►
From YouTube: House Standing Committee on Local Government
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
B
A
A
D
I
Testimony
thank
you.
Members
of
the
committee
and
chair
meredith
appreciate
the
opportunity
to
be
here
today
and
thank
you
for
giving
us
the
courtesy
of
calling
this
bill.
First,
I
have
to
leave
momentarily
to
go
chair.
Judiciary
might
have
with
me
my
colleague,
sal
santoro,
representative
santoro,
as
well
as
judge
executive,
gary
moore
from
boone
county,
also
the
national
association
of
counties
president
this
year
and
we
are
bringing
to
you
this
house
bill
120,
which
was
born
about
three
years
ago.
I
It's
gone
through
the
process
for
the
last
couple
of
years
with
a
lot
of
changes.
The
idea
behind
this
bill
simply
put
is
to
allow
fire
districts
and
fire
departments
to
consolidate
and
to
provide
better
service
and
coverage
to
their
local
constituency,
their
local
citizenry,
and
so
there's
been
a
lot
of
information
shared.
I
know
that
judge
executive
moore
has
talked
with
the
international
association
of
firefighters.
J
A
All
right
committee
members,
please
turn
your
mics
off
if
you
happen
to
have
them
on.
I
And
the
I
and
I
at
one
time
in
my
life,
actually
served
as
a
firefighter
emt
in
florence
kentucky,
and
I
can
tell
you
that
the
the
service
that's
given
in
florence
is
different
than
the
service
that's
given
in
petersburg
or
some
of
the
smaller
communities
surrounding
the
area,
and
the
idea
behind
this
is
to
allow
them
to
consolidate.
This
is
not
mandatory,
it
is
voluntary
and
there
are
certain
implications
that
go
along
with
that.
So
that
is
the
very
quick
overview
of
the
bill.
I
I'm
going
to
turn
it
over
at
this
point
to
the
people
that
really
have
been
down
in
the
weeds
dealing
with
this,
which
is
judge
executive
moore,
as
well
as
chief
barlow,
who
will
come
up
and
take
the
seat
that
I'm
sitting
in
and
again,
representative
santoro.
This
was
my
initiation
into
the
general
assembly
was
at
the
first
meeting
in
northern
kentucky
after
I
was
elected,
they
said
hey.
I
I
know
that,
even
in
past
years,
I've
talked
with
representative
wheatley
about
this
talked
with
representative
rothenberger
about
this,
who
was
part
of
this
body
a
year
ago,
and
so
we
think
that
we've
got
it
to
a
place
now
that
it
will
be
beneficial
to
the
citizens
of
the
commonwealth
and
allow
us
to
do
or
perform
better
coverage
for
emergency
and
medical
services.
So
with
that
chief
barlow.
If
you
want
to
come
up
and
I'll
turn
it
over
to
gary
moore.
K
Well,
thank
you.
We
greatly
appreciate
this
opportunity
today.
As
it's
already
been
said,
this
has
been
a
several
year
process
for
those
of
you
that
were
in
northern
kentucky
in
the
summer
of
2019
pre-coveted
in
our
county
courthouse
in
burlington.
We
talked
about
this
issue,
I'm
here
at
the
request
of
our
fire
districts
and
our
fire
chiefs.
This
is
their
work.
This
isn't
a
top-down
effort
to
merge.
The
fire
services
are,
are
nine
different
fire
districts
in
boone,
county
and
I'll
say
that
again,
these
are
nine
chapter.
K
75
taxing
fire
districts
in
one
county
did
a
study
that
lasted
for
about
a
year
and
their
recommendation
is
for
those
that
wish
to
merge
to
be
able
to,
but
to
do
this
in
a
more
responsible
way
than
the
current
chapter.
75
merger
allows
so
this
new
chapter
chapter
75
a-
would
give
them
the
ability
to
do
many
of
the
things
that
their
study
and
the
work
that
chief
barlow
and
his
other
chiefs
came
up
with.
We
have
through
these
three
years,
we've
checked
a
lot
of
boxes.
K
K
We've
talked
with
the
kentucky
league
of
cities,
kentucky
association
and
counties
and
many
others,
and
we
believe
for
the
most
part
that
we've
addressed
the
concerns
that
are
out
there.
It
is
a
good
bill.
It
allows
a
new
tool
in
the
toolbox
for
those
that
wish
to
use
it.
No
one
would
be
forced
to
do
anything
that
they
don't
wish
to
do,
and
it
would
it
would
take
us
from
there.
I'm
gonna,
save
time
for
your
questions
and
answers
and
turn
it
over
to
chief
barlow,
the
fire
chief
of
the
burlington
fire
district.
A
L
Thank
you.
Thank
you
for
the
time
to
present
to
you
this
morning.
I'll
keep
it
very
brief,
because
judge
moore
basically
said
in
a
nutshell,
everything
that
I
could
have
told
you.
I
can
tell
you
that
I
was
one
of
the
original
researchers
when
our
county
association
came
together
in
2017,
and
we
said
we
really
need
to
look
at
how
we
solve
the
problems
moving
into
the
future
hard
to
believe
that
that's
been
four
years
ago,
because
the
future
is
now
upon
us.
L
But
some
of
the
concerns
we
had
was
recruiting
and
retention
staffing
trying
to
accommodate
the
service
levels
that
each
of
our
districts
are
trying
to
provide
independently
and
recognizing
that
as
growth
occurs,
they
don't
care
where
a
boundary
may
be.
The
problem
also
became
very
evident.
Current
chapter
75
does
allow
for
consolidations,
and
some
of
you
may
ask
why
not
just
use
that
existing
tool
in
the
toolbox.
L
L
They
are
doing
everything
they
can
to
provide
efficient
service
they're
doing
an
excellent
job,
but
the
reality
is
the
revenues
that
come
in
are
just
not
enough
to
provide
the
staffing
that
they
need
or
the
equipment
that
they
need.
So
then
they
start
looking
at
well.
What
neighbors
can
we
potentially
combine
with
the
problem
is:
there's
no
additional
revenue
available
when
they've
already
maxed
out
they're,
not
bringing
anything
other
than
liability
to
the
equation.
L
L
This,
as
has
been
mentioned
from
the
very
beginning,
was
born
out
of
a
significant
study.
This
is
not
a
small
work.
It
took
a
year
to
put
together
and
we
have
continued
to
enhance
it
over
the
time
to
make
sure
that
it
is
responsive
to
all
stakeholders
and
that
it
is
voluntary
for
the
local
community
to
make
that
decision.
L
But
what
I
come
before
you
to
ask
is:
please
consider
approving
this
tool
to
be
placed
in
the
toolbox
to
let
the
local
jurisdiction
say
if
this
works
for
us,
we
can
opt
to
get
into
it.
The
question
I
get
a
lot
is
well
how
many
districts
are
in
favor
of
this.
The
short
answer
is
no
one's
talking
about
it,
because
everybody
knows
we
can't
get
off
the
starting
block.
There's
no
legislation
available
other
than
existing
chapter
75
consolidation
that
just
won't
work.
So
I
I
would
humbly
ask
you
to
support
the
bill.
L
A
Representative
johnson
representative
reed,
you
want
to
make
a
second
to
that
second,
representative
reed,
we
do
have
someone
who
would
like
to
testify.
I
think,
in
opposition
to
the
bill,
brian
o'neill.
If
you'll
come
forward
and
give
your
comments
and
then,
if
there's
any
questions,
we'll
we'll
bring
those
forward.
B
Thank
you,
sir.
I
think
I
turned
it
off.
Thank
you,
sir.
Yes,
my
name
is
brian
o'neill.
I
am
the
legislative
director
for
the
kentucky
professional
firefighters.
We
are
here
to
speak
against
this
bill.
This
is
we're
not
opposed
to
the
idea
of
merger,
as
they
mentioned,
the
possibility
to
merge
already
exists.
B
This
is
something
that
can
be
done,
but
we
understand
that
this
is
a
way
to
seek
out
new
revenue
and
increases
in
that
way.
It's
a
good
intention
bill.
I
don't
think
that
there's
anything
nefarious
going
on
here.
However,
it
leaves
a
lot
of
room
for
a
lot
of
bad
consequences
to
happen
that
are
perhaps
unintended
or
even
for
somebody,
that's
a
bad
actor
to
come
in
and
take
advantage
of
these
holes
that
are
left
in
this
legislation.
B
Of
course,
this
is
not
just
a
boone
county
bill.
The
boone
county
study
that
best
study
is
where
this
came
from,
but
this
applies
to
everywhere
in
the
commonwealth,
so
certainly
taxpayers
and
business
owners
throughout
whether
you
were
in
ashland
richmond,
murray
hopkinsville
throughout
the
commonwealth.
You
need
to
be
concerned
about
what
this
bill
can
do.
B
It
mentions
chapter
75s,
but
if
you
read
into
the
bill,
this
also
affects
chapter
273,
volunteer
fire
departments
as
well
as
chapter
95
city,
fire
departments.
