Steve Kay

Maxwell bike lane extension gets axed

3 comments
August 23, 2011
By

The Maxwell bike lane that was apparently expanded by accident across Woodland to Kentucky Ave. in Lexington’s “Woodland Triangle” is getting cut back to its original size.

After some business owners and landlords complained last week about the loss of parking spots, supporters of the bike lane gathered signatures from tenants — resident and commercial — on the block to request the bike lane remain.

This created competing petitions, one from building owners (including Ramsey’s and the Black Swan) and one from non-owners, and a bit of a logistical hang-up.

If the Council did nothing today, the mistaken bike stripe would be removed and 8 parking spots would be replaced. But was the city now required to honor the petition in support of and requesting the bike lane?

There was a lot of Council sentiment from the usual suspects speaking up for the land owners, with Doug Martin complaining about the “sacrifice” the complaining businesses were experiencing. Ed Lane said he “didn’t think it was fair” to turn a half-block of parking into a bike lane.

Representing the land owners was Nick Nicholson of Stoll Keenon and Ogden, who stated SKO’s address as if it mattered, and he made an impassioned plea on their behalf, saying the new petition was “not representative of the people.”

The Council listened to all this then debated what to do, including seeking clearer guidelines for future such petitions from the parking authority, and sorting the interests of landlords, business owners, home owners and tenants (with the prevailing sentiment seeming to fall on behalf of landlords).

Council-at-Large member Steve Kay questioned whether now that the city had an apparently valid petition before it, was the bike lane itself was now valid.

No one — especially Ed Lane — liked that idea very much but as a point of order, Kay was quite clear: If the petition was in fact valid and the city was going to spend the money replacing the bike lane with the old parking spots, were they then going to be forced to again erase the parking spots and put the bike lane back in.

Lane and Julian Beard both complained about the role of petitions in governance, with Beard insisting that “Petitions are for guidance. We make the law!”

The full council ended up voting — with only two ‘nays,’ Kay and Diane Lawless — to get rid of the bike lane. So… your dreams of a safe ride to the park (or even continuing down High Street) come to a screeching halt at the already dangerous for cars, let alone bicycles, intersection of Maxwell, High and Kentucky.

My favorite part of the whole discussion came at the end, just after the vote, when Doug Martin got up abruptly and strode over to Kevin Stinnett. As Vice Mayor Gorton wrapped up the one topic to move on to the next, Martin could be seen gesturing emphatically and speaking in a hush to Stinnett. Martin then stalked out of the room and Stinnett’s face, which remained quite still the entire time, then — after just a pause — melted into what appeared to be a miffed smile.

So that was either a Martin joke or a classic Clown attack.

Commerce Lexington falling on hard times? (Not if Doug Martin has anything to F-ing say about it)

no comments
April 11, 2011
By

Last Thursday the Herald-Leader reported on the new draft report from the cut-and-paste consultants at Angelou Economics.

In their disgraced report, one of Angelou’s few original recommendations was to expand the reach and power of Commerce Lexington. After ProgressLex outed Angelou’s bunk report and Angelou and Commerce Lexington came under increased scrutiny, Angelou went back and added into this new draft some language reccomending that the Mayor of Lexington be in charge of the city’s economics. (A radical thought.)

Bob Quick, head of Commerce Lexington, praised the new report as “aggressive” and “forward-looking.” And then he implied that to carry the report out, the city would have to give Commerce Lexington more money.

And there was also this:

AngelouEconomics also provided a draft assessment of Commerce Lexington’s performance compared with peer cities.

Commerce Lexington’s economic development budget of $1.2 million is below the median $1.7 million of a benchmark group that includes Asheville, N.C.; Louisville; Northern Kentucky; Austin, Texas; and Colorado Springs, Colo.

According to Angelou Economics, “Commerce Lexington’s 41 percent public funding is the third-highest of the benchmarked regions,” but the number of private investors is the second-lowest, at 125.

Hmm… 41% public funding.

With the city facing a $25 Million budget shortfall, Mayor Gray — who on Tuesday will deliver his budget address — is likely to demand greater accountability from outside agencies working with LFUCG and funded by LFUCG.

So yesterday, the Herald Leader took a closer look at Commerce Lexington’s relationship with the city:

The role of Commerce Lexington — which has received $2.6 million in taxpayer money for economic development in the last five years — is about to change.

In recent years, the local chamber of commerce organization has guided local economic development efforts as the city took a largely hands-off approach. Commerce Lexington, which says its role is to market Lexington to businesses, provides limited public information about what it does with that city money.

