus on infill and redevelopment will be key, however we must ensure that the proper infrastructure is in place to support these projects, such as sanitary and storm sewers, water, electricity, and roadway accessibility as more vehicles come with more housing in one location. With the proper infrastructure in place, there are many areas within the city limits that can be redeveloped to infill with multifamily, creating many housing units at an affordable price for many groups of people such as young professionals, working families, seniors, and those who will move to Lexington in the future. The second piece of this becomes using current developable land within the urban service boundaries for smart neighborhood development. This includes things such as lot size, neighborhood layout to maximize land usage, accessibility to things around them, and future opportunities for land around these neighborhoods. However again, we must ensure the proper infrastructure, so we are not overbearing things such as sewer treatment facilities and allow growth to continue at an affordable and sustainable rate. Lastly, in order to make the overall cost of housing, especially new multifamily or single family housing more affordable, we as a city need to invest in our local trades, to support the labor needed for this long term growth and development, as the amount of skilled trade labor has become one of the most unpredictable variables in development of any kind.

Expansion

What factors do you believe are most important to consider if an expansion of the Urban Service Boundary was proposed to the Council during your term?

Answer:

Should a proposal for the urban service boundaries to be expanded come up during my term, I think it would be a logical first step to look at the area in which the proposal affects, and consider how much of the proposed land is actually developable, what type of development it would be zoned for, and what the current use of the property is. Once these have been established, it would then become priority to hear from the community around the proposed area to understand how the potential development would affect their business and quality of life. We would also need to ensure that we are still using land currently inside the boundary for smart growth, and that an expansion of the boundary isn’t just an easy solution for land development. It is very important to remember the agriculture industry is essential not only to the economy of Lexington, but to the tradition and the overall branding of Lexington, and these must be defended. Ideally if there were an expansion of boundaries anywhere, it would be of land that is not currently being used for equine or agriculture purposes, would be primarily used for housing and the essential businesses needed to support families in that newly developed area. I also believe that if proposed, and approved, there should be a shared burden between the development group and the city to complete the infrastructure investments (sewer, water, roads, electricity) that would be needed to begin this development.

Agricultural Preservation

What policies do you support that promote Lexington’s iconic and productive farmland and protect it from irresponsible future development?

Answer:

Lexington’s farmland is essential to the city’s economy and overall heritage. Equine and agriculture industries are not only employee a large number of people and create a large economic impact, but they also help drive other essential industries that make Lexington special such as tourism, unique local dining of all varieties, and many more. I would support policies that continue to lean into that tradition and drive growth of those industries and be mindful of potential impact of development around these areas. It is important to me to support the creation and expansion of programs for youth that are interested in these areas to ensure we have generations coming up to continue the agricultural tradition.

Tina Bryson

Housing

Studies show Lexington needs about 22,500 new housing units across all types to fill the housing gap in our city, but 75% of the needed units are at or below 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI).

What strategies and locations do you believe Lexington should prioritize for housing growth in order to address these needs?

Answer:

Lexington’s housing shortage is real, and the greatest need is for homes that working families, seniors, and young people can afford. If we truly want to address that gap, we must focus on how many units we build, as well as where and how we build them so housing growth truly serves the people who already call Lexington home.

In order to successfully address the housing gap in Lexington, we should focus on areas with existing infrastructure through infill and redevelopment, but we have to be honest about the challenges that can come with that approach. Too often, new development is concentrated in older, downtown adjacent neighborhoods where lower income and minority residents already live, creating real risks of displacement and rising costs. Growth should strengthen neighborhoods, not push people out of them. That requires community input and an understanding of how development affects everyday life.

We also need a mix of housing options across the city so people at different stages of life and income levels can stay connected to opportunity. Supporting our workforce depends on it. Done right, housing growth helps people stay rooted, protects existing neighborhoods, and keeps Lexington a place where families can build stable lives now and for generations to come.

Expansion

What factors do you believe are most important to consider if an expansion of the Urban Service Boundary was proposed to the Council during your term?

Answer:

If an expansion of the Urban Service Boundary were proposed during my term, the most important consideration would be whether it truly serves the long term interests of the Lexington community. Any proposal should clearly explain why expansion is being considered and whether growth inside the current boundary is being used responsibly and effectively.

It would also be important to consider the impact on farmland, existing neighborhoods, and public infrastructure. Because Lexington’s farmland is central to our economy, growth decisions should reflect how changes to the Urban Service Boundary would affect everyday life, including traffic, public services, and the community we are shaping for future generations.