So
cities
of
the
second
and
third
class
currently
are
required
to
provide
a
fire
department,
but
this
bill
would
allow
those
cities
to
if
they
decided
that
they
didn't
want
to
be
in
the
public
safety
game
anymore.
B
They
could
create
one
of
these
consolidations
and
basically
annex
out
and
give
away
their
their
fire
protection
and
their
responsibility
for
fire
protection
to
this
consolidated
emergency
service
and
that
newly
formed
board.
B
There
are
many
references
in
this
bill
to
the
county
government,
where
the
district
is
located
and
also
to
the
county
judge
executive
as
the
ultimate
authority.
However,
lots
of
fire
protection
districts
cross
county
lines,
and
this
bill
does
not
address
how
that
would
be
dealt
with
if
there
is
an
issue
that
has
to
come,
which
county
judge
exact,
does
it
go
to
also,
there
are
no
guarantees
about
the
level
of
coverage
that
would
be
provided
to
the
citizens
to
the
communities
to
those
businesses.
B
If
this
were
to
happen,
I
understand
the
idea
and
again
I
think
it's
well
intentioned
when
you
talk
about
consolidation,
but
usually
consolidation
means
a
reduction
in
safety
and
a
reduction
in
service.
There
are
also
no
guarantees
for
the
employees,
there's
no
guarantee
that,
when
this
merger
happens,
that
they
will
even
maintain
their
job,
let
alone
maintain
their
salary,
their
rank,
their
seniority,
etc.
B
The
questions
come
up.
This
is
just
a
lot
of
what-ifs
and
we're
going
to
throw
a
lot
of
what-ifs
at
this,
and
we
need
to
get
the
ball
rolling.
We
need
this
tool
in
the
toolbox.
I
understand
that.
I
respect
that.
However,
what
ifs
are
that's
what
we
do
as
firefighters?
Many
of
you
may
have
seen
the
rather
fantastic
explosion
that
happened
in
texas.
It
was
about
18
hours
ago.
This
is
not
something
that
we
look
at.
We
just
start
heading
there
and
figure
it
out
as
we
go
along.
B
No,
we
have
a
plan
for
that
and
that's
an
incident.
That
might
maybe
happen
once
in
a
25-year
career,
but
we
have
a
plan
for
that
and
what
the
holes
that
are
left
in
this.
We
don't
have
plans
for
that
in
place,
and
I
think
it's
wrong
to
just
start
down
this
road
and
then
hopefully,
figure
out
those
problems
as
we
get
to
them.
I'd
also
want
to
mention,
in
addition
to
the
kentucky
professional
firefighters
being
opposed.
The
kfa
is
not
here.
B
They
are
actually
neutral
on
this
bill,
but
I
spoke
with
them
last
night
and
this
morning,
and
they
too
were
under
the
understanding
that
there
were
going
to
be
further
meetings
to
kind
of
deal
with
some
of
these
issues
and
problems.
But
that
meeting
never
happened
so
they're
just
kind
of
left
out
in
the
dark
as
well.
But
I
thank
you
for
your
time
and
obviously
I
would
field
any
questions
that
anybody
has.
M
Thank
you.
I
think
this
quite
these
questions
may
be
directed
towards
the
sponsors
and
the
judge
more
so
so
it'd
be
all
time
to
move
around.
M
And
mr
chair,
I
have
a
couple
questions
if
I
may
yeah.
Thank
you.
You
all
mentioned
that
this
was
needed
because
some
districts
carry
debt
and
it's
hard
for
them
to
consolidate
under
the
current
situation.
So
my
question
is
what
happens
to
the
debt
under
this
bill?
If
there
are
agencies
that
are
finding
themselves
in
that
place
and
do
want
to
consolidate.
K
I'll
start
and
then
let
chief
barlow
take
it
more
from
the
district
point
of
view.
But
we've
talked
about
this
during
the
process
and
I
think
the
lending
entity,
whether
it's
a
bond
or
a
bank
financing
they're,
going
to,
of
course
make
sure
that
that
debt
is
satisfied
and
that
no
one
would
walk
away
from
it
want
to
make
clear
that
these
mergers,
no
one's
going
out
of
business,
so
that
entity
would
still
be
responsible
for
the
debt
and
and
it
would
be
taken
care
of.
K
We
think
that
those
things
would
be
negotiated
through
the
merger
agreement.
If
that
debt's
on
a
firehouse,
the
new
combined
entity
is
going
to
need
that
firehouse.
So
there's
probably
a
situation
where
you
would
work
through
the
logistics
of
how
that
arrangement
would
work.
But,
chief,
you
want
to
pick
it
up
from
there.
L
I
believe
and
to
answer
the
question:
yes,
those
specifics
have
to
be
worked
out
entity
to
entity
once
the
tool
is
available
and
the
entities
want
to
have
the
discussion
that
has
to
be
agreeable
to
all
parties
involved
and
that
the
debt
is
not
going
to
be
relieved.
It
has
to
be
accommodated
that
debt
will
carry
it
forward.
If
I'm
not
mistaken,
even
in
the
bill,
it
does
make
reference
to
sub-districts.
L
That
would
continue
to
fulfill
that
indebtedness
to
make
sure
that
somebody
else's
debt
doesn't
get
brought
to
the
table
and
another
jurisdiction
is
ultimately
paying
it
off.
You
might
say
so.
We
know
that
that's
a
very
real
issue.
The
difficulty
here
is
this
is
the
classic
which
came
first,
chicken
or
egg,
because
some
of
these
very
specific
discussions
that
need
to
occur,
whether
that
be
about
debt,
whether
that
be
about
staffing
or
positions
or
pay.
L
L
This
is
all
about
transparency.
This
is
all
about
laying
everything
on
the
table
up
front
facts
are
facts
and
then
discussing
those
facts
to
figure
out.
How
do
we
solve
the
problems?
How
do
we
make
sure
that
there's
not
a
single
person
that
loses
a
job?
This
is
not
about
job
loss.
This
is
actually
about.
We
can't
get
the
jobs
filled
fast
enough.
Now
we
need
more
people,
and
the
people
in
the
pipeline
are
still
in
process
of
training.
L
That's
a
problem
for
us
and
we
we
don't
have
the
volunteer
pool
that
we
used
to
much
like
across
the
commonwealth
and
across
the
country,
which
means
you
have
to
do
more
upfront
training.
We
don't
have
the
ability,
as
independent
districts,
to
do
that
kind
of
preparation
on
our
own.
But
if
we
do
it
together,
it
requires
entities
to
try
and
have
agreements
on
how
this
will
work
and
those
discussions
have
not
been
fruitful
in
the
past.
L
K
L
K
Add
to
that,
if
it's
not
a
good
deal,
nothing
requires
that
other
district
to
take
them.
It's
that's
part
of
the
merger
negotiation
and
I
would
add
that,
just
like
the
current
75
merger,
if
two
or
more
districts
vote
to
merge,
it
has
to
go
to
the
governing
body
so
either
the
consolidated
local
government,
the
urban
county
government
or
the
fiscal
court
to
approve
it
after
the
districts
have
voted
to
merge.
K
So
you'd
have
that
elected
body
oversight
as
well,
and
I
think
we
failed
to
point
out
the
taxing
authority
on
these
merged
under
a
75.
A
anything
above
compensating
rate
has
to
be
approved
by
the
elected
body,
the
consolidated
government,
the
urban
government
or
the
fiscal
court
that
doesn't
exist
today
in
75.
So
I
know
many
of
you
feel
strongly
that
there
needs
to
be
more
elected
official
oversight
of
tax
rates.
This
brings
this
to
this
topic.
For
the
first
time.
M
Thank
you
next
question
judge
that's
a
good
segue
into
my
next
question,
which
is
first
of
all.
Thank
you
all.
I
appreciate
the
work
that
you've
done
on
this.
I
do
have
grave
concerns
about
this
bill
and
my
next
question,
for
you
addresses
one
of
those.
I
worry
that
this
will
lead
to
a
consolidation
of
services
that
leads
to
a
reduction
in
services,
possibly
even
an
increase
in
homeowners
insurance
for
people
and
the
way
I
read
this
bill
it.
M
K
I
I
know
we
would
not-
and
I
know
that
our
fire
chiefs
and
our
firefighters
in
boone
county
would
not
stand
for
that
as
well
as
our
citizens.
What
it
does
do,
I
believe,
is
increase
iso
ratings
by
having
fire
apparatus
and
fire
houses
positioned
in
a
way
that
they
are
more
adequately
able
to
respond
to
to
911
calls
to
demands
for
service,
and
I
think
it's
actually
going
to
increase
home
values.
I
think
it
will
decrease
their
homeowners
insurance
through
improved
iso
ratings
and
other
efficiencies.
So
this
is
about
efficiencies.
