# General Government and Planning Committee - October 17, 2023 > Auto-transcribed civic record · October 17, 2023 - **Permalink**: https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/meeting/5934 - **Source video**: https://lfucg.granicus.com/player/clip/5934?view_id=14&redirect=true - **Date**: 2023-10-17 - **Last revised**: October 17, 2023 - **Length**: 15,725 words - **Speakers**: Chair > ⚠️ **Auto-generated content.** Audio from the official Granicus video was auto-transcribed with OpenAI's open-source Whisper large-v3-turbo model, run locally by The Lexington Times. Structured facts were extracted with GPT-4o; the narrative summary was written by Anthropic Claude. Verbatim wording may contain errors. See [methodology](https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/about/methodology) or [report a correction](mailto:editor@lexingtonky.news). --- ## Meeting Overview The General Government & Planning Committee convened on October 17, 2023, at 1:01 PM with K. Plomin presiding as the meeting officer. The committee addressed four agenda items during the session, with three items presented for informational purposes and one item deferred for future consideration. The meeting included presentations on the Urban Growth Management Plan Update, a Comparison of Employee Pay by Race/Ethnicity and Gender, and a Diversity and Inclusion Workshop Update, while the PDR Annual Update was postponed. One formal vote was taken during the proceedings, and no public comments were heard at this meeting. ## Attendance The following members were present at the October 17, 2023 meeting: • K. Plomin • D. Wu • J. Brown • C. Ellinger • S. Lynch • H. LeGris • L. Sheehan • W. Baxter • J. Reynolds • P. Worley (arrived late) No members were recorded as absent from the meeting. P. Worley arrived after the meeting had commenced but was present for the proceedings. ## Votes and Decisions The meeting included one recorded vote during the proceedings. **Committee Summary Approval** [timestamp: 00:30] A motion was made to approve the committee summary. The motion passed unanimously, though specific vote counts and individual member positions were not recorded in the available documentation. The motion and second were made by unidentified committee members. The unanimous passage indicates all present members were in agreement with the committee summary as presented, with no opposition or abstentions recorded during the voting process. ## Contested Items The October 17, 2023 meeting featured two primary areas of contention that generated heated discussion among council members. **Employee Pay Disparities** Council members engaged in a heated discussion regarding perceived disparities in employee compensation across the organization. The debate centered on concerns about equity gaps in pay structures and the adequacy of current measures to address these imbalances. Multiple council members expressed dissatisfaction with the status quo and called for more decisive action to remedy compensation inequities. The discussion highlighted ongoing tensions about fair pay practices and the organization's commitment to addressing systemic disparities in employee compensation. **Diversity and Inclusion Efforts** A second contentious topic involved the effectiveness of current diversity and inclusion initiatives. Council members participated in significant debate over whether existing programs and strategies were sufficient to meet the organization's diversity goals. The discussion revealed disagreements about the scope and impact of current efforts, with some members advocating for more comprehensive and robust diversity and inclusion strategies. The debate underscored differing perspectives on how to best advance equity and inclusion objectives within the organization. Both contested items reflected broader concerns about organizational equity and fairness, though the extracted data does not specify the particular council members who participated in these discussions or the specific outcomes reached. The heated nature of both debates suggests these remain ongoing areas of concern requiring further attention and potential policy development. *Note: Specific transcript timestamps were not available in the provided source materials for this meeting.* ## Urban Growth Management Plan Update [timestamp: 02:00] Director Duncan presented an update on the Urban Growth Management Plan during agenda item II. The presentation focused on the Planning Commission's ongoing efforts to identify new land for inclusion in the urban service area. Duncan outlined the current work being undertaken by the Planning Commission as part of the plan update process. A key development discussed was the formation of an advisory committee that will assist in the planning efforts moving forward. The presentation was informational in nature, with Duncan providing the council with a status report on where the Urban Growth Management Plan update currently stands. The discussion centered on the technical aspects of expanding the urban service area and the methodical approach being taken by the Planning Commission to evaluate potential land additions. This agenda item served as a progress report rather than a decision-making discussion, allowing council members to stay informed about the Planning Commission's work on this significant planning initiative. No formal action was taken during this presentation. ## Comparison of Employee Pay by Race/Ethnicity and Gender Director Walters presented findings from a comprehensive study examining employee pay disparities across racial, ethnic, and gender lines [timestamp: 45:00]. The presentation addressed potential compensation inequities within the organization's workforce. The study's initial raw data analysis revealed apparent disparities in employee compensation when comparing different demographic groups. However, Director Walters emphasized that these surface-level findings required deeper statistical examination to determine their significance and underlying causes. Upon conducting more rigorous analysis that controlled for relevant factors such as pay grades, experience levels, and job classifications, the study found no statistically significant disparities in compensation between employees of different races, ethnicities, or genders within the same pay grade structures. This finding suggested that the organization's formal compensation system was operating equitably across demographic groups. The presentation served as an informational briefing, providing transparency about the organization's compensation practices and demonstrating due diligence in monitoring for potential pay equity issues. Director Walters' analysis methodology appeared to follow standard practices for pay equity studies, examining both raw compensation data and adjusted comparisons that account for legitimate factors affecting pay differences. This agenda item concluded as an informational presentation with no specific action items or policy changes proposed. The study's findings indicated that while initial data might suggest disparities, proper statistical analysis within comparable job classifications showed the compensation system was functioning without significant bias based on race, ethnicity, or gender. ## Diversity and Inclusion Workshop Update [timestamp: 90:00] Arthur Lucas presented an update on the organization's Diversity and Inclusion Workshop initiative during agenda item IV. Lucas provided details on the implementation progress of diversity and inclusion workshops that have been conducted within the organization. The presentation included findings from recent assessments that examined workplace culture and employee perceptions regarding diversity practices. The update covered the workshop implementation process and shared results from organizational assessments focused on understanding current workplace culture dynamics. Lucas discussed how these assessments have been used to gauge employee perceptions of diversity and inclusion efforts within the organization. This agenda item was presented as an informational update, with Lucas serving as the primary speaker to brief attendees on the current status and findings of the diversity and inclusion program. The presentation provided stakeholders with insight into ongoing efforts to assess and improve workplace diversity and inclusion practices. The item concluded as an informational presentation without requiring formal action or decision-making from the meeting participants. ## PDR Annual Update The PDR Annual Update, listed as agenda item V, was scheduled for presentation during the October 17, 2023 meeting but was ultimately postponed. The item was deferred to the next meeting to ensure adequate time would be available for proper discussion of the annual update. No presentation was given and no speakers addressed this agenda item during the current meeting. The decision to postpone appears to have been made to allow for more thorough consideration of the PDR annual report rather than rushing through the material due to time constraints. The update will be rescheduled for a future meeting where it can receive the full attention and discussion time it requires. --- ## Decisions - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Approve the committee summary --- ## Full transcript Music Good afternoon, everyone. Welcome to the General Government and Planning Committee meeting, October the 17th. It's about 1.01 is what I've got. Preston Worley, who is our chair, was detained for a little bit. He will be arriving shortly. As vice chair, I will go ahead and preside over that meeting until his arrival. So first, we will have the first item of business is we will go ahead and approve the committee summary. Do I have a motion to approve? Second. Second. There's been a motion by Council Member Sheehan? Baxter. Second by Vice Mayor Will. Is there any discussion on the motion? being no discussion on the motion i will take it to approve all in favor indicate by saying aye any opposition the motion passed unanimously next our first presentation for today will be urban growth management plan update and director duncan will be taking care of that presentation so if come forward. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. We are here to give you all an update on the work that we have been doing with the Planning Commission since you all passed the goals and objectives in June of this year. And you all will recall that at that time, the goals and objectives you included in Theme E, Goal 3, the direction to the Planning Commission to identify new land for the urban service area. And you said that the Council had identified a critical need for land for housing and jobs. And in order to address that need, the Planning Commission needed to identify between 2,700 and 5,000 acres of land for the urban service area. and to adopt a master plan for that land by December 1, 2024. To assist the Planning Commission in this task, Planning Commission Chair Forrester formed an Urban Growth Management Advisory Committee that included four members of council, three members of the Planning Commission, and seven members of the community with particular expertise and interest in the area of expansion, including housing, jobs, affordable housing, and rural land. The advisory committee began meeting on August 8th and met every Tuesday through September 19th. Early on in those meetings, the advisory committee asked for information about sanitary sewers, and that was provided over multiple meetings by Director Martin, talking about how sanitary sewer service could be extended into new land outside the urban service area and how in some instances the extension of that service would solve existing problems in the urban service area, particularly related to the consent decree. The committee also asked for input from the PDR program to talk about where preserved lands are located and what it means for a property to have a PDR easement as far as urban development and urban infrastructure goes. They did all this under the guidance of the directions given by council as to where land should be considered and for what purpose. All of the meetings were open to the public and they were broadcast on