The leaders of Commerce Lexington have good reason to resist calls for transparency from the Herald-Leader given the paper’s recent history of exposing wasteful spending at the Airport, the League of Cities and other publicly funded organizations… so when the paper (Ms. Janet Patton leading the charge) tried to dig deeper into Commerce Lexington’s finances… well:

It is less than clear, from documents recently obtained by the Herald-Leader, exactly what the city gets for its Commerce Lexington investment, which grew from $50,000 a few years ago to more than 10 times that under former Mayor Jim Newberry.

Commerce Lexington maintains that because less than 25 percent of its overall budget comes from public money, it is not subject to open-records laws. The group declined to make additional documents public or to disclose how thousands of dollars in travel money is spent.

As we discussed here last month, Commerce Lexington’s most recent available IRS 990 Form provides some insight into the group’s finances and a stroll through their website paints a nice picture of their private sector funders (you know, local small businesses like Wal-Mart and JP Morgan Chase).

This publicly funded private group of big businesses parading as protectors of small business works actively to lobby government (local, state and federal) to dismantle collective bargaining and other union protections, to break down federal regulations on the coal industry, and to stifle any progress toward real health care reform.

So now Commerce Lexington is unhappy because Mayor Gray is likely to cut the taxpayer funding they are so dependent upon. Gray is likely to backseat Commerce Lexington’s role in the city’s economy… which is huge since under Mayor Newberry, the role of economic development was almost entirely outsourced from city government to Commerce Lexington.

Let’s look back at Mayor Newberry’s innaugural budget. Upon being elected (perhaps as a thank you to his good ol’ boy network), Newberry vastly expanded the role of Commerce Lexington in city planning:

I want to emphasize a few steps designed to enhance our economic development efforts:

Commerce Lexington

First, LFUCG has entered into a services agreement with Commerce Lexington in the amount of $661,500 – a 631% increase over last year’s adopted budget. Through this agreement, we will fund most of our business recruiting efforts. 

Or, put another way:

It’s not clear how much that funding will be slashed under Gray or what steps, exactly, he will take, aside from telling the paper that he expects to be much more involved in the economic decision making of the city than, say, the previous laissez faire Mayor (aka, he who excused the airport and KLC funding frauds).

What is clear is that some of the most powerful members of the City Council are taking a vocal stand against the usual Commerce Lexington blank check — including Vice Mayor Gorton, At-Large Kay and the one guy you really don’t want on your ass, the Council Bulldog Mr. Julian Beard.

Not all council members are upset… cue up an F-Bomb of surprise because…

But council member Doug Martin said reducing economic development spending is not the answer.

“I’m a supporter of the public-private partnership,” Martin said. “I think it’s not whether we need to cut it; it’s whether we need to quadruple it.”

No F-ing Way! Doug Martin wants to give them more F-ing money! Get the F out of here!

No… seriously, get the F out of here and go read Ms. Patton’s full Sunday report on Commerce Lexington’s dire straits if you haven’t already. Nothing will tear at your heartstrings this morning more than yet another protector of big business interests whining and complaining about losing taxpayer dollars.

Hmm… Dire Straits. Money for nothing. That ain’t working.

[You can explore some of Angelou's findings, reports and data here.]

Jim Gray sworn in as Lexington’s new mayor

no comments
January 2, 2011
By

It was a lovely ceremony. Here’s the full speech and the Herald Leader’s write up. I’ll throw up the video once somebody puts it on the internet tubes.

Congrats to Jim, Vice Mayor Linda Gorton, Steve Kay, Chris Ford and Bill Farmer Jr. on their new jobs.

Lexington’s city government is looking… pretty good

no comments
November 4, 2010
By

Lexington not only has a wonderful new mayor, but check out how good the new council looks.

If things went the wrong way Tuesday night, Lexington could have had 4 years of Newberry as mayor and Chuck Ellinger as vice mayor. *shudder*

Instead, we have Jim Gray as mayor and Linda Gorton as vice mayor (who should be great). Also, Bill Farmer Jr. replaces Cheryl Feigel in the 5th. Farmer is a bit of a wild card, but I’m pretty confident that he’ll be an improvement. Meanwhile KC Crosbie held onto her seat easily, and from all indications Chris Ford should be good in his first term in the 1st (though he’s got big shoes to fill following Andrea James). And Steve Kay on the council helps fill the void of Gray.