L
And
I
can
speak
to
the
issue
the
whole
concept
of
the
potential
of
going
beyond
the
existing
20
cent
per
100
cap.
It
takes
money
to
provide
service,
we
have
departments
and
I
can
speak
for
boone
county.
We
have
a
number
of
departments
that
are
at
the
maximum
cap
and
they
have
been
for
some
time
and
they
still
can't
provide
the
level
of
service
that
they
want
to
provide.
They
can
have
the
rolling
stock,
they
can
put
part-time
people
in
the
building
as
long
as
they're
able
to
make
it.
L
L
As
mr
o'neill
pointed
out,
we
have
to
have
plans,
and
this
is
all
about
trying
to
put
together
a
coordinated
plan
for
the
future.
That
says,
we
can't
just
rely
on
the
911
call
saying
well,
we'll
send
you
a
fire
truck
or
an
ambulance
or
a
whole
crew,
but
it
meant
we
just
stripped
an
entire
30
40
50
square
miles
of
their
resources.
L
We
need
more
resources,
not
less.
This
is
not
about
consolidating
to
reduce
this
is
about
trying
to
find
ways
to
actually
provide
the
service
that
is
necessary
and
right
now
the
funding
that's
available.
Even
when
maximized
is
just
not
enough
to
do
that,
and
and
that's
what
really
drove
this
out
of
boone
county
was
we
recognize
there's
it's
not
just
one
there's
two
or
three
departments
that
are
really
really
struggling,
and
I
will
be
very
fast
to
say
this
is
through
no
fault
of
their
own.
This
is
not
mismanagement.
This
is
not
inappropriate
spending.
L
This
is
about
there's
only
so
much
money
to
go
around
and
when
you
get
done
paying
the
bills.
That's
all
that's
left
we're
trying
to
fix
that.
I'm
a
department
that,
when
those
neighbors
have
a
problem,
my
department's
going
and
we're
glad
to
go,
but
it
also
means
I
just
reduced
my
department's
staffing
capability.
N
President
koenig,
thank
you,
mr
chairman,
gentlemen,
how
many
districts
are
there
in
boone
county
there.
N
You
so.
N
N
K
L
And
I
would
concur
with
that.
I
can
give
you
a
quick,
anecdotal
story
when
we
had
our
iso
review
a
number
of
years
ago,
one
of
the
things
that
the
iso
evaluator
told
us
is,
he
said
you
need
more
stations,
and
I
looked
at
him
and
I
said
I
can't
afford
more
stations.
He
said
well,
your
population
density
is
all
to
the
east
and
you
really
need
to
have
a
station
over
there
because
of
the
population
density.
I
said
right
now.
L
Our
station
is
somewhat
centralized,
I'm
about
five
miles
in
all
directions
to
cover
our
district.
If
I
move
to
where
the
population
density
is,
it
means
I
take
all
of
my
rural
constituents
on
the
west
and
the
south
side
of
the
district
and
I'm
going
to
move
the
firehouse
another
mile
away
from
them.
That's
not
right.
That's
that's
not
so.
L
It's
not
happening
in
those
rural
areas,
which
means
they're
not
seeing
this
windfall
of
growth
revenue
they're
holding
their
own,
but
it's
not
affecting
their
operation,
but
then
it
relies
upon
neighboring
districts
that
do
receive
money.
Okay,
well,
you're,
going
to
help
continue
to
provide
service
for
your
neighbors.
This
is
where
the
the
crux
of
the
matter
was.
You
know
if
we
looked
at
it
from
a
bigger
lens,
if
we
stopped
trying
to
look
at
individual
little
silos
of
how
can
I
help
you
in
your
crisis,
but
then
go
back
to
my
home?
L
We
would
do
a
lot
better
for
the
community
and
we
would
do
a
lot
better
for
even
preparing
our
own
firefighters
for
the
tasks
that
they're
asked
to
do.
I've
got
a
station
with
eight
bays.
I've
got
seven
people
on
duty
at
any
given
time.
Those
seven
people
are
trying
to
staff
two
ambulances,
two
pumpers
a
ladder
truck
a
tanker
and
a
brush
truck
they
get
on.
Whatever
has
to
go
many
times.
L
A
critical
ems
call
is
going
to
get
a
fire
engine
with
at
least
three
people
and
an
ambulance
with
two.
You
can
do
the
math.
That's
five
people
out
the
door
on
an
ems
run.
That
leaves
me
two
on
a
good
day
to
provide
service
for
38
square
miles,
and
that
does
not
count
my
neighbors
that
might
need
us
to
respond
to
them.
We
have
to
do
something
different
and
we're
at.
I
can
tell
you
from
burlington's
perspective,
we're
at
17
cents
a
hundred.
L
We
have
a
little
bit
of
wiggle
room,
but
I
can
tell
you
my
board's
not
exactly
crazy
about
well,
let's
bump
our
tax
rate
up,
because
we
have
room
so
that
we
can
fund
other
people's
issues.
That's
not
a
good
answer,
so
we
have
to
look
at
it
differently
and
we
think
that
this
is
a
good
tool
to
do
that.
K
Our
property
tax
rate
is
lower
than
when
I
took
office
22
years
ago,
and
we
are
proud
of
that.
Our
real
real
estate
rate
and
we
have
to
be
strongly
convinced
before
we
would
ever
allow
a
tax
increase.
So
the
first
thing
we'll
do
in
these
merged
entities
is
demand,
efficiency
and
demand
performance
efficiency,
not
at
the
cost
of
the
level
of
service,
but
efficiency
for
the
for
the
good
of
the
residents
and
the
good
of
the
fire
department.
So
we
think
it's
a
good
bill.
A
D
J
J
F
J
L
Sir,
this
is
this
has
been
born
out
of
boone
county.
This
was
a
grassroots
effort
that
in
2017
all
of
the
fire
chiefs,
we
have
a
monthly
fire
chiefs
meeting.
All
of
the
fire
chiefs
agreed
we
needed
to
do
the
research.
I
was
one
of
three
that
started
that
research.
When
I
referenced
the
rural
communities,
I
was
referring
to
the
rural
communities
of
boone
county.
They
have
been
at
the
table.
We
have
some
that
neighbor
our
jurisdiction.
We
have
very
close
communications
and
a
very
good
relationship,
but
if
the
bill.
K
J
K
Only
if
a
fire
district
voted
to
merge
and
then
that
fiscal
court
approved
it,
but
it's
a
voluntary
type
legislation.
No
one
would
be
forced
to
do
anything
well.
J
K
K
J
K
K
They
operate
solely
on
volunteers
and
their
budget
is
very,
very
small,
and
so,
when
chief
barlow
is
referencing,
the
supporting
the
rules,
that's
what
he
was
referencing,
because
we
have
some
very
rural
agricultural
areas
of
boone
county
and
that's
what
we
were.
What
we're
responding
for.
I
have
spoken
to
other
county
judges
and
to
others
around
the
commonwealth
through
this
work
and
we
have
presented
it
at
caico
and
this
bill
is
supported
by
caico
and
by
the
other
county
judges.
I've
not
had
one
oppose
it.
O
Thank
you,
mr
chair
I'll,
be
a
quick.
If
is
there
any
effect
at
all
with
the
ambulance
services?
Is
that
totally
so?
This
is
totally
separate.
O
K
Yes,
I
can
respond
to
that.
We
in
doing
our
due
diligence,
we
had
a
phone
call
with
some
of
the
fire
districts
in
jefferson,
county
and
in
a
situation
I
think
you've
had
saint
matthews
and
lyndon
merge
and
jefferson
county
in
the
last
several
years.
I
think
there
are
some
districts
that
that
have
done
this
in
the
past.
That
would
like
to
have
a
look
back
so
that
if
this
tool
became
available
and
it
worked
for
them,
they
might
want
to
move
to
a
75a
model.
O
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
A
J
In
representing
these
rural
firefighters
and
seeing
what
they've
done
the
last
couple
weeks,
they've
given
their
lives
and
blood
and
everything
I'll
pass
till
we
get
more
information
on
rural
hospital,
rural
firefighters.
Thank
you.
E
E
O
Explain
my
vote
go
ahead.
Thank
you,
real,
quick,
I'm
going
to
pass
for
right
now
and
the
reason
I
have
a
passing
is
like.
I
need
to
get
a
little
more
information
on
how
and
I
appreciate
your
explanation
on
the
five
year,
particularly
on
jefferson
county
I've
got
I've
got
a
district
that
covers
not
only
oldham
but
also
jefferson
and
I'm
and
we're
going
through
some
logistics
in
terms
of
trying
to
deal
with
this.
O
I
said
certain
situations
come
up,
so
I'm
going
to
pass
right
now,
I'm
not
going
to
say
I
think
I
vote
no
on
it,
but
I'm
going
to
join
representative
bentley
to
do
a
little
more
information
on
it.
But
thank
you.
D
D
D
D
M
My
vote,
I'm
a
no
I'm
I'm
not
opposed
to
consolidating.