I would also advocate for a transparent and inclusive process. While data should inform decisions, listening to residents, farmers, planners, and stakeholders across Lexington matters just as much.

Agricultural Preservation

What policies do you support that promote Lexington’s iconic and productive farmland and protect it from irresponsible future development?

Answer:

Lexington’s farmland is a defining part of who we are and a major contributor to our local economy. I believe protecting it requires thoughtful, balanced decision making that respects both our agricultural heritage and the needs of Lexington as the city grows.

As a councilmember, I would ask thoughtful questions, listen closely to experts and stakeholders, and support land use decisions that reflect community benefits for the long term. I support planning approaches that recognize farmland as an economic and environmental asset.

It’s important to approach growth responsibly by encouraging development that makes efficient use of existing areas, while being mindful of the impact decisions can have on surrounding rural land.

It is important to steward our land by working collaboratively with farmers, residents, planners, and fellow councilmembers to ensure future decisions reflect Lexington’s values and preserve this resource for generations to come.

District 7

Joseph Hale

Joseph Hale is the current Councilmember of District 7, and is the only candidate filed to run in District 7 for 2026. He has not completed a Fayette Alliance Candidate Questionnaire at this time.

District 8

Amy Beasley

Amy Beasley is the current Councilmember of District 8. She has not completed a Fayette Alliance Candidate Questionnaire at this time.

Tray Hughes

Tray Hughes has not completed a Fayette Alliance candidate Questionnaire at this time.

District 9

Whitney Baxter

Whitney Baxter is the current Councilmember of District 9. She has not completed a Fayette Alliance Candidate Questionnaire at this time.

Matt Miniard

Matt Miniard has not completed a Fayette Alliance candidate Questionnaire at this time.

District 10

Chris Woodall

Housing

Studies show Lexington needs about 22,500 new housing units across all types to fill the housing gap in our city, but 75% of the needed units are at or below 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI).

What strategies and locations do you believe Lexington should prioritize for housing growth in order to address these needs?

Answer:

Housing production has been lagging demand nationwide, and the impacts have been felt in pocketbooks across the income spectrum. There are a number of reasons for this lack of production including COVID complications of materials shortages and increased lead times, lack of skilled trade workers, rising mortgage rates, local regulatory barriers, and increased economic uncertainty and inflation that discourages “moving up” in housing. Lexington has largely been insulated from other recent major national housing fluctuations. The Urban Service Boundary had a positive impact, minimizing speculative overbuilding that led to national oversupply and contributed to the housing bust in 2007, but Lexington is not immune to recent housing trends.

Both the 2024 Kentucky Housing Corporation Housing Gap Analysis and the City’s 2017 Housing Demand Study point to a need for housing that is not matching up with our current levels of production, and as a result housing prices have risen. The median home price in Lexington has seen a 35% increase from $200,900 in 2020 to $272,100 in 2023. At the same time rent prices have gone from an average of $920 to $1,100. These rising costs have led to housing insecurity as over half (54.3%) of renters and one in five homeowners (21.5%) are considered cost burdened by housing. Add to that the rising costs of groceries, gas, consumer goods, and pretty much every other cost of living indicator, and you have a significant problem for the typical Lexington resident. There is a gap of over 22,000 homes to meet our total housing demand, and need for over 17,000 affordable housing units. We have work to do!

What have I done to address this problem? | I had the unique opportunity to both name the problem, with my office’s Housing Demand Study, and identify a multi-pronged approach to address the problem head-on and remove regulatory barriers to housing production. As Manager of Long-Range Planning for the City, I directed several Zoning Ordinance Text Amendments (ZOTA) to change regulations and encourage and allow more housing options throughout Lexington. None of these amendments were a sliver bullet to “solve” the problem completely but rather created one more pressure relief valve to allow additional production. We were successful in increasing the floor-area-ratio (amount of building allowed on a parcel) for our multi-family zones, eliminating parking mandates that favored impervious parking spaces over housing, legalizing accessory dwelling units to provide flexibility for homeowners to increase housing on their lots, in addition to developing two Comprehensive Plans that favor housing density when paired with livability. Recently, mixed-use/affordable housing developers have shared with me that their projects would not have been possible without this regulatory reform. When we remove outdated regulations, we encourage and allow innovation. We need to continue peeling away regulatory barriers and focusing on ways to allow housing production throughout the city.