This means that all of a sudden the 4-person cabal of Ed Lane, Jay McChord, Kevin Stinnett and Doug Martin is looking mighty, mighty small and insignificant. Look forward to lots of impotent rage from these folks over the next 2 years, while Diane Lawless & Co. sit back and chuckle at their political misfortune.

The Southside Screamer may have won, but at least we’ll have lots of temper tantrums and pouting to look forward to…

…and that LFUCG city council that’s looking pretttty prettty pretty good.

Don Pratt Endorses Himself in the Herald-Leader

no comments
October 27, 2010
By

When the Herald-Leader endorses one candidate over others, the un-endorsed candidates are given space to respond. In the LFUCG Council-at-Large race, they endorsed Steve Kay and Linda Gorton and now Don Pratt has struck back!

On what he stands for:

For more business as usual, vote for any of four candidates: they are interchangeable. If you want change, vote for me and Linda Gorton.

While Lexington is broke, other candidates talk about pet projects, ways to spend more money that Lexington doesn’t have. I advocate ideas that might actually bring in tax revenue, such as legalization of medical marijuana and allowing farmers to grow hemp. Others are silent.

On what he represents:

The Herald-Leader endorses people who play its game, who, for show, join neighborhood associations, attend committee meetings, and bow down to the institutional liberalism that has dominated local government for three decades. I will make changes, unlike those who sat idly by while Kentucky American unfairly raised our water rates.

I don’t conform. I live frugally. I fill my living room with luggage for foster and adoptive kids.

The Herald-Leader will never endorse this non-conformity, which amounts to political independence, an attribute lacking in the other candidates.

Can Don Pratt squeeze out a victory on Tuesday? It’ll be fun to watch… and in the meantime, keep in mind that you will be voting for THREE CANDIDATES in the race, so… choose wisely.

Mayoral Debate: Jim v. Jim at Community Action Council

no comments
October 27, 2010
By

Jim Gray and Jim Newberry met Tuesday night at Transylvania University for a debate sponsored by the Community Action Council, the Urban League and God’s Pantry — all excellent and dedicated community organizations.

The topic: To address the 17% of Lexington’s citizens who live below the poverty line.
The event was moderated admirably by Rev. Nancy Jo Kemper of the Kentucky Council of Churches. Rev. Kemper brilliantly ended the debate by telling both men that there would be no final thoughts — brilliant because the candidates’ final thoughts are so often memorized speeches written by someone else. This night was purely about how they answered the questions.
The questions went Left to Right… with Jim Gray seated on the Left and Jim Newberry on the Right. The order of questions was decided by a coin toss and when Kemper asked Gray to call it, the Vice Mayor offered: “I never win these.” He called Heads and once again, Gray had lost the coin toss. “It’s only going to happen up til’ November 2nd,” Gray said in a moment that set a tone for the evening — the crowd laughed, Newberry looked immovably stone-faced and the scene was set.
The first question was about rate increases and whether the city had the power to negotiate them. Gray said we should have that power, Newberry said we already do (which begged the question why he hasn’t used it) and Newberry went on, as he has done the entire race, to attempt to belittle Gray just as he’s been known to lecture and hector people throughout City Hall and across the city these past three years.
But Gray would not be bullied and did not back down. He pointed out that Lexington has not actively engaged in the process, has not intervened with the water and electric companies. “This Mayor has done very little,” Gray said, “and only when there was opposition…. The Mayor sat on the side of the table with the water company, and I sat on the side with the citizens.”
Newberry, looking annoyed at having to answer questions or listen to such histories, used his usual talking point that Gray was “fundamentally wrong.” (Though obviously the water company just handed us a massive rate increase, so… fundamentally…)
Next up, access to affordable child care!
Gray said that acknowledged that funding for programs was flat and called it symptomatic of the larger economic downturn. “What we can do is to be aggressive, become better advocates, where we can find funding, we need to.”
Newberry called access to child care “vitally important.” Then he said it was “imperative that both parents are working.”
Rev. Kemper pointed out that the average cost of child care in Lexington is $17,000 a year. For an infant. I was left wondering how Newberry could believe it was “imperitive that both parents are working” when he was discussing people — very often single mothers! – living under the poverty line and raising kids — very often by themselves… but, it was he did say it was “imperative” so who am I to question?
Question #3: The Affordable Housing Trust Fund! Rev. Kemper noted that a tax increase would help but obviously there wasn’t much support for that, especially given the economy, so, how about from the recycling revenue?
Newberry didn’t like that. We have to make investments in recycling facilities, he said, before we can start spending that money. Many groups have tried to get that money. So… no dice there and… that was his answer.
Gray went straight to South Limestone — to which Newberry did something other than glower at his hands and the microphone and instead mockingly laughed. But Gray had a point. The project was estimated at $5 million and ballooned to $16 million. “We have capital investments,” he said, “that we make regularly. We must examine the costs and the benefits.” It has been demonstrated that action is needed and we must bring the community into this discussion. “We should not have to move out of our neighborhoods to find affordable housing.”
At this point Newberry went totally off-topic and started railing on South Limestone and Gray’s comment. “His premise is false,” the Mayor said, “It’s borderline preposterous to cite.”