LexTV. And as the committee finalized a draft for public input, they then took a bus tour of all of the lands that were under consideration. So spent about two and a half hours riding through the rural areas of Fayette County looking at the lands that were under consideration. And then on September 12th, held a public input meeting in the evening where about 40 people addressed the committee to express their thoughts and concerns about the work of the committee and the draft map. This is the map that was created for the September 12th public input meeting. At the time, it included about 5,000 acres, with the priority area being Area C, as identified by the committee. Priority meaning that this was the area that they thought was most important to be considered for bringing into the urban area. Area C along Winchester Road and south of Inn State 64. But also other areas on the west side and the southeast portion of the urban service area were included in the draft and were made available for comment. The public commented about all of the areas, and in some instances, property owners in those areas expressed particular interest in being included in the urban service area or being excluded from the urban service area. So with the public input and with additional information, the next week the committee got together and created their final map recommendation for the Planning Commission. At that time, based on the public input that said some of the property owners, particularly in the Winchester Road area, who said they did not want to be included, that reduced that area significantly. The committee also removed part of the areas on the west side and some of the area on the east side, so reducing the draft acreage from about 5,000 acres to about 3,000 acres as a recommendation to the Planning Commission. The committee concluded their work and directed that their information be sent to the Planning Commission. Later on in September, the Planning Commission held their own public comment meeting on the draft that the advisory committee had created. An additional 20 people or so addressed the Planning Commission with some similar comments that were heard at the Advisory Committee meeting. At that same time, the Planning Commission asked for additional information from the Division of Water Quality about sewering these areas. And the Planning Commission did not take any action on September 28th, but decided that they would continue their work at their next Planning Commission work session, which is this Thursday. So we expect the planning commission will continue to review the recommendations of the committee and will have additional questions as they move forward with the map. In the meantime, the staff has also been working to identify a consultant for the master plan of this project as well. And so through the summer, through an RFP process, we are about to engage the services of TSW Planning Consultants, an Atlanta-based consultant with an office in Lexington and several different sub-consultants who will be addressing a number of issues. We expect, of course, the ordinary things that we would out of a land-use master plan, including land-use recommendations, infrastructure recommendations, and the like. But we've also asked this consultant to provide some information about the cost of services. So what's it going to take to provide the infrastructure to begin with, and then what will it take the government to continue to service that infrastructure into the future? So we expect all of that to be part of the master plan that will be completed at the end of 2024. In addition to their ordinary planning work, we expect the TSW consultants will do an extensive amount of public and stakeholder engagement through this process, and they will be providing updates to the council and to the planning commission. This, by the way, the TSW contract is scheduled for second reading with the council on October 26th, so we expect to be moving on that very quickly. So the schedule will be to complete the draft of the master plan within the next year so that we can then schedule a public hearing for adoption by the planning commission of the master plan no later than November 21st of 2024 in order to meet the council's deadline of December 1st. Madam Chair, that's our presentation. I'll be happy to address any questions. Thank you, Director Duncan. We will open the floor for questions or discussion from my colleagues. Vice Mayor Dan Will. Thank you, Chair. Director do you have a sense from either Chair Forster or just the Planning Commission in general what their timeline for decision making looks like for this? I do believe that they want to move with this, Vice Mayor. They just, you know, they weren't as intimate with it as the committee was meeting every week like this but i think that they are certainly aware of the issues they're aware of the work of the committee and i think they just wanted a little a little separation from that i do believe that they will move on this expeditiously though okay but you don't have a sense of timeline in terms of uh no i think we will know more after thursday's work session i think at that point they'll know what else what are the steps they need to take or if they'll be ready to set an adoption date okay thank you director Council member James Brown. Thank you chair. Thank you director for the update and for your work and your staff's work on this issue. If there is any changes made to the map from the planning commission, what process would that take and what would that look like? Well, I believe the planning commission is looking at it because they held their own public input meetings. So I think that they'll be responding in part to some of that. of that. And then, of course, it will be the staff's recommendation to the Planning Commission that the map still needs to meet the council criteria and address as directed by the council. But that will be addressed at a public meeting, and what we expect is that the Planning Commission will accept the map through a resolution. It will not be, of course, adopting the new land. That won't come until the master plan is done as far as expanding the urban service area, but it will be enough to give direction to the consultants to know what lands they should be considering. But that will be done at a public meeting. Okay. And then so, so is it the staff's responsibility to make sure whatever changes still meets the intent that was set by Council and the goals and objectives? Just as we did with the advisory committee, Councilmember Brown, we will continue to remind the Planning Commission of what the Council's intent was with this, what the goals and objectives say about this expansion and we will make sure that they're aware of that information. Okay. All right. Thank you, Director. Thank you, Chair. Council Member Svigny. Thank you, Chair. Even though I'm not a member of this committee, thanks for letting me speak. Just a quick question, and I think you mentioned it, but just because the original Goal 4 process was designed to kind of ask people if, kind of an RFP process to ask people if they were willing to participate in an urban service boundary expansion. Of the geography that's listed on this, what percentage of the people do you feel like are willing to participate in expansion? Of what the recommended map that came out of the advisory committee, Council Member Svigni, I believe we would be in the very high 90s. Many of the property owners, particularly the large parcels, expressed their desire to be included and that they said they were ready to develop now. So I think it's a high likelihood that all of this land, nearly all of this land, would be available for development just as soon as it can be. Thank you. Appreciate it. Thank you, Chair. Colleagues, are there any more questions or discussion for Mr. Duncan? Mr. Duncan, thank you again for the presentation. At this time, I'll turn over the chair and turn back to council member and chair Preston Worley. Thank you. Thank you, Vice Chair Plumman. Thank you for getting the meeting started. So we would move expeditiously even though I wasn't here yet. And I apologize for me being late. I was at a funeral visitation and had to get back from Frankfurt. So our next item on the agenda is a comparison of employee pay by race, ethnicity, and gender. Director Walters. Thank you very much for inviting me to speak today regarding the equity analysis that was completed by Management Advisory Group as a supplement to the compensation study they performed for the Urban County Government. Today I'm going to give you some information regarding the work MAG was asked to complete, the methodology and analysis, their conclusion, and then progress we're making and continuing to work on. And of course I'm happy to answer any questions at the end. Management Advisory Group International or MAG was asked to review and analyze LFUCG compensation data for classified and unclassified civil service positions in the unified pay plan to determine if race or ethnicity was a factor in salary distribution, if gender is a factor in salary distribution, and any other influencing factors that could determine the distribution of annual salary compensation. That being said, this does not include any sworn employees who are part of collective bargaining units and police fire and corrections. Only employees who are in our unified pay plan. The US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, or EEOC, is responsible for enforcing federal laws that make it illegal to discriminate against a job applicant or an employee because of the person's race, color, religion, sex, age, national origin, disability, or genetic information. As a local government, we have a reporting obligation to file an EEO4 report every two years using race, ethnicity, and gender data. We report using federal guidelines and with data that has been provided by employees through self-identification, whereby employees can choose one or more of the options provided. While there are additional race ethnicity categories that can be selected by employees, such as Native American, Asian, or Pacific Islander, MAG was unable to include those in their analysis due to limited data. As such, they have used black, Hispanic, and white for race ethnicity comparison in their report, and male and female for gender. MAG used this race, ethnicity, and gender data grouped by EEO categories for comparative purposes. The EEOC provides an instruction booklet that defines the type of occupations for their categories for reporting purposes. As an organization, we use these guidelines to assign a category to each one of our job classifications. As you can see on the list on this slide, we have eight categories to choose from. As you might expect, some are a little more obvious, such as protective services, including occupations where employees are entrusted with public safety. Again, in this case, all civil service employees and not sworn employees. And administrative support, including positions in our administrative series. But some are a little bit out of the ordinary. Officials and administrators, for example, you would imagine would be commissioners and division directors. However, that classification also includes positions in building inspection, for example. This is important because it gives you an idea of the wide range of job classifications and their associated pay grades that are all combined into these eight categories. Now that we've touched on the background, we'll start looking at the data. When we look at the data, we do see that there are differences in salary levels across race, ethnicity. However, a statistical analysis must be performed in order to determine if race or ethnicity is the primary factor for those differentials. An ANOVA analysis is a statistical test that uses a formula to compare variances across those averages. It looks at different groups and tests whether or not there are statistically significant differences that exist. So what does it mean to be statistically significant? Statistical significance refers to the likelihood that a result is not due to a chance or random factors. With regard to the analysis of race or