I
understand
the
need
for
it.
I
have
a
consolidated
district
within
my
own
district
and
we
have
a
mechanism
for
it
which
I'm
grateful
for
my
concerns
here
are
that
this
is
a
fix
for
one
county
out
of
120
counties
that
could
greatly
harm
others
and
that
it
could
raise
taxes,
reduce
services
and
harm
employees
and
we're
not
talking
just
any
employees
here,
we're
talking
about
our
frontline
heroes.
So
at
this
time
I'm
a
no.
D
A
House
bill
120,
as
amended
by
a
committee
substitute,
does
pass
with
favorable
expression
same
on
the
house
floor.
Thank
you
all
very
much.
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
All.
We
do
need
a
title.
Amendment
right
got
a
motion
on
the
title
amendment.
Second,
all
those
in
favor
of
the
title
amendment
please
say:
aye
any
opposed
got
the
title.
H
D
P
H
A
D
H
Okay,
mr
chairman,
we
also
have
a
committee
substitute
and
a
title
amendment
as
well
with
this
bill,
but
house
bill.
279
is
an
expanded
jurisdiction
bill
if
this
bill,
as
representative
santoro
mentioned,
if
it
looks
familiar
it's
because
it
did
pass
through
the
house
overwhelmingly
last
year
was
house
bill
467,
but,
as
he
mentioned,
it
did
get
caught
up
in
the
senate
due
to
code.
H
So
they
will
agree
in
writing
and
the
purpose
of
this
bill
is
to
relieve
some
of
the
burden
that
currently
exists
on
housing
and
building
construction
and
the
backlog
for
state
plan
review
and
allow
those
local
governments,
where
appropriate,
to
get
those
projects
moving
a
little
bit
quicker
throughout
the
process.
I've
been
working
closely
with
the
kentucky
department
of
education
on
the
committee
substitute
bill
and
mr
chuck
truesdale
is
here
to
speak
on
that
as.
P
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
and
I'll
try
to
be
respectful
of
the
committee's
time,
because
I
know
you've
got
a
lot
on
your
plate.
Today.
We
really
appreciate
representative
branstam
working
with
us
to
also
incorporate
the
provisions
of
last
year's
house
bill
599,
which
was
sponsored
by
representative
huff,
we're
very
appreciative
of
that
which
also
died
a
covet
death
before
it
could
to
get
through
the
process.
P
So
the
one
aspect
to
the
local
government
review
process
that
is
adjusted
in
the
committee
sub
also
streamlines
the
process
when
a
local
government
does
do
that.
Plan
review
hbc
generally
as
a
courtesy
forwards
on
their
documentation
to
the
department
of
education,
so
that
we're
not
waiting
for
that
documentation
when
the
local
school
board
sends
things
to
us.
P
This
would
also
make
sure
that
local
governments
also
forward
that
documentation
on
to
sort
of
get
that
process
rolling.
On
our
end,
the
other
thing
is
just
as
housing,
building
and
construction
has
sort
of
been
swamped
by
budget
cuts
and
loss
of
personnel
over
time,
so
has
the
department
of
education,
so
this
eliminates
some
redundant
responsibilities
that
are
really
no
longer
useful
at
the
department's
level.
P
The
first
thing
is,
it
removes
a
reference
to
the
kentucky
efficient
school
design,
trust
fund,
which
those
of
you
who
have
served
on
a
r
will
know
the
statutes
are
littered
with
funds
that
have
never
actually
received
any
monies,
and
this
is
one
of
them.
It
just
simply
eliminates
that
fund,
which
has
never
been
used
and
never
received
any
monies.
P
It
also
removes
an
energy
report
that
generally
requires
about
200
man,
hours
or
200
staff
hours
each
year
for
our
kentucky
facilities,
branch
staff
of
six-
that
represents
obviously
a
significant
use
of
their
time
and
resources,
which
could
be
frankly,
better
spent
approving
bg
pros
pg
documentation
from
school
districts
to
get
that
process
moving
so
that
when
the
spring
and
summer
construction
seasons
begin,
they
are
ready
to
break
ground.
And,
finally,
it
eliminates
references
to
a
water
water
bottle
filling
station.
C
A
D
E
D
H
H
H
D
D
A
A
Representative
brown,
if
you
are
still
on
the
zoom
link,
you
have
been
muted,
so
we
will
need
you
to
take
it
off
mute
if
you
are
going
to
want
to
record
a
vote
on
anything
this
time.
I
am
going
to
turn
the
chair
over
to
representative
frazier,
my
able
vice
chair
and
I'll
be
coming
to
the
table
to
present
house
bill
513
with
some.
A
A
A
This
bill
is
a
very,
very
simple
piece
of
legislation.
As
you
can
see,
it's
only
about
six
lines
and
addresses
an
issue
that
has
become
has
come
up
through
some
auditing
processes.
Over
the
last
couple
of
years,
sheriffs
get
a
fee
a
percentage-based
fee
when
they
collect
taxes
for
entities
in
the
county
and
others.
A
D
D
D
E
D
D
Q
D
A
D
G
The
only
guest
I
have,
sir,
is
representative
nemus
who
is
coming
from
another
meeting
so
but
I
can
start
without.
B
G
And
I
do
have
a
sub
motion.
A
G
G
I
filed
house
bill
309
to
address
concerns
expressed
by
residents
throughout
our
community.
It
provides
transparency,
accountability
and
oversight
of
operations
of
metro
government.
This
proposal
answers
the
call
for
subpoenas
to
allow
to
be
issued
by
metro
council's
government
oversight
and
audit
committee
on
behalf
of
the
newly
created
citizens
review
and
accountability
board,
and
it
requires
metro
council's
approval
of
large
legal
settlements.
G
So
before
I
well,
my
guest
needs
no
introduction,
but
before
I
go
to
him,
what
does
this
bill
do?
Three
main
things:
it
reforms
the
relationship
between
the
mayor
and
louisville,
metro
council,
strengthening
the
metro
council
powers.
G
We've
gotten
input
on
this
bill
from
a
variety
of
sources,
actually
section
one
which
I
will
have
representative
nemes
explained
part
of
the
language
actually
came
from
senator
mcgarvey.
G
A
lot
of
it
came
from
the
louisville
metro
ordinance
that
was
passed
and,
as
representative
nemus
will
explain,
we've
had
a
variety
of
meetings,
gotten
variety
of
inputs
from
various
sources,
including
the
fop,
several
sections,
two
four
and
six
were
the
result
of
input
from
both
republican
and
democrat
members
of
the
louisville
metro
council,
several
sections
I
used
language
suggested
by
the
county
attorney
that
would
be
in
section
2,
5
and
6..
G
At
this
time,
I'm
going
to
turn
it
over
to
representative
nemes,
because
this
is
a
for
those
of
you
not
in
louisville
tv
market.
It
may
be
foreign
to
you
what
this
is
trying
to
accomplish
and
what's
the
purpose
of
it.
So
I'm
going
to
turn
this
over
to
my
jefferson,
county
colleague
and
attorney
representative
nemes.
G
R
You
chairman,
mr
chairman,
thanks
for
the
opportunity
to
present
today
section
one
it
what
it
does
is
it.
It
codifies
the
existence
of
the
citizens
review
board
in
jefferson,
county
louisville.
My
town
has
created
a
citizen
review
board
because
we
want
people
outside
the
system
to
be
able
to
look
at
our
department
and
make
sure
that
there's
the
proper
relationship
between
our
police
and
our
and
our
community.
That's
something
that
our
community
has
supported.
I
believe
it
was
a
unanimous
vote.
R
R
The
the
citizens
review
board
has,
as
it
must,
a
wonderful
and
robust
opportunity
to
do
investigations
to
call
in
evidence
to
to
make
their
recommendations
for
improvement
meaningful
as
part
of
that,
as
a
minor
part
of
that
maybe,
but
as
an
important
part
of
that,
the
we'll
call
it
brac
the
the
the
citizens
of
review
board
of
crab
or,
however,
you
know
a
citizen
of
your
accountability
board.
I
forgotten
the
acronym,
but
the
citizens
review
board
should
have
the
ability
or
access
to
subpoenas.
R
But
subpoenas
is
an
awesome
power
and
in
some
time,
in
some
ways
it's
an
awful
power.
It
is
very
intrusive,
as
it
should
be
in
some
circumstances,
but
it
ought
not
be
given
out
to
everyone
and
for,
for
example,
in
in
our
general
assembly,
one
committee
has
subpoena
authority.
We
want
to
control
that
that
power,
it's
a
very
important
power,
so
one
committee
of
our
own
body
has
subpoena
power
what
this
does
is
it
in
louisville
metro,
council.
R
They
have
a
committee,
the
oversight
committee
that
that
has
subpoena
power,
and
so
what
this
bill
does
is
it
is.