More solutions | Regulatory reform is one way to clear the way for additional housing, but it is not the only solution, particularly with affordable housing. Developers are in the business of making money, and they will not typically create projects that do not pencil out for them. Market rate housing is market rate for a reason, in that it commands the price that the market will bear. The challenge with affordable products is that there is a gap between the market rate and affordable rate that needs to be made up somewhere. Luckily there are various funding sources that can help make up that difference, but those deals can be complicated and have a lot of requirements and expertise required to make those finance packages work. Lexington made a significant and symbolic shift from an ad hoc allocation of funding for the Affordable Housing Trust Fund to a percentage (1%) of the General Fund Revenue. I think this value statement is important as it acknowledges a need for a dedicated funding source. The City needs to continue to ensure that we are adequately funding this Trust Fund, since those dollars can be leveraged with other funding sources and the return on investment for our community is huge. One thing I would love to do is find as many ways as possible to apply these funds to homes that will permanently exist within our affordable housing stock, as opposed to applying them to a fixed term of affordability. The Community Land Trust model that is being utilized in Davis Park is an excellent example of how to do this. I will explore ways to expand this model.

The total cost for eliminating the affordable housing gap is daunting – the 2024 Affordable Housing Annual Report indicated that the subsidy required just for treading water is $26.5 million over 10 years. To make a significant dent in the gap is closer to $80 million over the same time period, and the astronomical cost to eliminate the gap is nearly $300 million! We can’t let the sticker shock deter us from pursuing solutions. We should work with our great local organizations who are already on the frontlines tackling this challenge, communicate with them frequently, and find ways to support their missions. Our Housing Advocacy and Community Development Department needs to continue to lead the way, researching solutions and best practices around the country to replicate what’s working in other parts of the United States.

In addition to financing and regulatory reform, we should also invest in workforce development for the skilled trades. Expanding and supporting programs like the Building Industry Association of Central Kentucky’s Building Institute, which trains HVAC technicians, electricians, and plumbers, will directly speed housing production and raise household earnings. A recent National Home Builders Association study finds skilled-trades wages have increased roughly 40–50% over the last eight years, and builders are now competing for labor, which lengthened project timelines from about 120 days to roughly 165 days. By increasing local training and placement capacity, we can shorten construction timelines, reduce costs, and help well-paid tradespeople better afford housing.

It’s clear there is a lack of available housing in Lexington, a problem that is only solved with increased housing production. Any approved housing development, regardless of price point increases the overall supply of housing and puts downward pressure on rents and sale prices. That is not to say that all housing should be approved just for housing’s sake. Quality of life, burdens on city infrastructure and related costs, and other environmental/economic/societal sustainability factors still need to be considered, but a priority needs to be placed on ensuring Lexington is a place with a variety of housing options so we can continue to grow as a welcoming and vibrant city.

Expansion

What factors do you believe are most important to consider if an expansion of the Urban Service Boundary was proposed to the Council during your term?

Answer:

Lexington’s Rural Service Area (RSA) comprises 68% of the land in Fayette County, while the Urban Service Area (USA) makes up the other 32%. And while the RSA is over two thirds of the land mass, it only houses 7% of the population, leaving the other 93% of the population within the other third. This reality illustrates the success of the USA policies in containing urban growth within a concentrated area, ensuring that we grow within a fiscally responsible growth pattern and sustainably utilize our infrastructure. The USA, the first in the county in 1958, was in response to a period of rapid growth when IBM first came to town in 1956 and has served as the lynchpin of Lexington’s growth management strategy – something I do not see changing. Its original intent was to ensure that we had the ability to provide sewer for new growth, and that we did not outgrow our ability to provide costly city services. That purpose remains and is as important as ever.

In addition to providing that fiscal safeguard, it has also had the fortunate byproduct of preserving our horse industry and world-class rural areas that have become synonymous with Lexington as the Horse Capital of the World. The horse farms, rolling hills, and the unique approach from Bluegrass Regional Airport, have all contributed to a sense of place, tourism, economic development, and a thriving agricultural economy. The benefits to the USA are many, and decisions affecting it should not be taken lightly.

Which is why it was time to create a new process that better defines the way decisions regarding the boundary are made, and I am glad the Council took the steps to approve the LPGMP process. This process has been in the works since it was included in the 2018 Comprehensive Plan, and defines a data-driven approach. The Growth Trends Report will include a thorough analysis of community trends and a projection of land need. Assuming these numbers indicate that Lexington has enough land to accommodate 20 years’ worth of growth, there will be no viable discussion of expanding the USA.