Again, Gray would not be bullied. He said the $5 to $16 million increase was preposterous. “As a trial lawyer, I understand your inability to understand this.” Gray reminded the Mayor that he runs Gray Construction, he’s in this businesses and called the cost “woefully wasteful.”
Now — mind you — there’s a disconnect here. Mayor Newberry is trying to talk up a Herald Leader fact check about a campaign ad. Vice Mayor Gray is talking about the over all cost of the project… not the purpose of the project or the end result of it. Newberry tried to paint Gray as opposed to Limestone revitalization. Gray was simply saying the execution of the revitalization could have been smoother, smarter, streamlined. Anyway, at this point Newberry had moved on to vagueries about revenue streams and I’ll return to that in just a bit.
I should mention here that there was a giant Twitter screen hanging above the stage and audience members could “tweet” responses and questions and every once in a while those were read. Obviously if you have Twitter you read all of this as it was happening so I won’t recount all of them, but…
Question #4 came from Council-At-Large Candidate Steve Kay, who appeared to be the only other candidate in the building (unless I missed Don Pratt?), and since Steve Kay’s spent a good deal of his professional life working with issues like this, he tweeted his question, which was a good and obvious one given the preceding conversation: What are the possible funding streams?
Newberry fielded it first — the General Fund, a Matching Fund would reflect a commitment… and then he veered right off the tracks and tried to return to South Limestone to the dismay of anyone who wanted to hear the sitting Mayor explain what he’s been doing for the past three years at which point Rev. Kemper stepped in and told them to stop and answer the questions.
“You are the preacher so we will listen to you attentively,” Gray said… again to appreciative laughs.

And then, Jim Gray answered the question. Obviously there’s great community interest in this issue and we must address it. In a $500 million budget, we should be looking carefully at ways to find savings. One half of one percent is half a million dollars. “Business,” Gray pointed out sagely, “is made on percentages.”

At this point Rev. Kemper read a tweet which suggested we might find some extra revenue in taxing political ads. Laughter was shared by all, even Newberry happened to smile. Alas, I don’t know who tweeted that but it’s an awesome, awesome, awesome idea.
Question #5: The importance of pre-K education, affordable education as a value in community!

If only Aqua Buddha would visit this race. But no, seriously, pre-K is important, so, what did they say?
Gray: Our funding priorities on the local level is limited to very basic services. Education is not in local funding. “The Mayor and I both agree and recognize that this leadership role provides us an opportunity to use the bully pulpit.” He talked about the importance of raising awareness across the community of all the benefits in funding and supporting affordable education.
Newberry: For the most part, this was Newberry’s best answer of the evening. In particular, because it had actual human and personal emotion. He talked about his wife and his kids and told the story of raising them and obviously I’m not going to do it justice in the re-telling, but if there’s someway Newberry wins the election on Tuesday, this is the side of him Lexington has been waiting three years to see and so, so infrequently does. His gist: Many people are not aware of the services and we have to make them aware… so, in essence it was the same as Gray’s but in content it was as though he’d, for a moment, taken a page out of Gray’s book of personability.
Next Question: Lexington’s poverty rate in 2000 was 12.9%, now it’s 17.6%. What might you do to address this?

Gray was first again, and began by stressing the importance of first acknowledging the problem. So many of us, he said, in Lexington talk only about what a great place it is and too often we’re complacent. “I’ve spent my life building places that build things, manufacturing plants, and we must do better.” He talked about pushing Commerce Lexington to create a new plan that wasn’t just geared at business interests but “that focuses on working people’s needs.” Gray told the story of meeting a man at a Duncan Park event just weeks ago who’d been laid off from the GE lamp plant… and again, Gray showed the compassion and motivation that has marked his leadership style.