ethnic group distribution, there are two categories that resulted in statistical significance, service maintenance and skilled craft. That is, in both of those cases, the analysis of the averages resulted in a statistical significance between white and black employees. Because of that difference, MAG wanted to dig deeper to determine if there were other underlying factors for those differences. So they used the individual pay grades of the classifications as control. They found, however, that once the pay grade was accounted for, the statistically significant differences no longer existed. With regard to the analysis of gender distribution, there are three categories that resulted in a statistical significance. Officials and administrators, professionals, and service maintenance. That is, in all three of these groups, the analysis of the averages resulted in a statistical significance between female and male employees. In this summary, you'll see in the officials and administrators category, female employees' average salaries were actually greater than male employees' average salaries. However, again, when MAG drilled down to determine if there were underlying factors for the differences, they used the individual pay grades for the classification as a control. They found again that once the pay grade was accounted for, the statistically significant differences were no longer present. So what does all this mean? First, MAG found that no statistical significance in the distribution of salaries by race, ethnicity, or gender that could not be accounted for for the pay grade of the incumbents. While the outcome of this report is favorable, we know that this is a continual process. It's important to note, for example, that we have just under 1,700 classified and unclassified positions in our unified pay plan. As you think about organizational structure, think about a single division where you have one director, maybe a deputy director, a handful of managers, probably even a few more supervisors, but the majority of the employees in that division are going to be in lower pay grades. This makes preparing employees for promotional opportunities very important. Thinking about those opportunities, here are some items we presented to this committee in 2021 when we were here to discuss our classified civil service workforce analysis plan. One of the things we focused on was training, and we wanted to ensure that all employees completed a diversity and inclusion workshop, and Arthur is going to talk to you a little more about that in his presentation. We wanted to provide training for hiring managers and hiring panels, so we created robust documents and now ensure that all hiring panels are diverse. We expanded offering of our academy so employees who complete the courses can have one year of supervisory experience that they can put on their applications. We increased from one academy to two academies per year, and they're consistently full. With regard to our employment advertisements, we expanded and targeted employment advertisements to reach minority communities, and we also promote diversity and inclusion on our job advertisements and our website. We've created a mentorship program that is now in a testing phase. We launched the Navigating Your Next Job with LFUCG guide that's available to employees on our website. With regard to job descriptions, we reviewed all job descriptions for minimum education and experience requirements, utilizing an equivalent combination to satisfy degree requirements wherever possible, and ultimately we reduced minimum qualifications for 16.2% of our classifications in an effort to increase applicant pools. We set all of those goals in 2021 and have accomplished each of them in our efforts to recruit and retain talented employees. Also in 2021, we provided some information regarding promotions for minorities. We've updated that information to also include women and also add statistics for the last three years as well for you. For example, when we permitted to this committee in 2021, approximately 70% of our employee population identified as white and the remaining 30% identified as black, Asian, Hispanic, American, Indian, or two or more combined races. During the five year period reported at that time, there were 638 promotions, 147 of promoted employees were minorities, and 149 employees were female, or about 23% each. However, in the last three years, we've had 234 promotions, where 62 of those employees were minorities and 69 were female, increasing to 26.5% and 29.5%. While we're very proud of this progress and the improvements we've made, we know that there's always work to be done and we will continue to work on this. And with that, I'll take any questions. Thank you very much. Council members, do we have questions? Council member Lynch. Thank you, Chair. Thank you so much for your presentation. I have several questions, so I'm just kind of going to walk back through the presentation starting at the beginning. Can you explain for me, my knowledge, what is a unified pay plan? So a unified pay plan is all of our classifications that have a 500 level pay grade. So we utilize about 37 grades, I think right now, from 504 to 540. and basically that plan establishes ranges a pay range for each grade and those ranges have about five percent difference in each of them is this written down anywhere that i can access this information check see if it's on our site if not i will send it to you okay awesome thank you My next question is regarding the categories used for comparison. You listed on your slide that it was black, Hispanic, and white, and those were the only categories used because of due to limited data for the other classifications. So I'm guessing that we just don't employ very many folks that are Asian, Asian Pacific Islander, Native American. Is that what that means? Yes, and that there wasn't enough data to provide a statistical analysis on that information for it to be valid. Do we have that data, even though they did not use the data in the city? Absolutely. We track it, and we do report it to the federal government as well. I would like to have that data. Could that be sent to me as well? Because I would like to get the full spectrum of what it looks like. I'd like to see if we have our last report. We file again this year. That process just opened and is due, I think, December 3rd. Awesome. Thank you, because I want the full picture. Sure. for everyone. Looking at the EEO categories you listed, the only one I wasn't clear about was paraprofessionals. Can you tell me what jobs or classifications that employs? Sure, I'm happy to. Some examples would be, and this is defined by the EEOC, occupations in which workers perform some of the duties of a professional or technician in a supportive role but might require less formal training or experience normally required that could be child support workers a recreation assistance for our purposes I can give you a couple of examples would be recreation assistant, recreation supervisor, program specialist, family support worker, program leader. Some of those would be examples we use. Thank you for that clarification. Looking at the data, the first table that we presented on race, ethnic group distribution by EEO occupational category, again, looking at the protective services category for the Hispanic group, there was no data listed. Does that mean that in that job category, we do not employ very many Hispanic Americans in that group? Is that why it's showing there's no data for them? At that time, yes. Is that data available? Well, for this particular case, there must not have been any employees. This is a pretty small group without including SWORN. It would just be security officers, safety officers. There would be very few job classifications in protective services without the SWORN. So then that number is zero. That number was zero at that time. Okay. And the same for technicians. It lists, again, no data. So then we employ no Hispanic Americans as technicians. That number is zero. At that time, yes. Thank you. Regarding my time. Okay. I'll ask a couple more questions. Regarding pay grade, it says on here, once the pay grade of the employees was accounted for, Those statistically significant differences no longer existed, talking about the differences that the prior slide of the table showed. Can you provide three examples of that? So as an example in, let's pull my list out, one that has a bigger group. For officials and administrators, for example, there are, looks like five classifications that are in 517 pay grade. So we might have multiple classifications within a pay grade, but when MAG drilled down to the pay grade level and applied the same analysis, there were no statistical significantly differences at that time. It removed those. What dictates pay grade? Pay grade is a result of a study of the job position questionnaire, our JPQ process, in combination with internal and external equity and also potentially market studies. I think I'm out of time, so I will end here and log back in later. Thank you, Chair. Council Member, please jump back in the queue. Vice Mayor Wu. Thank you, Chair. Thank you for that presentation. I'm going to talk this out so I understand what we're talking about here. So there are obviously based on just pure salary averages, there is some level of disparity, but within each pay grade, there is not the disparity based on race and based on gender. Is that correct? That's correct. So the difference between those two kind of measuring scales is then that we have more men and we have more white folks in higher pay grades generally. Would you say that's? Potentially and also fewer opportunities. When you think of higher pay grades, we probably only have 300 or so job classifications that would be grade 522 and above and the other 1,400 or so would be below that amount. So we have a lot more positions that are in lower pay grades than there are higher pay grades. Okay. place where it's pointed out that it's kind of flipped is in the officials and administrators, both in terms of male and female pay and in terms of by race. Can you give me, and it gives a couple of examples of deputy directors, directors, commissioners, so some of those fairly high-level division roles. Can you tell me, I know commissioners are appointed by the mayor and approved by us. What about the director and deputy director levels? Who hires for those roles? They're classified civil service positions, and so they are hired typically by the commissioner would be the hiring official for a director that works in their department, and then they go through basically the standard process that every classified civil service person goes through. They have to apply and compete, and the hiring official interviews at least five, including any military or internal preference, et cetera. Yeah. Are there any other sort of employee levels that the mayor appoints besides the commissioner level? The mayor appoints their staff. and I would, yes, the CAO I would, and the CIO would be at commissioner level. Right, gotcha, okay. Yeah, that jumped out at me and that's kind of interesting because in some ways because of those appointments and those kind of high level hires, it almost kind of separates itself out from the rest of the pool and that's why I find it interesting is that's where we have the the opposite statistic happening. Would you say generally, in terms of the progress and some of the aims, we're trying to get more women and minority folks into higher pay grades, into sort of channels for promotion and give more opportunities, I guess? I think that the goal was to make sure that all employees have that understanding. But yes, we want to make sure that everyone has an opportunity to move because, like I said, those opportunities are so few and far between. So we want to make sure employees are prepared to be able to move up into promotional opportunity positions. And for, you know, we just went through a hiring process for council that we've worked together on. For a lot of these hires, are they done by a hiring committee? What's the process like for hire and promotions? So one of our recommendations to hiring officials is to establish a hiring panel, and that panel must be diverse. We require that, and we have a lot of folks who are in the government and willing to participate in hiring panels as well if you don't have as much diversity within a hiring division. And we also review the questions that are asked by the hiring panel as well to ensure that they are appropriate, et cetera. and we also have a panel member policy where we make sure that people who sit on panels don't have like personal relationships with the candidates that are coming through those are a few examples so these committees and panels are they in panel sort of ad hoc by the position there's not like a standing panel or committee that does everything right correct they're within each hiring division i suppose but they doesn't mean that your panel has to be from within that I think it's really important to have a broad variety of ideas and thoughts. And so to be, there might be subject matter experts, but there also might be other people who are just in tune or a good judge of character and that sort of thing that you might want on a hiring panel. Thank you so much, Director. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Council Member Sheehan. Thank you, Chair. you know, my professional training has been researched, so I know that this was a very complex analysis, and you're also having to present statistics that you can find yourself, or if you're presenting at some amount of work, because I know that would be challenging. And when we're looking at things like averages, it can be, most people have a basic understanding what an average is, but when you actually calculate an average, you're only taking it into account. Two data points within the dataset, highest of the loss. And so it doesn't take into account all of the individual data points within that data set. And that is why this further analysis is needed. So just looking at the averages is not enough. And from your presentation today and some of our discussions, what I see is once you get into the data, you don't see a difference within those pay pay grades, which is important to know, but that we do have work to do with, you know, across pay grades and in those promotion opportunities. And we're starting to see the interventions that you talked about today pay off, and I appreciate that. But I think when we're looking at, you said, what was the percentage you gave for women in our workforce here for LFUCG? I don't know if I gave the percentage for women. We did for the different minority groups, 30%, I think you said, identified. I did say 30%. So, and then if our promotions are at about 26%, then we, to see more equity, we would need that 26 to get closer to the 30. And if we think maybe the percentage of women in our workforce is about 50-50, then we would want those percentages to be, for promotions to be up closer to that 50%. And it looks like we're working towards that. So I think that the training, the mentorship programs, the employment advertising, all of those initiatives seem to be working. So I am particularly interested to see those increased percentages as we continue to employ those methods. So thank you. I hope so as well. Thank you. Thank you. Council Member Reynolds. Thank you, Chair. And thank you, Tammy. Thank you so much for the presentation. We've been wanting this information for a long time, so I'm really glad to see it, and I appreciate all the work that your department did on this. I'm looking at the slide that has the race slash ethnicity and salaries, and it just has the breakdown of black, Hispanic, and white. Remind me what you said, the total number of employees that we have is right now. So in that particular analysis, probably better go back to it. That's leaving some out, right, because we didn't account for them. Right. So that's about 1,400 included in that particular analysis, which was at the time of the study. But total, how many do we have? We have around 1,700 positions, individual positions, but some of those are going to be vacant as well. 1,700. Okay, so if we're looking there just at Hispanic, that is super low. So I'm glad that we've had a lot of progress and we're moving in the right direction, but there we're, I think, way behind. And we all know that a lot of our divisions have a need for bilingual and multilingual employees. And so I think we could work on trying to reach out to that community more. Absolutely. And make sure that they know what jobs we have available. So I'd be happy to help with that any way I can. Great. Thank you. Thank you. Appreciate that. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member. Council Member James Brown. Thank you, Chair. thank you to me for the the presentation but that's my first question and it was talked about somewhat already is that when you look at the raw data uh... in comparison to once you do the analysis of variance the road that it looks like there's disparity in several categories but what you do them analysis of variance and breaks it down into job codes you don't have that how do we did could you help me have this conversation with employees when asked about this we run into because they will say there you know in the presentation it looks like there's an obvious disparity uh... explained us the analysis of various we don't know how would how would you have a sprays that conversation and and you're right It's a difficult subject, and especially if you aren't a statistician, which I'm not, but I do understand that when you're looking at just a string of data points, the part to focus on is that pay grade information. And if there was disparity within those pay grades, I think that you would see, we need to look further and see what else might be causing that. But because when they drilled down to that point and the statistical significance no longer exists, then I think that you feel comfortable at that point that there isn't a, and I don't want to use the word disparity, but they actually used it. so that disparity isn't there anymore. It's the tricky part about, like Council Member Sheehan explained, all of these different data points. And so when you look at them, they're grouped within a range, and that makes the analysis on those points, the variance goes away. I'm not great at explaining it either, let's be honest. So I think that's part of the point, is that's going to be a hard conversation to have and to justify what employees that feel like there's obvious disparity in pay. The other thing that I got a slight concern with, but I think I understand why it was done, is some of our biggest divisions aren't included in the study, and that's our public safety divisions, the police department, the fire department, and corrections. And I think if they were included, I know definitely on the raw numbers it would show a disparity in all the categories. But then it's hard to put it into the analysis of variance because the pay grades aren't the same as the unified pay plan. So I understand why they weren't included, but I can't help to think that it just further skews the numbers across the board. Well, I think that it's important that we've focused on just position the unified pay plan because MAG was looking at our compensation study specifically. So what our system looked like before and after. And because those categories weren't used and they have their own collective bargaining agreements, it really isn't an apples to apples comparison. You had to stay within the unified pay plan to see that. And it would be a whole different analysis to determine if there were any disparities there. Yeah, yeah. The other thing I'll say, and I acknowledge the progress that has been made. There have been some real significant efforts. I know we were getting comments from employees about folks being hired in and getting hired in at a higher rate than they're currently making after being here for pretty significant years of service. I think we have, you all, HR has worked to address that along with the other things mentioned in the program. But I can't help but think there are other things that we can do to address some of the issues that we've heard. And CAO, I don't know if you want to speak to some of the things that maybe you all are thinking about doing or piloting outside of the box and what we can expect maybe going forward to address some of the issues. Because I think sometimes it comes up that folks have concerns about people in the same pay grade not making the same amount of money. Exactly right. And I've heard Tammy, I probably have gone over this six or eight times with her. And I could never explain to anybody the statistical difference, analysis difference, without Liz Sheehan being by my side to help me. But my main focus here is you can talk about we don't have any, when you look at the statistical difference, there's no problems. Well, we do have them. And we have to address them. And those problems come in those pay grades with Vice Mayor Wu hit on it. with no opportunity for advancement. Everybody is stuck, and you can't move up and promote. So one of the things we did last year with URA's approval is we went to Fleet. You remember how Fleet, those gentlemen that were here were so nice to express their problems in the compensation. But what we did was is they felt there was nowhere to go. They didn't have any movement at all. And over there, because it was a smaller number of people, we were able to design a system that gave them some movement, that gave them various things they could go to. Now, we weren't going to come in and just say carte blanche, everybody gets a raise, but it gives the opportunity to promote. That is our problem. Our problem is we've got all these people locked in these lower positions. Hispanic, black, women, they're all locked in these lower positions and they have no ability to move. We're trying to do the same thing at Water Quality. And Water Quality has got that same, it's a bigger organization, but the same kind of thing. And we need to look back to see what we can do in their grades and in their classifications to improve this and give them some opportunity for promotion. that's where all this is. These across the board things are great, but they're giving me 5%, where everybody else is not moving up. When you mentioned the idea that you saw the difference up there in that area, in that higher area, commissioners or so, that's all intentional. The mayor has said, I've been here numerous times when we had all white commissioners. And she said, I'm not going to do this. I want diversity in my commissioners, because if I don't have diversity in my commissioners, I have no chance of getting it in my directors and deputies and on down. And we really struggle with this. We have made these panels, and I'll stop because I know this is, but I'm really passionate about this issue. We made these panels that Tammy has talked about. They were all people just like me. You know, everybody likes to hire people like themselves because it's easier and you're more comfortable things. So we said these panels can't just all look alike with the same people. And that's why we have changed them. And I think that is helping. But we're a long way. And no matter what a statistical analysis says or anything else, we've got a lot of work to do. Things are not just great. And I think it's important that we recognize that. We can never get comfortable. We've made progress, but man, we've got a long way. Thank you for that. I just want to say that I acknowledge the work that's been done, but looking at the presentation, I don't want folks to think that it's all hunky-dory when we know it's not. And that we're going to have to do some things outside of the box to help address it. So, thank you. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Councilmember. Councilmember Gray. Thank you, Chair. I thought there was one before me on the committee, but thank you for allowing me to speak. And just to concur or just statement wise is I just find it problematic that it's not able to be explained. And we have to figure out how we can explain these things without having you by our side. that's just something out there. There's been a gentleman that has been coming into our council meetings and work sessions and he's been speaking about the MAC study for months. Just curiously, have you spoken with a gentleman to explain the results of the study? My predecessor had several conversations with him, but no, he has not reached out to speak to me. Okay. Okay. When Councilmember Lynch asked a question, you repeatedly said, regarding the Hispanic number of employees, zero at the time. At this time, have those numbers increased? That has the potential to change on a daily basis, but I am happy to take a look at that as well to see how the numbers are today versus what this was at the end of the study. Okay. And when was the study conducted? It was conducted, started at the beginning of what ended in 2022, last year. Okay, last year. And could you tell us more about this mentoring program? them sure some of the pilot programs I know that they're working with I believe water quality and a couple of other divisions but basically creating mentors within a division that can help you know teach and coach employees and kind of prepare them for the next level of their career path we also work with colleges and universities to try to basically prepare students to come into our workforce as well and we really think it's important to you know sometimes it's easy you know just go about do your daily job but if you really want to promote and advance you want to make sure you have that opportunity to learn and grow and experience new things in order to be ready to move to the next step and is this program utilized with our waste management division i'm not sure if they're part of the pilot program or not um i don't think so but there's no reason that it couldn't couldn't be implemented in any division i know that there have been many complaints from our employees in waste management division about work environment as well as their pay of course and hiring process. And I just, I think we need a little bit more love over there. But whatever we can do to make sure all our employees are happy and also reaching out to different communities to apply for positions with LFUCG would be great. I have more questions, but I'm sure that goes along with Dr. Cleveland's study that I know that Mr. Lucas, Arthur Lucas, will be speaking about soon. So thank you. Thank you. Council Member Lynch. Thank you, Chair. Just a few more questions. How often are pay grades, is it evaluated? How often do you all evaluate that, make changes, updates? So I will say it's kind of a living, breathing situation. We've had two full compensation studies that were both performed by Management Advisory Group. One was in 2014 and another in 2022. So it's usually every eight to ten years that you would want probably a full compensation study just because of the process. It's a big undertaking. And you shouldn't have that much change in that period of time that you would need like a whole revisit. But we actually perform an analysis any time a new position is created. You see those on the docket. But we study those JPQs and basically work that position into our classification system. So an analysis is performed every time someone asks to create a new position. Thank you. I guess my last couple of questions are regarding your progress initiatives and things you're going to do moving forward. Because reading this was very alarming to me. Very alarming. Councilwoman Gray asked questions about the mentoring program and I know you said in your presentation you all are in the testing phase. So after the testing phase, your plan is to roll it out employee-wide? Yes. Okay. How long is the testing phase going to take and when does the rollout plan date-wise? I would have to check on that. I'm not as closely involved with that process as Eric is, but we'll work on that and get some information to you. Thank you CAO Hamilton because you made me feel a lot better about this presentation. Hearing that the administration acknowledges that there are huge problems. Makes me feel better because what I felt like after the presentation was that everything's fine. Which is not what this presentation, and the way I read it and interpreted it said to me. So I'm glad that you recognize that there is a problem. There is a huge equity gap we need to fill regarding HR and making sure that our employees are truly representative of the community that we're serving every day. Because I was very alarmed, very, very alarmed by this presentation. So I'm glad that we're making steps in the right direction. And I know for employees that doesn't feel fair or equitable when they're getting their paycheck every two weeks and they're seeing disparities there every day. I know this process takes a while. I get that. I definitely get that. But I'm glad we're working on it. And I look forward to hearing more about those progress steps and receiving additional data on the other ethnic classifications. Absolutely. Thank you. And I think that's it for me. Thank you, Chair. Thank you. Any other council members? Anything else? Director, thank you very much. Thank you. Our next item is going to be presented by our diversity inclusion officer, Lucas. This is the diversity inclusion workshop update. Mr. Lucas, great to see you whenever you're ready. Good afternoon, council. Okay, I'll make sure. Good afternoon and thank you very much for the opportunity to come and provide an update on the diversity and inclusion workshop. As far as a little background information on the DNI workshop, back in 2020, when the mayor put together a temporary commission for racial justice and equality, Out of the subcommittee, the law enforcement subcommittee, Justice and Accountability, there was a recommendation that our police department go through some enhanced and established bias training and evaluations. And I'll give Mayor Gordon credit for saying that she not only wanted it to be focused on our police department, but she felt that LFUCG as a whole should partake in the D&I training. So with that, back in 2020, council approved for us to issue an RFP to hire a consultant to do the diversity and inclusion workshop. And a part of the RFP selection committee at that point in time, which was issued in 2021, we had then Vice Mayor Kay, Council Member Brown, Assistant Police Chief Maynard, Glenda George from our Law Department, Stacey Diamond, Public Information Supervisor, as well as Alicia Smith, who at that time was HR analyst, but is now the Director of Training and Employer Relations, along with myself. And as far as the implementation team, that was made up of myself and then HR manager Eric Howard, who is actually now the deputy director of HR at this point in time. So as far as the RFP and the focus of the workshop, Dr. Roger Cleveland, which many of you may know, is the owner of Millennial Learning Concept. He was the person chosen to implement this DNI workshop for us at LFUCG. And within the focus of the RFP, we asked for him to conduct some organizational assessments, looking at our conditions and determine specific needs for the actual training. We wanted the focus to be on common language from a diversity and inclusion standpoint. During that time, back in 2021, we were coming out of COVID, so all of the workshops were to be virtual, and we wanted to make sure they were no longer than 70 minutes. One of the things that we talked about were people's attention span as far as watching television or being trained online. And then also, Dr. Cleveland, we talked about setting the tone for the workshop. And as far as participation for our employees, if those employees wanted to participate, they could do it anonymously via chat, Q&A, or polls that Dr. Cleveland had set up. As far as the organizational assessment, Dr. Cleveland had three different types of methodologies that he used. The first one was to audit our policy programs, personnel practices, processes, and procedures. And a lot of that information was forwarded to Dr. Cleveland by HR department. We had a survey methodology which between the dates of November the 1st and December the 3rd, we had a total of 840 employees that completed the surveys as far as what was collected. 768 were electronically, and for those employees that did not have access to computers, we received 72 hard copy surveys, which was all turned over to Dr. Cleveland. And then the final phase, the focus group, Dr. Cleveland completed six 60-minute focus group meetings with our employees between the dates of January the 6th and January the 12th. And that was made up of employees from throughout LFUCG, no one particular division. So as we look at the workshop schedule as far as what was laid out, our workshops were to begin on March the 17th and run up until April the 20th. Dr. Cleveland and another person that was helping him conducted 37 virtual workshops for us here. Our council members and staff, they were scheduled on a, had two particular dates that they were able to participate. and our directors and commissioners went through the actual training on April the 8th. We gave special consideration, as you see, to our Department of Corrections, Fire, Police, Parks and Rec, Streets and Roads, Waste Management, and Water Quality, and we did that because of the nature of their work. One of the conversations that we had, in particular with fire department, is if we try to put them on a screen in a virtual training session and the alarm went off, you're going to have a blank screen. So we made sure with these bigger departments that we spoke with them before scheduling them for the workshop to make sure that they were accommodated. And then we gave a special thank you to some people within LFUCG for the behind the scenes work that they were doing, such as Susan Straub, counsel for approving the RFP back in 2021, Eric, Nick Brock with the Public Information Office, Faye Barron with HR, as well as Stacy Diamond with the Public Information Office. As far as the RFP deliverables, we had a total of 1,515 employees that participated in the actual training. And that consisted of employees that were full-time, part-time, seasonal contractors, coroners, judges, etc. After each workshop, Dr. Cleveland, employees had an opportunity to complete a survey. So there were over 700 respondents to the survey that we had after the workshop. Dr. Cleveland also provided a train-to-trainer workshop for nine employees within LFUCG, and that was so we could take the materials that he had put together and utilize those materials moving forward. Also, we were provided a new employee orientation video. Dr. Clayton provided an executive summary that we received earlier this year. And then also from the online 60-minute training video, that's where our police, fire, and community corrections are going through the training. Police and fire, they completed their training in July of this year. and currently our Community Corrections Department is going through the training during their in-service. Their classes are all in person. Now, some of the assessments or findings that Dr. Cleveland discovered from the work that he did, as you can see up there, 43% of our employees believe diversity is for political correctness or show. Our employees between the ages of 18 and 34 feel diversity is merely a gesture. 49% of our employees believe LFUC values diverse perspectives as a resource for improved organizational outcomes. And 42% feel we have employees of diverse populations represented equitably from entry level to senior management. And just got through talking quite a bit about the pay from an equal pay standpoint, as you can see the numbers, 35% of our women agree compared to 64% of men. And 28% of blacks agree compared to 60% of whites. As far as developmental opportunities within our organization, 40% women agree with that statement compared to 54% men. And as far as investing in training, 39% of African Americans compared to 53% of their white colleagues agreed to that. Also, as far as the assessment findings from the survey standpoint, under the question about workplace culture is slow to change with a history to do nothing, you can see the three comments up there. Someone said it's rooted in tradition and procedure. Restricted forward motion and progress. We're in 2022, but it's 1929 here. Also, the survey lends itself to say that there's no cohesive organizational culture. And as far as safe ways to force your grievances, 61% of our males agreed with it, and 45% of females agreed with that statement. and feeling comfortable being themselves as far as our employees. 