However, if the numbers indicate that we do not have enough land to meet our future growth under our current policy and regulatory framework, an expansion will be discussed. The first step though will be to look at the existing policy and regulatory framework and see if we can be more productive and efficient with the land we have available. This was included as a mandatory first step in the LPGMP, and rightfully so, as it is critical that we ensure we are doing the best we can within the existing USA. We have an obligation to evaluate our growth patterns and ensure they are providing the types of outcomes we say we are after, and if they are not, we need to be willing to make the necessary adjustments. If we have made all the adjustments necessary and still do not have adequate land supply, then it becomes time to make a recommendation on an amount of acreage to meet the deficient need, fund a masterplan for the area, and allow the Planning Commission to follow their process to identify where the expansion will take place. It is critical that the Mayor ensures quality appointees are filling those seats, and it is incumbent on us to enthusiastically confirm candidates that we believe are capable of making such decisions.

One element that would be a welcome addition to the adopted LGPMP would be the inclusion of a map that indicates where land will be permanently preserved and off-limits to expansion, and conversely, areas where potential future expansion could take place. This would guide the Planning Commission, and would be incredibly helpful in infrastructure planning, ensuring that we are being the best stewards of taxpayer dollars. It would also assist the Council in expansion decisions, by giving us a better understanding of the finite land available. When you think in those terms, I believe you are more careful with your decisions and have a more complete understanding of the long-term ramifications. This component was originally called for in the 2018 Comprehensive Plan, but was never successfully completed, though discussions have been ongoing.

Agricultural Preservation

What policies do you support that promote Lexington’s iconic and productive farmland and protect it from irresponsible future development?

Answer:

Lexington’s agricultural economy is critically important, both for the direct economic impact through jobs and businesses, but also through its contributions to our tourism economy and local identity. There are over 70,000 acres of prime soils in Lexington, and nearly 40,000 acres of soils of statewide significance – we are fortunate to have such a high concentration of excellent soil that allows a variety of agricultural activities to thrive. Additionally, these soils and our location within the United States could gain significance for potential food production as climate change continues to impact our country. These resources are worth protecting.

There are several tools available at our disposal that promote our farmland and protect it moving forward. The Rural Land Management Plan I directed out of my office in 2017 provides a very comprehensive inventory of our rural assets as well as outlines many of the tools already in place, and recommendations for further strengthening these protections. One important tool that provides the most protection of farmland through strong legal instruments is the Purchase of Development Rights program. Stemming from the original Rural Land Management Plan in 1999 (which was in response to the last major expansion in 1996), the PDR program was born with a goal of permanently preserving 50,000 acres of land in the Rural Service Area. Today the program has about two thirds of the way to its goal, with 33,332 acres currently preserved, leveraging federal funding sources along the way to maximize return on investment. This tool is important but could perhaps become even more important when paired with the map I mentioned in the previous question. When we identify exactly where we would like to preserve, we can focus efforts to ensure their preservation in perpetuity.

Another policy for protecting Lexington’s agricultural area, perhaps even the most important, is continued smart growth policies and strong infill and redevelopment. The best defense is a good offense, and by executing development within the Urban Service Area that provides land use efficiency and fiscally responsible utilization of infrastructure, it minimizes pressure on greenfield development that pushes out toward the rural area. To accomplish this, we need to continue to evaluate our regulatory framework and explore incentives for development (but only those that meet the criteria of efficiency, fiscal responsibility, and other Comprehensive Plan goals) through alternative infrastructure funding mechanisms and expedited processes. We need to reward the good actors who are furthering the vision put forward by the community through Imagine Lexington 2045 and encourage quality infill and redevelopment.

In addition to policies that protect the agricultural economy, we should also continue to focus on economic development in the ag arena. The Bluegrass AgTech Development Corporation partnership between the City, UK, KY Dept. of Agriculture, and Alltech was established in 2022 and continues to provide grants to companies furthering our agtech goals. The city should keep pursuing innovative companies, looking for opportunities to leverage seed funding to either attract new employers or incubate fledgling local start-ups that fit nicely within our agricultural economy.

Our rural area is obviously valuable to Lexington for a great number of reasons and we need to be intentional not to cause it irreparable harm, but it is also not immune to change. Our local agricultural leaders need to be open to discussions to ensure that we are not leaving opportunities on the table for the sake of status quo. It is okay to err on the side of caution for an irreplaceable resource but let’s make informed and measured decisions.