Newberry’s personality blast in the last question had been used up apparently and he began as he usually does by just listing things… but in his list, one might notice a stark difference between he and Gray. “There are a number of barriers,” he began, and then listed them. Some people haven’t achieved the education they need. Others have physical and mental health issues. Some are incapable of increasing their lot because they don’t know how to access the system. “We need to address this holistically.” If they could be functional, if they need medication, they could hold down jobs, so we need to find ways to get them medication.

If you’ll notice, Gray talked about employing people and Newberry talked about the people living below the poverty line as if they were all uneducated or sick. For a Mayor who had was unfortunate enough to preside over the near collapse of our economy, you might expect a focus on the ballooning number of capable but unemployed workers.

Rev. Kemper followed up, pointing out that indeed Gray was talking about blue collar workers and Newberry was address access to services. “We read a lot about acquiring high tech jobs,” she said, “but a large part of the population can’t do them.” How can the city more aggressively market itself to businesses suited to these people’s needs?

Newberry immediately went to Horses, Health Care and High-Tech. He pointed out, quite rightly though somewhat poorly phrased, that each sector employs people “up and down the economic food chain.” (Which, if you think about it, could either be a Marxist description or a Randian one.)

Gray talked about IBM, about Toyota, both coming here and giving good jobs. Newberry had ended his response by talking about 700 call center jobs. “We can’t accept or celebrate $10 an hour jobs with no benefits.” Gray went on, “I can’t wave a wand and get rid of the recession, but now is the time we can best challenge the status quo.” He talked talked about three of his campaign workers who have graduate degrees but who can’t find jobs. He said now was the time to think differently about how we approach the question (and his Commerce Lexington idea above would be a good start, I’d say).

The Final Question of the Evening: Imagine it’s October 26th, 2014… what progress has your administration made?

Again, I was impressed with Kemper. Not because the question was so outlandish but because it provoked such different responses in the two candidates, responses that speak exactly to who they are.

Newberry talked about the future and what his great VISION for it consisted of… by talking only about the past. “We showed up in 2007 and LFUCG was a virtual train wreck.” He talked about deep seeded problems, he talked about preparing for the WEG, he talked about bringing in 3000 jobs (even though the city’s lost 4,600) on and on, and finally he talked about the future: expand the economy, solve traffic problems.

Gray, on the other hand, talked about the future. He talked about Charles Logan again, the laid-off worker from the GE lamp plant. “I hope I can run into Charles again in four years,” Gray said, “and Charles will say he feels better about things, that he will say there are job opportunities for him and people in his neighborhood, that there’s a ray of hope that he can’t see right now.” He talked about working with our senior citizens and having the community reach out to them, to welcome and involve them. He said the key challenges facing his administration would be rooting out wasteful spending and creating job opportunities. You could almost taste the fresh air.

And that was it. It was all over but the hobnobbing, and, well, not my style, so I skipped that part.

As an overall impression though, and one final thought, I’ve heard many people in the media and around town talk about how Gray speaks too often in pretty visions, that his style isn’t grounded in nitty gritty detail. I didn’t think that was true tonight and I could go through all the reasons for that… but I won’t because what really struck me is that it is Jim Newberry who has his head in the clouds, who can’t speak to specifics, who can’t cite concrete accomplishments.

And maybe he can, but he sure did not on this evening. For someone who has been Mayor of this town for almost four years, Jim Newberry lacked specifics. He said things like “we need to look at all kinds of revenue streams” but he could have just talked about what he’s done… the revenue streams he’s uncovered, the ways he’s already addressed these problems. He has the entire city government at his fingertips and four years of experience, but he has no solid, grounded answers.

People talk about Gray like he shouldn’t paint a picture of Lexington. But it was Jim Newberry who stated, “We need to continue to make Lexington one of the finest places in the country for early childhood education.”

I mean, no one’s going to disagree with that. But what does it mean? What has he done? Where does the word “continue” come from? Who is measuring that scale? Where is Lexington succeeding, where is it failing in this rubric?

And Newberry’s responses were littered with that kind of ephemeral what-are-you-talking-about all night long.

[Oh... and also, Steve Kay has just announced the endorsements of Pam Miller and Debra Hensley...]



Newberry may be losing polls and his cool, but he still has a bogus poll to tout

no comments
October 25, 2010
By

Shortly before the devastating Herald Leader/WKYT poll was released Thursday afternoon, Jim Newberry’s Bromanager sent out an email touting the wonderful news of a “poll” from the Lexington-Bluegrass Area Realtors showing him “up” 16 points. OMG rad!