It
recognizes
that
the
citizens
review
board
need
access
to
subpoenas,
but
we
don't
want
to
give
it
out
a
lot
of
places.
Just
like
we've
decided
here
that
we
don't
want
to
give
subpoena
out
to
all
of
our
committees.
Even
so
we've
we've
said
if
the
citizens
review
board
needs
information
that
they
can't
get
by
way
of
open
records
by
way
of
foil
requests.
R
By
way
of
that,
freedom
of
information,
the
federal
law,
by
way
of
other
kinds
of
avenues
or
components
of
the
investigation,
then
they
have
access
to
a
subpoena.
By
going
to
the
elected
body,
the
metro
council
that
committee,
that
already
has
subpoena
power,
they
can
request
documents
or
they
can
request
witnesses
through
that
committee.
R
So
that's
the
apparatus
that
we've
resolved
that
we've
decided
to
allow
the
the
citizens
review
board
to
have
access
to
this
really
important
subpoena
power
or
ability,
while
not
giving
it
out
to
a
group
of
of
people
outside
the
committee.
The
one
committee
on
the
citizens
on
the
metro
council.
So
that's
that's!
What
we've
done
answer
any
questions
about
it,
but
and
bottom
line
is
our
people
in
louisville
have
made
the
determination
bipartisan
determination?
R
I
think
unanimous
that
we
need
a
citizens
review
board
to
to
make
recommendations
for
improvement
in
our
community
much
needed
recommendations.
They
have
the
power
to
investigate
and
part
of
that
power.
To
investigate
sometimes
is
the
need
to
have
access
to
subpoenas
and
that's
what
section
one
of
this
bill
seeks
to
accomplish.
G
Really
focus
is
on
balance
of
power,
ensuring
that
transparency
occurs.
Section
two
of
the
bill
primarily
gives
the
government
oversight
accountability.
The
right
to
approve
by
resolution
settlement
offers
over
a
million
dollars
in
some
communities.
That's
hard
to
believe,
but
louisville
metro
council
has
no
authority.
All
they
have
to
do
is
budget
for
it.
After
those
settlements,
the
bill
gives
that
right
to
the
government
oversight
and
accountability
committee,
because
they
have
the
power
to
go
into
closed
session,
because
many
of
these
negotiations
need
to
be
confidential.
G
So
that's
why
this
power
went
only
to
the
ga
government
oversight
committee
and
not
to
the
full
metro
council.
It
clarifies
for
this
input
or
clarifies
language
related
to
the
ethics
commission.
G
Subpoenaing
allows
the
goa
to
subpoena
current
or
former
officers
of
metro
government,
and
this
became
important
through
the
through
the
events
of
last
year,
plus
there's
another
investigation
which
is
known
locally
as
the
explorer
debacle,
which
there
are
former
officers
and
that
really
need
to
testify.
G
So
this
will
give
those
the
power
to
do
that
section.
Three
is
where
it
creates
a
non-partisan
mayor.
It
does
not
change
metro,
council
and
I'll.
Go
into
that
further,
it
limits
the
mayor
to
two
terms,
as
opposed
to
three
in
67
c
today,
section
four
says
it
clarifies
the
role
of
the
county
attorney
relative
to
litigate
to
ordinances,
which
is
the
legislation
for
the
city.
G
There
were
some
language
changes
that
actually
caused
some
confusion,
so
we're
actually
changing
those
back
and
clarifying
that
and
some
of
that
language
came
from
the
county
attorney
section
six.
It's
hard
to
believe
that
a
a
government
does
not
have
the
ability
to
remove
its
chief
executive
officer
for
cause
well,
metro,
louisville.
The
way
67c
was
designed.
G
We
never
see
financials
for
that
urban
services
district
and
then
section
8,
9,
10
and
11
were
suggested
by
the
mayor's
office
and
they
relate
to
the
ability
of
the
chief
to
send
a
designee,
because
current
law
has
been
interpreted
to
say
that
the
chief
has
to
attend
every
single
disciplinary
meeting
and
that
it
just
was
non-workable
last
year
it
was
so
time
consuming
and
the
mayor's
office
suggested
that
and-
and
we
agreed
on
that,
so
why
do
we
want
to
do
a
non-partisan
mayor?
G
G
G
They
are
not
only
contiguous
like
our
districts
but
they're
compact.
So
that
means
the
the
constituents
are
much
more
homogeneous
with
the
people
they
elect.
So
it's
and
as
we
all
know,
legislative
process
is
often
more
partisan
than
being
chief
executive
should
be,
and
finally,
as
metro
or
as
new
york
city
mayor,
the
inf,
the
famous
fiorella
laguardia,
said
there
is
no
democratic
or
republican
way
of
clearing
the
streets.
G
So
with
that,
we
will
be
happy
to
entertain
questions,
and
I
know
there
a
couple
of
people
signed
up
to
speak
against
the
bill,
but
we'd
be
happy
to
entertain
questions
now
or
later.
Mr
chairman,.
A
Q
Thank
you,
mr
chairman
holly
hopkins
with
the
jefferson
county
attorney's
office.
I
am
assistant
county
attorney
and
serve
as
the
chief
of
the
legislative
services
division
of
our
office.
The
jefferson
county
attorney's
office
is
designated
legal
representative
by
statute
for
all
of
metro
government,
and
I
am
going
to
focus
my
comments
today,
primarily
on
two
sections
of
the
bill:
the
citizens
review
board
section
and
the
provision
regarding
lawsuit
settlements.
Q
I
believe
it
was
in
november
all
told
that
was
a
five-month
process.
Lots
of
lots
of
citizen
hours
and
council
hours
and
county
attorney
hours
went
into
that.
Excuse
me,
the
the
ordinance
creates
an
oversight
mechanism
composed
of
two
parts,
both
the
office
of
the
inspector
general,
which
is
a
full-time
paid
office
with
investigatory
authority
and
staff,
and
then
a
citizens
review
board
referred
to
as
the
citizen
review
and
accountability
board.
Q
Q
Of
the
of
the
oversight
body
with
respect
to
this
particular
bill,
the
language
used
muddies
some
of
those
relationships
a
bit
for
exa.
The
the
role
of
the
inspector
general
appears
to
be
diminished.
The
way
it
is
written
in
bill,
and
I
think
that
needs
to
be
addressed
because
of
the
functionality
of
the
ordinance
and
because
of
a
full-time,
trained
professional
needing
to
lead
the
charge
on
an
investigation
to
sure
it's
professionally
done.
Q
Secondly,
the
confidentiality
of
the
board
and
ig
discussions
needs
to
be
tightened
up.
The
board
and
the
ig
need
to
have
the
ability
to
talk
about
very
frankly
and
in
in
a
confidential
setting,
not
just
cases
but
potential
cases.
Q
So
language
and
the
current
bill
needs
to
be
tightened
up
to
ensure
that
investigations
continue
to
be
confidential.
Q
Third,
with
respect
to
subpoena
power,
in
particular,
the
work
group
envisioned
more
of
an
independent
administrative
subpoena
power
to
the
inspector
general
similar
to
what
is
done
in
atlanta.
At
this
point
house,
bill
309
takes
a
different
approach
and
puts
subpoena
authority
ultimate
subpoena
authority
in
goa.
Q
That's
how
we
refer
to
the
government
oversight
and
audit
committee
and
how
we'll
likely
refer
to
it
in
shorthand
here.
The
effect
of
that,
though,
as
written,
creates
some
operational
issues
that
would
need
to
be
addressed
if
the
power
is
going
to
remain
with
the
committee
first,
there
needs
to
be
more
protection
for
confidentiality
of
proceedings
before
go
act.
The
way
the
bill
is
written,
the
board
we
think,
should
be
the
ig
needs
to
request
a
subpoena
from
goack
there's
nothing
in
the
measure
as
it's
written
now.
Q
Secondly,
go
out
can
only
act
through
its
votes,
so
if
they
vote
to
issue
a
subpoena,
that
vote
has
to
be
taken
in
public
and
that
needs
to
be
somehow
protected,
the
confidentiality
of
the
underlying
investigation
and
subpoena
and
that's
not
accounted
for
in
the
current
version.
Q
Q
If
there's
testimony,
that's
subpoenaed
that
all
occurs
before
goac
in
a
closed
session,
the
measure
as
it's
currently
written
makes
no
mention
of
the
ig
or
anyone
from
the
board
being
able
to
be
present
at
those
sessions
being
able
to
question
the
witness
and
go
back
understandably,
would
not
have
all
of
the
information
needed
to
do
an
effective
examination
in
a
give
and
take
fashion,
because
it's
the
investigation
of
the
ig
in
the
board.
Q
So
that's
that's
another
issue
we
see
with
this.
Lastly,
the
way
it's
written,
there
is
no
requirement
that
any
of
the
evidence
gathered
in
connection
with
a
subpoena
be
presented
to
the
ig
or
to
the
board,
so
a
subpoena
could
be
issued
documents
and
testimony
gathered
and
goa
would
have
the
discretion
never
to
provide
that
to
the
body
conducting
the
investigation.
