"TM: Steve, thank you for joining us.
SA: Thank you, Tom. Thanks for having me.
TM: Let's begin with a huge topic and that's the concept of regionalism. How do you define it?
SA: Sure. I think the way that I would define regionalism is simply working together across political boundaries to make ourselves stronger. And that could be in any number of different ways, but the goal is to increase our economic strength, increase our quality of life, doing things that we can't control by ourselves that we have to work together on. So, regionalism is becoming ever more important because of trends in the world today.
TM: The Central Kentucky region consists of what, 17 counties roughly?
SA: That's one of the things that we're finding through our work is that regions can be defined in different ways, but it's probably a maximum of 17 counties and maybe in some instances on some particular things maybe smaller.
TM: So, there are 17 county jurisdictions and within each one of those county jurisdictions there are various districts?
SA: Exactly.
TM: Each of them has at least some political aspect.
SA: Exactly.
TM: How daunting is that aspect?
SA: If you look at the sheer numbers of separate political entities and if we take the 17-county region or 54 units of local government, if you looked at that number, it would be overwhelming to think how can we ever get everybody to agree on everything. If you turn it around though and you begin to look at the fact that by cooperating together, each one of those units of local government can maximize its efficiency, can improve its services to their local citizens, you begin to think, 'Yeah, this probably could happen.' Because budgets are tight, revenues are tight in Central Kentucky. Even though the economy is rolling along, city and county governments are struggling right now. So when you begin talking and finding ways to improve their ability to provide services and improve infrastructure, you get a better reception.
TM: We've had change in leadership in Lexington recently and one big component of Mayor Newberry's platform was to promote regionalism. What's your sense of the environment out there?
SA: I think that Mayor Newberry's election was a clear signal by the voters of Lexington that they were willing to support a candidate who is able to reach out and go across Fayette County's boundaries on terms of land use, transportation planning, economic development and environmental protection - very positive day. That's one of the things that we've found in a lot of our work is that people are much more receptive to the idea of regionalism than they've ever been before.
TM: When we talk about formalizing a "region" here in Central Kentucky, one of the things that might imply is a plan to share revenues to accomplish improvements in infrastructure, transportation, that sort of thing. Bluegrass Tomorrow has had a study underway to look into that. What are you finding?
SA: We found a couple of very interesting things. One, we began with the premise that working together we can be stronger. When we began to look at the actual numbers though, we discovered that local communities currently do not have enough revenue to share. Most communities in our study area, in fact, are struggling to provide services and infrastructure. That kind of blew our minds, in a sense that we expected that, hey, we're doing pretty well here in Central Kentucky. We've got some strengths and we certainly do have some strengths, but at least in terms of revenue to be shared, there's not enough revenue out there. So, that began to get us thinking - well, we still need to do the improvements to make our region better, make our region stronger, more economically competitive. How can we do that? And that's one of the things that Bluegrass Tomorrow has really looked into is alternative revenue sources for communities that would generate enough revenue that could be shared. So under the current system, not enough to share; under a new system, enough to share and make everybody stronger.
TM: What kinds of alternatives have you discovered?
SA: Well, one of the key things is simply finding ways to increase efficiencies locally by working together regionally, sharing services, finding ways to help each other out and in the process save everybody money, save every taxpayer money - that's one of the key things. We've got, as I said, 54 units of local government out there trying to do exactly the same thing. Is there a way to coordinate and combine better and make everybody more efficient? There also are some alternative revenue sources out there that we're constitutionally prohibited from, at least local communities are constitutionally prohibited from, utilizing. For example, local communities can't vote on a sales tax that could be used for local and regional improvements. So that's one of the things that I think will come out of our research is local communities need more flexibility to match today's economic realities in terms of revenue generation.
TM: There has been discussion of that local option. It's too early to talk about momentum at this stage, but some have said that perhaps by 2009 - a non-election year - it might be conceivable that the state legislature would take it up. What do you think of that?
SA: It certainly could and we've got to start somewhere. We've got to remember that this isn't just a Central Kentucky issue; this is a big issue. These alternative revenue sources are big issues for us with the Louisville metro area, the northern Kentucky metro area, the other big cities in the state - they're finding themselves pressed to provide services and infrastructure on the revenue mechanisms they have in place, which are primarily tied to payroll taxes. Payroll tax revenue leaves communities vulnerable to changes in the global economy. Our state constitution was written in 1891 - really no such thing as a global economy, so we're beginning to see this effort for regions to come together and say, hey, we need to look at finding some alternatives to other sources.
TM: Let's pull our thoughts within the boundaries of Fayette County and talk about some recent developments and what they imply. One of them is the decision to hold firm on the urban services boundary. Of course, what that implies is that we have to figure out, now, how to continue growing our economy in a sensible way within those boundaries.
SA: Exactly. I think that that decision, which was a well thought-out decision that was made after months and months of public input, was a very positive decision, but it should not be read as a no-growth decision. Fayette County is going to grow; it has to grow. We just need to find new models for doing that and fortunately they're all over the place, these new models. Cities around the country are changing the ways that they're growing and have been real successful at it, so we don't have to reinvent the wheel here in Lexington.
TM: When we talk about urban infill and what's going on downtown, it's quite exciting. Change is visible now and we can actually see it happening. Where do you see it going?