60% of our men agree with that statement and 47% of our women agree with that. Now, at the end of the work, Dr. Cleveland also made some recommendations for LFUCG moving forward. And it's a three-pronged approach. The first one is under the leadership top-down support. One of the things that talked about is developing a diversity, equity, inclusion, organizational strategic plan, communicating our diversity, equity, inclusion statement that we have, as well as in-person diversity and inclusion workshop for leadership, meaning management only. Under the policies and practices category, talked about conducting a comprehensive review of our organizational policies and practices. And that encompassed the CAO policies as well as our policies within HR, policies and practices within HR. And those are just some of the items there as far as the hiring promotional process, recruitment process, hiring checklists, and navigating your next job. And then the final of the three-pronged approach was our organizational culture. Include our diversity, equity, inclusion statement in new hire orientation. Include the DEI video as a requirement for new hire orientation. Add DEI video as a voluntary module on our LexLink website, which is our internal website. complete an employee climate survey every two years, and then generate diversity, equity, inclusion terminology to add to the DNI website. So as I talked about the recommendations, here are some of the items that have been implemented that are currently taking place. As far as the diversity, equity, inclusion plan, what I did was I've taken Dr. Cleveland's recommendations and I've started to work on that. So that's part of what I did from the result of what Dr. Cleveland recommended. As far as communicating our diversity, equity, inclusion statement, currently, well, back in December, we now cover that statement in all new hire orientations. That's one of the things we want to make sure people coming in the door, they know that we are making that commitment or we're striving to do better in the area of DE&I from day one. We also, I teach several different D&I classes and I use that statement in my classes as well as we had it posted on LexLink and it is on the D&I website as well. The in-person D&I workshop for leadership, management only, that was completed earlier this year. Many of you all, it was completed by Colleen Elridge. many of you all may know her by Coach Colleen, owner of Be More Consulting. But we had an in-person training session for our directors during the month of May, and our commissioners went through the same training in August of this year. As far as the CAO policies review, I conducted that audit as far as reviewing all the CAO policies. policies completed that back in March of this year, as well as looking at our policies and practices within HR. And I completed that in September of this year. So as far as continuing with the recommendations, and in here you see parentheses around next steps. These are all items that we as administration still need to have some conversation about as far as moving these items forward, would like the DEI video as a requirement for new hire orientation. I mean, right now their orientation is packed, so we need to figure out a way how can we insert this information into the orientation. And the DEI video is a voluntary training module on LexLink. We gotta make sure that it's going to be accessible for all of our employees and not just those sitting at a computer. completing the climate survey. I think really and truly think this one here as far as completing that employee climate survey will go a long way in helping us to figure out some of the results that I talked about early on within the work that Dr. Cleeton has done because it will help us to narrow down and pinpoint areas that we need to work on. Having access to the D&I terminology from diversity inclusion website, use D&I website as a resource. Put some links on there to such things as language access, global legs, housing advocacy, LGBTQ, etc. And then as far as initiatives that are ongoing are already implemented, the adoption of the formal DEI statement that was adopted by council back in 2021, I believe it was. Diversity and Inclusion Workshop for All Employees talked about that. Our recruiting efforts. Tammy talked a little bit about that, but I believe it was two years ago maybe that there was an established budget for recruiting, that we have $50,000 in a budget to help with recruiting for diversity. interviewing panels. Tammy's talked about that and I do truly believe. You're real close to being finished. Okay, okay. No, with the interviewing panels and I do help serve on those and I can say having that diverse thought process in the room does make a difference when it comes to making selections. The DNI trainings, these are just trainings that I do. You know, I I do HR quarterly training. I work with our police department. I attend there as sergeant's academy, lieutenant's academy, field training officers. I've worked with Get On Board out of the plenary as well as most recently worked with the Chrysalis House. And then as far as CA policies and HR policies, I can say that under my review, one of the things that we found out is we've got to do a better job with keeping up with the information in there and updating our policies. That was one of the big things that I found is some were outdated, but also for the council members that are new, I think it was last year we had the conversation about the use of the word citizen versus residence. You know, and how when you call some people citizens within our community, they do not feel like they're a part of Lexington or our community. So we went back and made some changes within those policies. And then up there I have the Crown Act, and after you all adopted that as a policy for Lexington, not long after that I had a department head to send me their grooming policy and ask me to make the comparison between their policy and the Crown Act to see if they mesh. And I won't get into the details, but the bottom line is I did make some recommendations for changes to their policy. And then Dr. Cleveland did compliment us on a few things that are taking place as far as the permanent commission that was established for racial justice and equality, the appointment of an equity and implementation officer, having an established minority business enterprise, developing the classified civil service workforce analysis plan, increasing minimum wage to $15 because that was just recently done as well. And then the achievement of a score of 110 on our municipal equality index, which gave us the best rating in the state of Kentucky, but also put us in the top 4% out of all locations throughout the country. And next steps obviously, this is to report to council. We'll be to now share the information with our LFUC employees as far as the executive summary, And then continue the implementation and recommendations that have been made and any others that come this way as well. And I'll just end on this as far as DNI within LFUCG and I think Sally's already said it once. No, we've still got a lot of work to do. I can say that since being here, we've made quite a bit of progress as far as moving forward. we still have a lot of work to do and that is the plan for us to continue the work and continue moving forward thank you mr lucas thank you so much that's a lot of information you went through really really pretty quickly for everything that was there thanks a lot um okay council members council member baxter thank you chair and thank you mr lucas for the presentation i have a few clarifying questions. When you talk about the workshops that were completed and you list out our full-time, part-time, seasonal contractors, judges, things like that, how did we relay that opportunity to people outside of government? About the work that we've done? The workshops that were, it says that 1,515 employees participated, but in parentheses it talks about contractors and things like that. So how were those opportunities provided to those people? Now I don't know personally, but I would say those contractors that are working within LFUCG, working with us, let's say we had people working within our IT department and we issued the mandatory you take this class, then probably some of them were a part of it or maybe in a parks and rec. Like I say, I don't know per se. That makes more sense to me now. But I would think that's the way it happened. They were considered part of the team. Okay. That makes more sense. Thank you. And then when we talk about completing an employee climate survey every two years, how did we decide on the two-year mark and why was that the appropriate timeframe? Well, I think the thought process is, and just for example, if we complete a climate survey let's say in 2024, and once we get the results back, we're going to need some time to work on whatever the problems or issues are. And to say that we're going to do a climate survey, you know, because typically it takes about a month or so just to actually get the complete survey done, and then you got to go back and analyze the data, break it down, and then you got to put together a plan. So the thought process is once we issue it, we've got to put together a plan, but we don't want to rush it so that we don't complete it by doing what the employees have asked us to do or at least having to sit down talk with them about whatever the issues or topics are we just don't want to rush it well that makes sense to me um i would hope that our our directors and commissioners would be doing a regular check-in and i'm sure that they are with their employees i understand the the time frame, the process that it takes to address any issues that were brought to the surface. But I would hope that we are checking in with our employees a lot more frequently than every two years. And then finally, I just want to say that these last two presentations have been kind of hard to digest. You know, this stuff is really uncomfortable. these topics aren't always the easiest topics to discuss and to kind of hash out, and sometimes the truth hurts. And, you know, Council Member Lynch made the point that she was very thankful that we were talking about it, and that we're having the conversation, and that's, I totally agree with that. The only way we can make progress and move forward is by acknowledging any faults of our own. And so I commend you for your work and our HR department as well for addressing issues and taking steps to move forward. Chair, I would like to recommend that maybe we have a yearly update on this information. I think that would be important to have measurables and see what progress we're making. So it's just my two cents there. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Lucas. Thank you, Chair. Thank you. Thank you. uh council member sheehan thank you chair um thank you for the presentation for all of the work that you have been doing um this i think talking about the training opportunities in particular it made me think about something that we're doing at uk now with our faculty members we have to submit you know like a packet of materials of like what we have done this year right and so part of that now actually includes a whole section on DEI work. So what have you done as an employee? Any trainings? What conference presentations maybe have you attended that is related to this? What do you do in your classroom? How does your research relate to this initiative? But it is a way for us to say, okay, we know this is important by even asking this question as an organization, but then as a way for people to report back all of the good things that they're doing related to that initiative. So I'm wondering if there are places for our employees or our departments to report back that information or for us to ask that question to gather like what they're doing. So like I know Christy Stamba, you know our director of aging and disability services has been working now with our security team to do our dementia friendly, And get them dementia friendly trained. That would be an effort. And council members, I'm going to be asking you to do that training too. At the senior center there is a like all are welcome here sign. We have spaces within government that now have gender neutral bathrooms. So there are these like training opportunities but there's also like making spaces, spaces of belonging and safety. And so I just wonder if there's a way for us to think about how to report these efforts back. and to have an opportunity for employees and departments to kind of showcase then, okay, well, here's what we're doing and here's how we're meeting this initiative, or even a potential way to, like, incentivize this continued work because we're showcasing it. Okay. Thank you for the suggestion. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member. Vice Member Wood. Thank you, Chair. Thank you for this presentation, Mr. Lucas. A few questions for you. When we were talking about the workshops, Councilmember Baxter touched on it, this 1515 employees, were there particular either divisions or groups of employees that weren't included in these workshops? Did it include public safety? Did it include police and fire? Yes, it included from a public safety standpoint, it included the administration portion of police and fire because as I said you know I had the conversation with the fire department as far as they have individual devices that they watch videos and trainings on I don't know the technical name but it was just explained to me that if we set them down for an hour and that alarm goes off then you're going to have the empty screen so it was more so the administration that went through the virtual trainings and then the officers as far as the fire department and police department that use their own training devices I guess if you will. Do you have a sense this is 1515 employees out of how many available or eligible employees that could have taken it? During that time I want to say around 2700 maybe and like I say majority were public safety. So about half of the folks that could have taken these workshops took these workshops? Yes. Yes, sir. Okay. And then further down under assessments, you talk about development opportunities. What can you define that for me? What are development opportunities in relation to this survey? Which page are you on? I'm on assessment findings, LFUCG employees. shows development opportunities 40% of women agree that there are development opportunities versus 54% of men. Well I guess what I'm saying there is you know if we go back and do the assessments that I'm talking about then we're going to have an opportunity because with the information here we don't know who, what department, what division you know these people are with because it was an anonymous survey. But if we're going to start doing a climate survey, then we're going to have an opportunity. And let's say people work for Arthur Lucas and someone within my group is the person that has a problem with whatever it may be. Then Arthur Lucas should be putting together a game plan to work on and talk with his employees, kind of to your point. So that's what I'm talking about as far as opportunities. It's going to give us an opportunity to hopefully address and fix some of the concerns that our employees have. Okay. And then on the next page, under safe ways to voice grievances, what is, just quickly if you can, what are the methods or mechanisms for people to voice grievances? What does that look like? And do we have statistics on that in terms of how many of these kind of grievances are being formally complained, how they're resolved, et cetera? Now, I do not know in particular about grievances. I know that we have the 1-800 number, the hotline number that people can call. Obviously, they can call HR directly because the hotline actually goes to, I believe, our Department of Internal Audit as well as HR. I'm not 100% on that, but I'm not 100% on the way the process work as far as grievances. I mean, to my knowledge, I believe they have to contact HR in order to follow. That might be interesting data for us. And I don't know, Director Walters, that's something we can get. And then just lastly, I mean, this is a very important issue to me and I think to a lot of us out here. And, you know, one of the survey points that jumped out at me was the 43% believe diversity is for political correctness or just for show. and that's something that I'm always very cautious and wary about because we see that a lot, whether it's the corporate world, the nonprofit world, or government. There are too many institutions that I think do a good show and talk about D&I and kind of do these kind of things but not change the inherent and sort of a deeper culture of it, and I think it will take a holistic approach of words and actions, And, you know, as Council Member Sheehan talked about, you know, even more inclusive facilities, things like that, has to be a very holistic way of looking at it to – it's going to take a while. It's going to take a lot of work. And as Council Member Baxter said, it's going to take some uncomfortable conversations and some hard decisions. But I'm glad we're doing this work, and I appreciate your work. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Council Member Lynch. Thank you, Chair. And thank you, Mr. Lucas, for the presentation. I just have a few questions regarding your presentation. You detailed that there were nine employees who took the train, the trainer workshop. What happened next after you all did that? That training was so that we could take the materials and move those forward. Now, I mean, I'm the primary person that does the training. And what I've done with the training materials is, for example, I have a class tomorrow. I've taken Dr. Cleveland's presentation and I've instituted that into the training. So I will be utilizing his trainings. And then the other folks are, I guess, if you will, like backups in the event that we're needed. But I started utilizing them, I think, towards the end of last year, if I'm not mistaken. But I do a quarterly training on HR's calendar that they send out. and it's a voluntary thing where people can sign up for the class. Who are the other eight folks that are the trainers for the employees? Now, I don't have the individual names, but I know there were three from FIRE, one from Corrections, one from Law, two or three from HR, I believe. I know at least two of their trainers were in the class. And I think that was it, I believe. So out of that nine, you're the only person that's actively doing, conducting workshops based on being a trainer and getting those materials out to our employees. Yes, yes. And it's based on, right now, it's based on the request people signing up. I mean, it's a voluntary thing that people can sign up for. And right now, I've been able to handle the load, I guess, if you will. In an effort to make sure that this is DEI is a part of the fabric of our work culture, it will be awesome if all nine train-the-trainers could be actively doing workshops in their divisions in and around the city government. One person doing it for over 2,000 people doesn't seem very effective. So if we've got nine people trained to be doing workshops, it would be great if they all could be doing workshops. in and around city government. Because the more touches we have, the more pervasive this climate of diversity, equity, inclusion will be throughout the employees, throughout the entire system. So I would hope that we can engage the other eight people to do the work as well. Yeah, and I won't say that it's because they're not interested or willing to do it. I'm just saying right now, I mean, the need, I've been able to fulfill the need, I guess, if you will. But yes, but no, I definitely just wrote that down, so I think that's something to look into as well. Great. Thank you. Another, I saw that you, under the recommendations implemented, you spoke about that you reviewed the CAO policies. Yes, ma'am. And I'm assuming you did that through the DE&I lens and made revisions and recommendations for revisions. Is that how that happened? Yes, yes, exactly, yes. Is there a red line version of that that I could see to see what was the policy before and then what are the recommendations or revisions you suggested to be made after? Let me look into that. Let me double check. Okay. Great. And then, let's see. I also saw that in your presentation regarding next steps that the DE&I video is a voluntary training module or going to be a voluntary training module on LexLink. Yes. Why is that voluntary, not mandatory? Well, I mean, that's a conversation that we have to have as administration. Those items there are the ones that we really need to sit down and talk about and say, do we make this mandatory and then if people don't do it by whatever time, what's, I don't know if consequences is the right word, but that's something we need to have a conversation about. Yeah. Yeah. I think it would be good, because it's a good, as you said, a good first step when people come to work for us. They need to know what our expectations are. That video would be a great thing, should be a part of the orientation packet. Okay, okay, yeah, yeah. And I guess lastly, what's my time like, 24 seconds? Did Dr. Cleveland ever come and present on his report himself? No, no, ma'am. I mean, we just converse through Zoom. How can we obtain a copy of that report? And or, Chair, I would entertain, I would love to have Dr. Cleveland come himself and give him a report out on the report? Is that possible? Yes, we could ask. I mean, as far as the report itself, after today, the report will be available on the website. Can you send it to all of us on the committee? Yes, ma'am. Okay. I think that's it, Chair. Thank you. Thank you. Council Member James Brown. Thank you, Chair, and thank you, Mr. Lucas, for your report. I remember when we first created your position, I think I envisioned it being all-encompassing of everything DEI. I think you do a great job and have and continue to do a great job with training and making sure that our folks across city government are aware of what our expectations are when it comes to diversity, equity, and inclusion. I'm just, you know, to Council Member Lynch's point about how do we create and make this something that's part of the fabric of LFUCG. And, you know, other municipalities have created an office of DE&I and have folks across government that report to the head of that office and address issues on a variety of factors. I know today we're talking about the workshops and the update and next steps. And I think there's a plan for us to go forward, but I would encourage the administration to have a conversation about how we do more. I think we have all the pieces in the right spots with Tiffany Brown in the mayor's office, you in the CAO's office. We had Sherita Mitchell doing, I said Mitchell, Sherita Miller with MBE. And I think there are other folks that are doing a lot of the work that we need. I think we just need to figure out a way to better streamline it. I believe it comes from the top down, but I think having a structure in place that is relative to that I think is important. So I just, you know, I mentioned it before, and I'll continue to keep mentioning it. I think there's opportunity to do more and have a more concerted effort across the board. Let me ask a question. So we, so Dr. Cleveland got awarded the RFP and then Colleen Eldridge came in and did the training. Yes. Was there a reason that we switched streams, midstream to go to doctor or to not have Dr. Cleveland do those in-person trainings? Well, I don't think there was a particular reason why not to. I mean, I was asked, do we have others within the community that do this type of work? And, you know, when you're talking about RFPs and things like that, we're trying to be, you know, spread the wealth, I guess, if you will, as far as, you know, bringing different consultants in and getting different point of views and things of that nature. Okay. All right. So it wasn't any particular reason. It was just giving more opportunity to folks that's in that field. Yes, sir. And Dr. Cleveland and I, we've had the conversation about that, and I assured him that he's not off our radar screen or anything like that. Okay. Okay. All right. And then I would look forward to seeing his final report or his executive summary, whatever it is, in regards to the results. And I kind of think we need to leave this presentation with the same message that we have made some strides and are working hard to address the issues. But this is something that we have to be diligent about and continue our efforts in regards to it. So thank you. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Council Member. Next is our Vice Chair, Council Member Plumman. Thank you, Chair. And thank you, Mr. Lucas. I remember, like Council Member Brown said, you coming before us about a couple years ago when we talked about all this. And it looks like you've been very busy. Thank you also. I don't know if all of you know this, but Mr. Lucas participates in our Get On Board program. We train underrepresented voices how to come onto the boards. And we just had another one last night. But he's been doing diversity and inclusion five years for a long time. So thank you. And I think that speaks loud to our community, too, that you're out there and doing that. When I was reading the assessment findings and I'm looking at some of the results, I'm like, wow, I'm glad we asked these questions. And to keep this as a baseline as we move forward to see how we've improved that. Because some of them really astonish me that folks feel that way, that exist, and we need to be cognizant of that. So I really appreciate that. But on these questions, were these solicited? In other words, the questions where you received these responses, were they agree, mostly agree? How were those phrased? Yeah, I mean, Dr. Cleveland had the draft, I mean, the actual document that he submitted to people for them to respond to. Okay, so it was kind of that agree, someone agree now. Dr. Cleveland's materials. Okay. And I also remember when we budgeted $50,000 for the outreach for diversity. Yes, yes. And what did that look like? What did we do? Well, I mean, it's actually allowed us to move in many different directions. And I think most recently when we had the CIO position, we were actually able to post an ad on Blacks in Lexington's website, know professionals within that particular field it's allowed us to advertise with uh the pride center so it's allowed us to use lextropolis for advertisement so it's helped us broaden our outreach i mean we use radio vita which is a radio station out of paris kentucky and they translate information into Spanish as far as our ads and things of that nature. So that's been very helpful as far as, you know, our outreach moving forward. Yeah, I'm great that, it's good that we had that money allocated because I think that will help. We'll keep up the good work and we'll just keep following it and see if we can make some improvements. Yes, ma'am. Thank you, Chair. Thank you. Council Member Gray. Thank you, Chair. Hello, sir. Hello. As you mentioned earlier today when we spoke that the packet we will be receiving from Dr. Cleveland is the executive summary? Yes, ma'am. And you said that's what the city ordered instead of? No, it's not necessarily what the city ordered. in the conversations with Dr. Cleveland, he brought up the fact that typically when he does workshops such as this, he will provide an executive summary. And I mean, and this is the first time we've ever done this. So we accepted and yes. And that's where majority of the information that you see in front of you is coming from the executive summary that Dr. Cleveland provided. Okay. Thank you. I just wanted to get that one out of the way. because you mentioned the climate summary of the results that once you all get the results you then go through yourself in order to figure out how to remedy those well well the game plan there is and and again we have to have the conversation as an administration but once the surveys are done obviously we're going to get feedback back and then i mean my thought process is we hopefully will be approved to hire another consultant that does this type of work so that he or she can give us some guidance on this. But I know once you do the survey, the game plan should be to take the results and then put in an action plan as far as depending on what the outcome is. I mean, if you know you have a situation where employees feel like there's a lack of communication, then, you If they work for Arthur Lucas, I need to work on communicating to my employees. So the question is, what do I do to make sure that happens? So my ask is this. If there is any way that council can receive those results when you receive them, just something for us to see as to gauge from here to there before the actual, once you begin working on it. That's my ask. But I know that you teach DEI classes around. However, for council, I just learned this, that we're able to take these classes. We don't, I have not received any information of the classes that are going out. I know that every division, according to HR when I spoke about it, someone sends them the classes or the schedules. I have not received that. Have my colleagues, have you received those classes? No heads are moving. No, I'm talking about now they have classes. There's a class tomorrow on the 18th in the basement. I'm going to speak more about it, but there's an HR training calendar that comes out once a quarter. Yeah, once a quarter is what I think you're referring to, but it comes from HR. I guess my colleagues and I as well as I was surprised to learn about that. But I would think of is there a better way to let our employees know of these classes that are taking place? We send those quarterly training announcements to payroll coordinators and request that they distribute them to employees. So I'll double check to see who in the council office receives those. And I'll be sure to send out the most current one to you as well. Thank you. And it was mentioned by Council Member Wu regarding the grievances. Let me say, it's probably because I'm new, as someone has mentioned, a large number of our employees have been coming to me regarding their unhappiness with their employment. We have had people who have been coming to me about in different divisions, going from even our public safety to our waste management to our other divisions that do work here who have been expressing their grievances, and they don't know who to go to. So just when we were speaking about grievances, perhaps we need to do a better job of making sure our employees feel safe to express those grievances, Whereas with the public safety, I was freely able to go to their chief and express those, and we are working on something regarding there. But I just want to make sure our employees feel safe in going to whomever it is, HR leader, who will not, I guess, what's the word for it, punish them for doing so. Because there is punishment going on with our employees, which is very interesting to me. And also regarding the Dr. Cleveland report, this is something I've been asking for since maybe day two of me being here because I have heard of this. And I know from our conversation earlier today, you had no idea I had been asking. I know that I have two other colleagues who have been asking as well. And for me, the fact that I had to jump hoops and shoot emails and wait until today was problematic. I believe if council asks for reports that our city has paid for, we should not have to jump through hoops or do hide and seek in order to get that information that we have readily paid for. But that has nothing neither here nor there for you. So, yes, that's just a statement. Thank you, Chair. Council Member Savigny. Thank you, Chair. Even though I'm not on this committee, I appreciate your presentation and I'll keep it brief. Two things that kind of just I noticed on that survey was the no cohesive organizational culture. And I just, I feel like that's something I would definitely, there's a variety of things I'd focus on. But the concept of no cohesive organizational culture, it's culture's king, I think, when it comes to attracting employees. So that concerns me in general. I would be willing to help in any way I can with that because I found that I could always attract good employees if I had a good culture. And then lastly, the diversity inclusion training, like in larger organizations that I've worked in and managed and all that kind of jazz, we always, like this was something that we had to do annually, like we felt like it was important. I do think that that message has to happen on an annual basis. It can't be the same training every year. It's got to kind of change up because the conversation changes each year and eventually it resonates with people. It takes a long time to make those systemic changes in your diversity inclusion culture. So I would encourage us to do it more frequently and mandatorily. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Lynch. Your back up. Thank you, Chair. And I just wanted to have one more question, something that Council Member Brown brought up, piqued my thoughts, because we have strategic, wonderful employees in different divisions, different departments doing the DE&I work. And a lot of times we're stronger together. If we had, as Council Member Brown mentioned, that several cities have a D&I office where it's a centralized location for this work to happen for the whole city. And right now, everybody's in different places, different divisions. Do you think it would be more impactful if we had a DE&I division where you all could be housed to get more of the work done instead of being piecemeal in different divisions, different departments, different supervisors, if you all were housed in the same in one division? I mean, and that may be a possibility. I've never been a part of a cohesive group like that, but I can definitely see some possibilities of it being a more cohesive or sharing responsibilities or however you want to see it. So, yeah. Just something that I would like my colleagues in the administration to think about is that having one place where employees can know they can go to get this information, to get the source, get the help instead of having to go several different places could be a good way to help our employees and better our journey along this DE&I initiative in accomplishing these goals. And maybe that means creating a new division, redoing some restructuring so that we can have a more coordinated effort regarding DE&I. So thank you so much. Mr. Lucas, thank you so much. And thanks for everybody participating in the conversation. Our next item up is the purchase development rights annual update. And we are going to postpone this item until next month. I don't think there's any time issues as far as the ordinance requiring presentation. I think they've still got plenty of time. But I want to particularly thank and apologize to Director Overman and Chair Gloria Martin, who sat through this entire meeting. But I also mainly want to thank them because they did volunteer to be at the end of the agenda, knowing what else we had on the agenda. And I think this is an incredibly important conversation regarding race and equality within our own house that we needed to make sure that we had and really appreciate them graciously giving us that time. But the purchase of development rights and our preservation efforts in our community are also paramount policy concerns. And so we want to make sure we give them ample time. And I don't think 17 minutes is an appropriate amount of time to give such an important program. So we're going to postpone that and have that be the first item on the next agenda. And again, apologies we weren't able to get to you, and thank you. With that, I don't think I want to take time for the items referred to committee. Give us a little break before work session. I know the mayor will be chomping at the bit to get started. So with that, we will stand adjourned. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.