Q
So
those
are
are
some
of
our
concerns
with
the
with
the
subpoena
portion
of
the
bill.
We've
shared
those
with
some
people.
I
recognize
things
we're
moving
quickly
and
there
may
not
be
time
to
even
fully
consider
those
before
today's
meeting
so
we'd
be
happy
to
provide
those
to
to
others.
We've
done
a
markup
of
the
bill
and
we
could
share
that
with
respect
to
the
settlement
approval
portion,
it's
a
little
unclear
with
exactly
what's
intended,
but
by
adding
this
into
67c,
but
the
effect
would
be
dramatic.
Q
Metro
like
caico
and
klc,
have
two-step
insurance
process.
There
is
self-insurance
component
and
then
there's
an
excess
coverage
policy,
a
contract
with
a
third
party
insurer
in
every
situation
where
insurance
is
provided
by
someone
else,
be
it
the
board
of
an
insurance
trust
like
metro
as
a
party
to
and
klc
and
caico,
or
a
private
third
party
insurance
contract.
Q
Q
The
board
is
comprised
of
the
four
major
players
they.
They
comprise
97
percent
of
the
funds
in
the
contributions
they
make
decisions
about
whether
claims
get
settled
and
for
what
amount,
because
one
it's
their
money
and
two
if
claims,
don't
get
settled
they're
on
the
hook
for
a
judgment
you
add
in
a
third
party
to
that
discussion
and
approval
process
and
those
voluntary
contributors
don't
have
any
incentive
to
keep
putting
their
money
in
the
pot
because
they
don't
have
control
over
how
it's
spent
with
respect
to
third
party
insurers,
it's
a
straight
contractual
provision.
Q
Q
Adding
in
an
extra
layer
of
approval
prior
to
making
offers
could
result
in
opportunities
for
settlement
being
lost
to
metro
and
more
cases
winding
up
having
to
go
to
trial.
So
those
are
the
comments
I
have
on
both
of
those
pieces
of
the
bill.
Happy
to
answer
any
questions
the
committee
might
have.
My
colleague
marianne
watkins
is
is
whether
she's
general
counsel
for
the
self-insurance
trust
in
metro
and
would
be
better
suited
to
answer
any
questions
you
might
have
on
the
settlement.
Approval
piece
of
the
bill.
S
S
The
way
that
it
was
crafted
filed
and
presented,
we
would
say,
is
suspicious
at
best
of
the
different
components
to
the
bill.
There
are
two
that
I
want
to
take
sort
of
deal
with
on
today.
The
first
is
the
subpoena
power
members
of
the
louisville
metro,
civilian
review
board
work
group
from
2020,
codified
that
the
crb
an
office
of
inspector
general
process
in
louisville
needed
to
include
subpoena
power,
to
investigate
police
conduct
and
to
review
broader
lmpd
policy
and
training
systems.
S
Investigative
authority
through
subpoena
power
gives
the
ability
to
interview
all
witnesses,
including
lmpd
officers,
and
have
access
to
all
documents
and
other
evidence
needed
to
complete
a
thorough
investigation,
some
of
which
may
not
be
within
the
possession
of
metro
government
without
subpoena
power
involved.
Parties
cannot
be
compelled
to
speak
or
provide
evidence.
S
Therefore,
restricting
the
crb's
access
to
critical
information
and
thwarting
community
demanded
transparency,
subpoena
power
would
undoubtedly
best
be
utilized
if
directly
given
to
the
crb
and
the
inspector
general.
This
would
ensure
it
retains
its
full
independence
from
the
executive
and
legislative
branches
as
desired
by
the
community.
S
Note
that
there
is
precedent
within
lmg,
louisville
metro
government
for
a
non-elected
body
to
have
subpoena
power
if
the
intent
of
the
current
subpoena
bill,
this
language
remains
directing
it
to
go
through
a
committee
or
another
body.
The
process
must
be
clearly
laid
out
in
statute
language.
S
Proper
statutory
guidelines
must
be
included
to
shield
the
subpoena
proceedings
from
open
meetings,
open
records
laws
to
protect
the
confidentiality
of
those
involved
in
the
investigation
until
such
times
as
an
investigation
are
completed
and
released.
The
second
part
quickly.
It
deals
with
the
nonpartisan
mayoral
election.
S
This
would
be
an
affront
to
the
democratic
process
by
which
louisville's
city
county
government
was
formed
through
merger,
as
voted
on
by
citizens
of
jefferson
county.
The
voters
chose
during
merger
a
process
of
partisan
elections
in
which
democrats,
republicans
and
independents
engage
in
a
competitive
policy
debate.
S
This
proposal
to
move
toward
more
of
a
california-style
jungle
primary
is
a
major
departure
from
that,
and
it
should
only
be
decided
by
a
full
vote
of
louisville
residents.
Anything
otherwise
would
be
wholly
undemocratic
and
is
in
a
situation
where
partisan
elected
legislators
in
frankfurt
are
dictating
a
local
electoral
process.
Here
are
the
political
facts.
S
Republicans
currently
hold
a
veto,
proof
super
majority
in
both
the
kentucky
house
and
the
senate.
They
can
pass
any
bill,
they
so
choose.
Louisville.
The
economic
engine
of
the
state
has
a
political
party
registration
that
is
57
percent
democrat
32
percent
republican
and
10
percent.
Independent,
the
kentucky
house
makeup
of
the
jefferson
county
delegation
is
74
percent
democratic
and
26
percent
republican.
S
The
kentucky
senate
makeup
of
the
jefferson
county
delegation
is
60
percent
democrat
40
percent
republican.
In
the
past
75
years,
louisville
has
elected,
11,
11,
democratic
mayors
and
two
republican
mayors
house
bill
309
is
written
where
only
the
mayor
race
would
be
nonpartisan
I.e.
The
metro,
council
races
again
would
remain
partisan.
S
It
appears
that
there
is
no
other
government
entity
across
the
country
where
there
is
a
split
structure
of
nonpartisan
and
partisan
elections
between
the
executive
and
legislative
bodies
of
local
government.
The
unprecedented
power
grab
on
the
louisville's
mayor
office
is
throwing
the
rubric
rulebook
out
the
window
in
the
name
of
party,
not
the
people.
S
This
is
a
clear,
partisan
attempt
to
get
republican
control
in
louisville,
where
republican
party
ideas
have
clearly
failed
to
win
the
votes
with
louisville
voters
for
the
mayor
race.
This
subversion
of
democracy
should
be
dropped
from
hb
309.
There
is
also
a
racial
and
equity
issue
associated
with
a
non-partisan
mayor
race.
S
National
research
shows
that
nonpartisan
municipal
elections
have
a
lower
voter
participation
than
non-partisan
elections.
Party
labels
provide
crucial
identifying
information
by
the
candidates
by
imposing
desperate
information
cost.
Non-Partisan
electoral
settings
reinforce
the
political
importance
of
the
class
differences
which
exist
in
the
ability
to
process
and
to
structure
incoming
political
cues
and
information.
S
Taking
party
labels
away
in
non-partisan
elections,
increased
barriers
to
information
about
candidates
for
voters,
exploiting
their
ability
to
process
incoming
political
cues
and
information
without
party
symbol
and
making
the
connection
between
candidate
choice
and
personal
interest.
This
is
especially
important
in
local
elections
when
voters
see
an
election
as
a
choice
between
their
political
group
and
another,
they
are
likely
to
vote
for
the
candidate
representing
their
group,
and
current
data
does
support
this.
90
percent
of
black
louisvillians
identify
as
democrats.
S
Removing
party
labels
disenfranchises
all
voters.
The
absence
of
party
labels
reduces
the
clarity
of
choice
for
voters.
A
voter
who
must
choose
from
among
a
group
of
candidates
whom
he
or
she
knows
little
about,
will
have
no
meaningful
basis
in
casting
a
ballot.
In
the
absence
of
a
party
ballot,
voters
will
turn
to
whatever
cue
is
available,
which
research
shows
often
turns
out
to
be
the
ethnicity
of
a
candidate's
name.
S
Nonpartisanship
also
tends
to
produce
elected
officials
more
representative
of
the
upper
socioeconomic
strata
than
of
the
general
populace
and
aggravates
the
class
bias
in
voting
turnout,
because
in
true
nonpartisan
systems
there
are
no
organizations
of
local
party
workers
to
engage
in
out
the
vote.
Efforts
on
election
day.
This
part
of
h.b
309
would
take
our
city
and
entire
state
backwards
on
equity
in
a
day
and
age,
when
advancing
toward
racial
equity
should
be
the
goal
of
all
elected
officials,
republican,
independent
and
democratic.
A
F
Well,
I
thank
you,
mr
chair.
I
have
a
couple
questions
and
the
first
one
representative
miller
had
stated
that
they
had
met
with
many
groups,
including
fop,
how
what
groups
did
you
meet
with?