SA: In many ways, getting back to the small town that Lexington used to be before the second World War, which was a town with a pretty tight urban fabric. That urban fabric has been destroyed over the last fifty years by the insatiable demand to find parking spaces for our cars, for example, but we're not talking about skyscrapers on every corner by any stretch of the imagination. It's really, in many ways, going back to our smaller town roots.
TM: That insatiable desire for parking places is something of interest to all who have an interest in seeing downtown recover from what you just described. We have quite a bit of "greyfield" space in downtown Lexington and by that, of course, I mean parking lots.
SA: Exactly.
TM: To the casual observer, those spaces seem like prime spots to place buildings and retail and commerce, yet there they sit. Of course those parcels are private property - they belong to somebody. How do we balance those two dynamics?
SA: I think that the market itself will push greater flexibility onto these individual parking lots. I think that the revenue that they generate relative to what they could be generating will catch a lot more people's eyes than they have in the past. We never needed to think about them, because we kept growing out and out and out, but now as we've turned inward I think the market forces will change that.
With that said, the city also has a role. If the city is going to grow in the way that the planning commission has in a sense decided that we should, the city government has a role, too, in making sure that we utilize every piece of property as efficiently as we can in the urban service boundary. And for the most part, surface parking is one of the least efficient ways to use property.
TM: One of the interesting items learned from Commerce Lexington's annual leadership trip to Oklahoma City last year was how they regard their central core, how that part of the city is everybody's space. Do you sense that downtown Lexington is viewed that way by people who live in neighborhoods north, south, east and west around our city?
SA: I think we could strengthen it. The idea that downtown is everybody's neighborhood was certainly true in the early part of the 20th century. I think we've gotten away from that now. We've seen commercial developments on the south side at Fayette Mall for example, Hamburg Place on the east side, that have begun to create centers that people identify with as, hey, that's my neighborhood, I live in Beaumont or I live at Hamburg. There's nothing wrong with that, but I think that downtown needs to strengthen its role as everybody's neighborhood. It's good; it's competition and I think competition will make downtown stronger.
TM: What things are going on right now that give you hope that we really are beginning to turn the corner on some of these issues?
SA: I think the lead is that the planning commission voted not to expand the urban service boundary. That said basically to the community, 'We've got to find a way to make a new city,' and I think that's a great thing. I think Mayor Newberry has certainly been very positive and proactive. Vice Mayor Jim Gray has certainly been supportive of a lot of these ideas. The fact that we have projects underway, I think, is a great example of the success of the idea of turning downtown around, so between the people and the projects, there is that sense that we're on a different track now.
TM: You mentioned earlier that you've actually been out there, field tripping if you will, going around the country and this has been going on for some years. You and, I think, Phil Holoubek, a downtown developer and perhaps Vice Mayor Jim Gray on a few of them?
SA: Yes. Jim Gray has gone with us.
TM: And you folks have gone out and actually spent some time in these other communities that are a little bit ahead of us in this area and looked at what they're doing, gone searching for ideas.
SA: Exactly. The best environment to learn is actually getting out and seeing what somebody else is doing. The communities are willing to share their successes. Nobody's doing everything perfectly, but we can learn the bits and pieces that we can apply here.
For example, Greenville, S.C. and Old Milltown needed to reinvent itself. One of the things that they did was to blow up a four-lane freeway that ran through their downtown and replace it with a pedestrian park. Pretty radical idea in a conservative southern city to say parks are as important as freeways - and in this case, more important. We've also talked a lot about, for example, Boulder, Colo., being a good role model. A university city and a lot of the energy that the university brings to a community - how can we tap into that? I like to say that going to Boulder is like going to Lexington in 20 years; all we're doing is time traveling. I think Boulder has been very successful at capturing the imagination of the folks who live there, capturing the imagination of folks who want to live there. So, I think that we can step it up a notch by learning from what these other cities are doing.
TM: I remember the downtown Lexington of the fifties and early sixties and it had a very tangible character. Now, fast forwarding to 2007, it's truly exciting to see this metamorphosis going on, a new identity is emerging. Think ahead two or three years from today - what do you see happening here?
SA: The trend for downtown living is going to be, I think, steady. The city has a stronger role to play than they have in the past in terms of making sure that the people who move downtown have the same quality of life or same amenities as people who may want to live in the suburbs. So, for example, if you live downtown, are there enough parks to walk your dog in? Are the streets clean? Are the sidewalks physically safe so you don't trip over them while you're walking around in the evening? There's a whole lot of basics that I think the city has a role to improve on and I think they will. And as we look a little bit farther down the road, I think we end up seeing a city that's alive 24 hours a day, there's people out doing things, it's safe, it's exciting, there's a lot of sidewalk activity. It's really one of the places that people are going to want to come and visit. When they go to see the horse farms, they're also going to want to come to downtown Lexington and I think that will only keep reinforcing the success that we're going to see.
TM: And how important is public participation in all of this process?
SA: It's the 21st century and public participation is absolutely the bedrock of doing this and a lot of times in Lexington, we get a little complacent. Things are rolling along on one track and we're on a different track now. And so I think it really is vital that our citizens stay in tune and stay involved, because it's going to affect everybody, and as long as they've got their say in it, I think it will make it positive for everybody.
TM: Steve, thank you very much for joining us.
SA: Thank you, Tom.
"