Of course, this looked a little odd following the poll from the respected Mason-Dixon showing Gray up 4 points. In fact, one almost might think that max-out Newberry donor and WKYT general manager leaked the word of how awful their poll was going to be beforehand, so Newberry could tout the LBAR “poll” to spin the bad news.

But maybe that LBAR poll was legit?

Well, I got a hold of the numbers, so lets take a look at that, shall we?

Here’s their methodology:

Each of the two surveys had sample sizes of 300 respondents and was conducted on October 10-12, 2010 by SGS.

300 people? Oh boy, this is going to be fun.

How about their results? They polled Republican/Democrat support for state legislature candidates, as well as the US Senate race. Despite the poll having a 58/36 party advantage for the Democrats, they claimed that the residents of Fayette County (second most liberal city in this fair state) want a Republican legislature by a 42-37% margin. Odd…

And despite Mason-Dixon and cn|2 showing Jack Conway up double-digits in Lexington, LBAR found that Rand Paul was… statistically tied with Jack Conway. Tied. Odd…

As for favorable ratings, Jim Newberry’s was a net 16 points better in LBAR’s poll, and Jim Gray’s was 4 points worse. Odd…

In the Council-at-Large race, despite the fact that Chuck Ellinger pulled in only 17% of the vote in 2006, LBAR has him pulling in 41% of the vote, 14% more than the closest competitor, Linda Gorton. And despite LBAR loudly touting longshot fringe candidate George Brown placing in third (nearly doubling his vote from this race in 2006), what LBAR failed to mention is that he actually tied someone else for third, Steve Kay (the difference between the two that only one of them is a business shill). Odd…

So, this was the fine poll that Newberry was touting in an email sent out minutes before the Mason-Dixon poll showed Gray jumping ahead of Newberry by 4 points.

Take whatever meaning from this that you choose. (Newberry, for example, says this means that people love him because he’s never made a mistake and he’s awesome).

One more LBAR “finding” of note from their “poll”: In the 10th district it is Doug Martin 27%, Kevin Williams 15%, with 54% undecided.

Logic tells me two things. One, this means that Doug loses by 8 points.

Secondly, this new ad that Doug Martin is airing during the local newscast just isn’t going to work at all:

Lexington Council-at-Large candidates hitting the YouTube machine

no comments
October 25, 2010
By

Lexington’s local council races don’t have ads that compare with Aqua Buddha as far as entertainment value, but I’ll share some of the early entries that appear on the YouTube Machine.

Here’s possible Council-at-Large front runner Linda Gorton, being as calm and reasonable as usual:

Here’s a Steve Kay ad, which he probably has enough money to put up on the TeeVee. Unfortunately, this one isn’t as trippy as his primary ads:

The only other ad I can find on the YouTube is this one for shameless business shill George Brown. I’m not sure if this is an official video of his campaign, since it has a copyright claim in its info section. Which is funny, because if it is official, it’s breaking about 10 different laws, as I’m sure the owner of the Stevie Wonder and Michael Jackson catalog would agree:

Has anybody in Lexington seen any council race ads running on TV or radio? Please share.

Updated LFUCG races finance numbers

no comments
October 15, 2010
By

All of the LFUCG candidates with races coming up in three weeks have now filed their finance reports with KREF (accept Doug Martin, who was too busy bullying people to get his in promptly). The updated totals for these races are here.

Some numbers of note:

  • To date, Steve Kay has spent more on his at-large race than all other at-large candidates combined. We’ll see if $ can finally translate into a top 3 finish for him this time.
  • Bill Farmer is winning the money game over 5th district incumbent Cheryl Feigel. Farmer, previously a long-time council member in this district, probably has the best chance of any challenger to oust an incumbent in Lexington.
  • If money is any indication, Ford will be taking the 1st District easily.

I’d fill you in on Dougie’s numbers and chances, but again, he’s late and they’re not available.

But I do have footage of the Southside Screamer out on the campaign trail, attempting to “fundraise”, if that’s what you call it:

Linda Gorton lost my vote

no comments
May 18, 2010
By

Lexington Council-at-Large candidate Linda Gorton’s new TV ad says she’s “not a grandstander”.

Lost my vote.

Higgy’s gain, I guess…

Steve Kay for Vice Mayor!

SUPPORT THE YONDER

Archives

Search

Social Networking Crap

Shop at the Barefoot and Progressive Store!

Free Ad Space

Help support B&P! DONATE!

Free Ad Space

Share Barefoot & progressive