You
said
many
groups
and
I'm
kind
of
that's
not
very
transparent.
When
you
just
said
many
and
and
the
fop,
who
are
the
many.
J
G
J
G
R
The
mayor's
here
very
transparent,
no,
no,
it
is
transparent.
The
mayor's
office
council,
fop
gli
impetus,
impetus,
aclu,
you
want
to
name
some
we'll
talk
about
them,
but
we're
not
we're
not
holding.
I'm
sorry.
F
R
This
bill
was
this:
bill
was
filed
last
year
and
we've
talked
to
a
number
of
metro
council
members
last
year
as
well.
So
if
we're
just
going
to
talk
about
309,
that's
one
answer,
but
if
we're
going
to
talk
about
the
issue,
including
the
bill
that
was
filed
last
year,
I
mean
it.
This
is
not
lack
of
transparency,
and
this
is
not
a
lack
of
opportunity
for
people
to
be
heard.
This
bill
has
been
filed
for
15
talked
about
for
15
months
now,
so
that's
your
criticism,
I
think,
is
unfounded.
Q
F
G
R
No,
there
would
not
be
anything
there
would
just
not
be
a
dnr
next
to
the
name.
I
also
want
to
mention,
because
I
think
this
is
important,
as
I
think
this
bill
is,
is
being
misrepresented.
Lexington
has
a
non-partisan
mayor,
no
one's
saying:
that's
that's
suppressing
the
vote.
One
city
out
of
the
82.
we've
got
82
cities
in
jefferson
county.
Only
one
is
partisan,
two
shively
two
inch.
Thank
you
chevrolet
and
jefferson
and
louisville.
We
have
416
cities
in
kentucky.
Seven
are
partisan.
R
We
have
supreme
court
justices,
seven
of
them,
jefferson
county
has
its
own.
It's
nonpartisan,
so
are
yours.
So
are
your
cities
there's
no
allegations
that
africa,
our
african-american
community
is
disenfranchised
because
they
don't
they
don't
vote
for.
We
don't
vote
for
our
justices
on
a
partisan
on
a
partisan
label.
It's
it's!
It's
the
history
of
kentucky
that
we
have
our
mayors,
your
mayors,
our
mayors,
except
for
two
in
jefferson
county,
are
elected
on
a
non-partisan
basis.
I
have
26
cities.
I
represent
two
in
oldham
county,
all
of
them,
except
for
louisville
nonpartisan.
R
10.6
percent
of
my
district
is
independent
and
last
fact
I'll
say
is
this.
I
was
given
road
plans
by
the
mayor,
the
last
two
road
plans,
one
of
them
I
think,
had
14
roads.
One
of
them
had
10.
one
of
those
roads,
24
roads.
One
of
them,
was
outside
the
watterson.
With
all
due
respect,
I
think
the
people
of
valley,
station
and
people
fern
creek
and
the
people
of
middletown
and
the
people
of
prospect
are
entitled
to
some
infrastructure
as
well
and
the
best
way
to
make
sure
that
our
our
mayor
is
coming
to
jefferson.
R
Coming
to
frankfort,
like
lexington's
mayor
does
advocating,
for
the
entire
county
is
to
make
sure
that
the
mayor
has
to
hunt
votes
all
over
the
county.
If
you've
got
to
hunt
votes
all
over
the
county,
you're
going
to
represent
the
entire
county.
I
assume
that
the
primary
will
produce
two
democrats,
not
a
republican
and
a
democrat
two
democrats.
I
have
no
beef
with
that,
but
I
want
that
democrat
who's
going
to
represent
loyal
going
to
be
our
mayor.
F
Up
all
along
the
watterson
in
that
area,
but
my
comment
is
this
is
just
a
huge
power
grab
when
does
louisville
want
to
be
like
lexington?
I
don't
have
not
heard
any
of
my
constituents
ask
for
this
bill
or
say,
let's
be
like
lexington.
I
have
not
heard
of
any
big
push
for
this
bill.
Maybe
you
have
in
your
republican
circles,
but
this
is
non-democratic.
F
N
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
my
comments
and
questions
directed
to
mr
findlay
and
and
I'm
gonna
start
by
standing
up
for
my
colleagues
a
little
bit.
I
I
I
don't
know
what
is
suspicious
about
this
bill
and
to
start
off
with
that,
I
respect
your
opinion.
I
respect
your
desire
to
come
and
and
speak,
and
but
you
know
this
is
a
bill
that
was
filed
last
year.
It's
filed
again
this
year.
N
Everything
has
been
out
in
the
daylight
there's
nothing
suspicious
about
it
and
representative
nemes
stole
a
lot
of
my
good
material.
I
I
don't
live
in
louisville,
but
from
the
current
voting
patterns,
it's
completely
reasonable.
There
would
be
two
democrats
to
come
out
of
this
election
and
I
think
that's
fine,
but
with
that
knowledge
was
20
years
ago
that
rebecca
jackson,
one
of
my
favorite
people
frankly,
was
county
judge,
I
believe,
there's
a
county
clerk.
That's
a
republican
currently,
so
republicans
can
win
and
things
change.
N
N
As
representative
nemes
pointed
out,
there's
most
every
mayor's
race
in
this
state
is
nonpartisan
in
my
part
of
the
world.
We
have
between
kenton,
boone
and
campbell
counties,
probably
40
cities.
All
of
them
are
nonpartisan
works.
Just
fine,
and
I
would
I
don't
think
that
makes
any
of
them
inequitable
and
let
me
just
say:
I've
been
on
this
committee
for
15
years.
N
City
of
louisville's
never
been
shy
about
coming
to
me
and
saying:
hey.
We
don't
like
this
bill
or
we
have
questions
about
this
bill,
or
will
you
vote
for
this
bill
in
my
15
years?
I've
not
heard
a
peep
from
anybody,
and
I
think
I
have
a
good
relationship
with
mayor
fisher
and
he's
not
been
beyond
calling
me
before.
E
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
representative
kinnick,
you
didn't
call
me,
let
me
say
this.
If
I
may,
you
know
thank
you
for
the
pressure,
mr
family,
I
couldn't
have
said
it
any
better.
My
friend,
okay,
you
know
I'm
going
to
say
a
couple
things
right
here.
You
know
we
talked
about
citizen
input
and
we
talked
about
balance
of
power
and
and
which
kind
of
peaked.
My
curiosity
said
the
representative
miller
said
we
don't
have
the
numbers
to.
We
didn't
have
the
numbers
to
remove
someone,
an
executive
which
I'm
assuming
was
the
mayor.
E
Okay,
I'll
go
back
a
long
way.
I
go
back
to
the
old
border
ottoman
days.
You
know,
and
I
matter
of
fact
I
used
to
have
to
make
presentations
in
front
of
those
folks
to
get
things
done
as
well.
Then,
as
a
city,
we
decided
to
go
to,
you
know,
consolidate,
and
the
citizens
made
the
decision.
What
we're
going
to
do
now.
You
can
deflect
and
do
any
way
you
want
to
go
on
this
situation,
but
this
is
strictly
about
trying
to
get
control
of
the
mayors
is
what
it
is.
E
There's
been
a
long
running
issues
with
the
metro
council
and
the
mayor's
office
whomever
may
be
in
there.
Now
we
have
a
system
that
works,
okay
and
and
their
republicans
get
elected.
Just
like
democrats
do
as
well
too,
but
this
thing
right
now
talking
about
the
mayor's
race.
This
is
one
thing
I'm
talking
about,
because
the
bottom
line
is
this
is
that
we
know
who's
going
to
be
running,
won't
mention
those
names.
You
know
those
names
are
out
there
and
what
it
does.
It
improves
the
odds.
E
E
You
know
this
is
what
this
is
and
it's
a
shame
that
it
has
to
come
to
frankfort
down
here
to
change
this,
because
let's
have
the
citizen
input
if
they
want
to
do
it
and
then
let
the
citizens
make
that
decision,
but
we
shouldn't
make
that
decision
in
my
personal
opinion
in
that
situation,
so
it's
unfortunate.
There
are
a
lot
of
loopholes
in
this
bill
which
I'm
not
going
to
get
into.
I
just
want
to
talk
about
this
briefly,
gentlemen.
I
respect
everybody
at
that
table.
You
know,
but
it's
just.
E
Let's
call
it
what
it
is
and
it's
unfortunate,
because
no
one
has
any
guarantee
in
life,
and
it's
almost
like
we're
trying
to
skew
what
we
do
here
and
when
you
talk
about
you
talk
to
people.
No
one
called
me
and
said:
hey.
Would
you
like
to
be
a
part
of
this
committee?
We're
going
to
do
this
bill,
I'm
just
a
legislator.
You
know
I
heard
this
from
a
fellow
legislator
sitting
right
down
there
yesterday.
Nobody
called
me
so
I'll
use
that
same
phrase.