District 11

Richard Moloney

Richard Moloney has not completed a Fayette Alliance candidate Questionnaire at this time.

Cassandra Vogl

Housing

Studies show Lexington needs about 22,500 new housing units across all types to fill the housing gap in our city, but 75% of the needed units are at or below 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI).

What strategies and locations do you believe Lexington should prioritize for housing growth in order to address these needs?

Answer:

I believe that Lexington’s housing gap requires a strategy that increases supply without pushing the city’s development farther outward. We should focus on expanding and promoting Affordable Housing Density Bonuses,this allows the city to meet housing needs while also preserving rural land. Strategies like encouraging developers to include both affordable and mixed‑income units, particularly through redevelopment of underutilized land, helps keep Lexington accessible to residents across all income levels. Transit‑rich corridors like Versailles Road are especially well‑suited for mixed zoning redevelopment, as the location has the potential to offer diverse housing options connected to jobs, services, and public transportation.

I also think that we should prioritize investing in Public‑Private Partnerships,this is one tool that can help expand opportunities for residents, nonprofits, and mission‑driven developers to acquire and maintain affordable housing, keeping homes permanently rooted within the community. Open Door Housing is an excellent example of mission-driven development for affordable housing. If we maximize the resources we already have—like the Permanent Supportive Housing funds used by AVOL or the Low-Income Housing Tax Credits as used by developer Holly Wiedemann with the Parkside Apartments —this will help accelerate the creation of stable, long‑term housing options for those who need it the most. Using tools that are already in place, alongside strategic redevelopment, ensures Lexington can grow responsibly while meeting the full spectrum of housing needs.

Expansion

What factors do you believe are most important to consider if an expansion of the Urban Service Boundary was proposed to the Council during your term?

Answer:

If an expansion of the Urban Service Boundary is proposed to Council during my term, I will push to focus on an Infill First approach. Infill First will allow Lexington to grow in a way that protects our existing neighborhoods and helps the City use public resources responsibly. If we prioritize development in areas where infrastructure is already in place, this helps to offset costly sewer extensions, new road construction, and expanded emergency services that would otherwise place a heavy financial strain on current residents. For example, the 2023 expansion was projected to cost over half a billion dollars in infrastructure investments, so any future expansion would require both strategic planning and efficient use of existing resources. When and if we do need to expand our Urban Service Boundary, we need to ensure the expansion is both feasible and fiscally responsible.

I believe that in order for expansion to succeed, Lexington must adopt practical and enforceable requirements for affordable and mixed‑income housing, aligning expectations with market realities, so new development can deliver the housing types Lexington needs. Evaluating land suitability, infrastructure costs, and long‑term sustainability keeps growth attainable for residents across all income levels. The Preservation and Growth Management Program provides a framework for balancing development with the protection of Lexington’s rural identity, ensuring that expansion is measured, intentional, and tied to clear outcomes that can guide future planning.

Agricultural Preservation

What policies do you support that promote Lexington’s iconic and productive farmland and protect it from irresponsible future development?

Answer:

I view The Purchase of Development Rights (PDR) program as one of our most important tools for preserving Lexington’s prime farmland. The PDR program ensures farmers are compensated for their stewardship while preserving the iconic landscape that defines the Bluegrass. This program works to promote and protect our farmland, and I support that. We currently have more than 5,000 acres of vacant land inside the existing Urban Service Boundary. This vacant land is why I support an Infill First approach .This allows Lexington to grow without sacrificing our farmland. When we focus on Infill First, we are doing more than just saving farmland, we’re also protecting our natural habitats, supporting healthier ecosystems, and maintaining the rural character which is central to Lexington’s identity.

I believe that the Preservation and Growth Management Plan will help us in deciding any future boundary changes, while adding another layer of accountability to its current residents. By requiring a Vacant Land Review and infrastructure cost analysis before expansion is considered, we’re ensuring that our decisions are data driven. We have to look at everything from land suitability to long‑term sustainability. If we pair strategic growth, with practical requirements, we can meet our community needs, while still preserving the rural identity that makes Lexington unique.

District 12

Hil Boone is the current Councilmember of District 12, and is the only candidate filed to run in District 12 for 2026. He has not completed a Fayette Alliance Candidate Questionnaire at this time.