Nobody
talked
to
me
about
it's
also.
E
If
you
want
to
try
to
move
things
forward,
you
want
to
be
positive
and
productive
in
a
community.
Then
you
should
be
inclusive
of
all
people
involved.
That's
what
you
should
do
in
my
personal
opinion,
but
once
again
I've
said
it
it's
no
secret.
You
know
I
don't
know
why
we
bring
things
from
louisville
down
to
frankfurt,
to
try
to
fix
what
we
consider
problems
in
there,
but
instead
of
us
collectively
getting
together
and
one
of
my
favorite
phrases.
E
We're
like
a
spoke,
you
know
we're
east
west,
north
south
in
the
city
of
louisville,
and
if
we
all
worked
collectively
together
in
collaboration,
then
we
get
some
things
done.
This
is
not
a
good
bill.
In
my
personal
opinion,
I
won't
be
supporting
it
and
if
it's
something
you
want
to
try
to
change
in
the
future,
what
I
would
suggest
is
that
you
be
inclusive
everyone.
That's
in
this,
bring
all
folks
to
the
table
and
let's
try
to
make
decisions
as
we
move
forward.
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
may
I
say.
S
Something,
mr
chairman,
I
wanted
to
address
mr
koenig.
I
know
he
had
said
something.
The
reason
why
I
use
the
the
language
suspicious
was
for
the
very
reason
that
I
you
know
I
opened
up
my
remarks
with.
I
know
that
the
nonpartisan
male
race
is
not
anything
new
but,
as
I
said
in
the
in
the
remarks,
it
is
something
different.
I
believe
that
one
of
our
city
council
folks
called
it
an
experiment,
there's
not
a
lot
of
non-partisan
mayors
and
partisan
city
councils.
S
O
I
want
to
remind
folks
this
is
way
before
our
time,
but
this
general
assembly
created
67c
and
created
the
merge
government
to
function,
as
is,
and
at
that
time
it
was
flawed
in
its
process,
because
if
you
keenly
remember
that
there
is
that
it
was
going
down
the
pipe
that
this
is
going
to
be
non-partisan
on
both
mayor
as
well
as
a
council,
this
will
be
nonpartisan,
but
at
the
last
moment
it
would
shift
it
to
be
partisan
races,
which
I
wish.
O
That
was
still
the
case,
that
both
levels
of
government
look
both
levels,
elected
officials,
the
mayor
and
the
council-
should
be
nonpartisan.
I've
always
believed
that,
and
I
always
try
to
try
to
push
for
that.
I
think
down
the
road.
We
need
to
go
down
down
that
path
so
when
it
comes
to
let
the
citizens,
but
the
general
assembly,
has
a
power
to
do
and
to
frame
things
to
help
louisville
become
in
a
better
position
as
as
we
are
now
as
far
you
know.
As
far
as
the
the.
O
As
far
as
where
we
need
to
go
and
what
we're
trying
to
do
this
partisan
race,
it's
not
partisan
we're
trying
to
get
a
better
opportunity
for
everybody
to
participate,
and
I
think
the
comment
that
the
likelihood
of
having
two
democrats
to
be
run
against
each
other
in
the
general
election.
I
think
it's
a
high
probability.
O
So
when
it
comes
to
you
know,
when
it
comes
to
trying
to
put
things
forward,
I
even
try
to
push-
and
I
talked
with
the
sponsor
about
having
a
separate
bill
that
would
create
an
inspected
general
as
a
nonpartisan
elected
position
to
do
this.
O
But
given
the
process
we're
going
through
that
we're
going
through
that
process-
and
so
I
backed
off-
but
I
still
think
it's
probably
worthy
to
go-
that
down
that
process
to
have
a
conversation
to
have
an
elected
official
nonpartisan
outside
of
these
two
groups,
because
I'm
telling
you
I
have
seen
it
being
a
metro
council
member
there
is.
There
is
dynamics
that
that
some
people
understand
that
goes
on
between
the
metro
council
to
the
county,
attorney's
office
and
with
the
on
the
mayor's
office.
O
And
it's
got
to
it's
got
to
be
resolved
to
give
more
flexibility
in
terms
of
a
balanced
government,
so
I
mean
obviously
I'll
be
supporting
this
bill
because
I
think
it's
a
step
forward
in
a
better
direction
to
help
improve
louisville
get
louis
in
a
better
position,
because
there's
a
lot
of
things
that
going
on
with
louisville,
and
I
apologize
for
my
members
outside
of
louisville
to
go
through
this
process.
I
know
you
all
have,
I
guess
a
view
of
louisville,
but
we
need
to.
We
need.
O
We
need,
as
hell
as
much
help
as
possible
from
our
from
our
colleagues
out
in
the
state,
to
help
louisville
becoming
a
better
stronger
position.
The
more
we
are
now.
A
I
thought
I
heard
you
we
do
have
one
more
question.
Representative
brown,
I
think,
has
a
question
on
the
zoom
link.
Go
ahead,
representative
brown.
T
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
I,
as
I
look
at
this,
I
I
don't
see
the
correlation.
Well,
the
three
things
reverend
finley.
Thank
you
for
the
good
job
that
you
did
in
explaining
and
and
your
comments.
You
took
away
most
of
the
things
that
I
wanted
to
say
and
ask
about
I'm
a
former
lexington
affair.
T
Urban
county
government
council
member
and
in
1972
and
starting
in
1974
lexington
became
the
first
merged
government
in
the
commonwealth
of
kentucky,
and
it
was
decided
then
that
that
it
would
be
the
mayor
would
be
nonpartisan
and
the
council
would
be
nonpartisan
and
that
has
worked
for
us.
I
I
don't
understand
and
don't
see
the
reason
for
separating
the
mayor
out
and
making
him
nonpartisan
and
the
council
members
partisan.
I
just
don't
understand
that.
T
The
the
second
thing
is,
it
seems
like
there's
a
problem
and
there's
a
concern
about
the
citizens,
review
board
and
the
subpoena
power,
and-
and
I
think
that
the
incidents
of
of
a
year
ago,
with
brianna
taylor
and
that
have
led
us
to
this
point-
call
for
there
to
be
transparency
and
oversight
about
police
departments
all
across
the
state
and
the
the
third
thing
that
that
comes
to
me
is
that
I
think
that
that
frankfurt,
the
commonwealth
of
kentucky,
is
being
heavy-handed
in
in
its
approach
to
louisville
metro
government,
in
that
the
citizens
voted
to
make
it
partisan
the
the
mayor
and
the
council
to
be
partisan.
T
I
think
it
would
be
presumptuous
of
us
and
heavy-handed
of
us
as
a
as
a
body
to
to
step
in
and
say
that
it
is
our.
It
is
our
responsibility.
It
is
what
we
want
to
do
as
a
general
assembly
to
to
put
on
the
citizens
of
jefferson
county
to
say
that.
Well,
the
mayor
should
be
non-partisan
and
the
council
remain
partisan.
I
don't
understand
it
and
I'm
going
to
be
voting
no
on
this
bill.
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
J
I've
been
here
five
years
and
it
seems
like
my
job
has
been
to
micromanage
louisville,
when
I'm
from
eastern
kentucky,
where
I
got
a
doll
obesity,
I
got
youth
obesity.
I
got
heart
disease
problems,
I
got
adult
smoking,
I
got
18
000
people
out
of
electric
and
I
wish
we
could
solve
all
levels
problems
in
one
day,
but
I
know
we
can't.
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
D
D
E
D
F
G
F
A
M
Thank
you.
As
representative
koenig
said.
Yes,
most
of
the
mayors
or
the
mayors
in
my
district
are
nonpartisan
to
the
best
of
my
knowledge.
That's
not
because
it
was
mandated
by
frankfurt,
how
we
run
our
city
elections.
I
think
the
people
in
my
district
would
take
great
offense
if
we
were
told
that
our
mayor
had
to
be
nonpartisan
and
our
council
had
to
be
partisan.
M
We'd,
be
very
confused
by
that
since
representative
miller
mentioned
meeting
with
the
aclu,
and
we
have
this
handout
here
from
the
aclu
and
I've
kind
of
been
struggling
for
the
words
I
wanted
to
use
to
define
how
I
really
feel
about
this
bill,
reverend
finley-
I
I
too,
am
very
suspicious.
I
think
that
is
the
right
word,
but
the
aclu
here
said
because
there
are
good
parts
of
this
bill,
but
it's
two
bills
smashed
together
that
have
no
business
being
together
and
their
statement
was.
M
A
A
G
T
A
A
Next
wednesday,
we
will
have
the
joint
committee
meeting
with
the
senate
state
and
local
committee
on
the
cdbg
hearing,
it'll
be
in
room
131
and
then
we'll
leave
that
meeting
and
come
into
this
room
to
have
our
regularly
scheduled
meeting.
If
we
have
business
to
go
before
us
saying
no
other
business.
This
meeting
is
adjourned.