From: Jan Read To: Preptit, Jeff (Council Member) Cc: Tom Bauer; Claire Gibson Subject: Feedback on Canvassing Materials — Green Hills East Conservation Overlay Date: Saturday, June 13, 2026 4:07:30 PM Attachments: Proposed GHE overlay ballot.docx GHE_Overlay_Comparison - Revised 2026.06.10 (1) with TB Marks.....docx Attention : This email originated from a source external to Metro Government. Please exercise caution when opening any attachments or links from external sources. Dear Councilmember Preptit, Thank you for assembling the canvassing materials and inviting our feedback. As members of the steering committee, we have reviewed the documents, and after two years of work toward this vote, we believe two changes are essential to a clear, valid, and defensible result. 1. A clean yes-or-no vote on the Conservation Overlay only. The draft ballot currently asks residents to vote on two different zoning tools at once, and its instructions direct anyone who prefers a Contextual Overlay to vote no on the Conservation Overlay. This conflates two separate questions and makes the meaning of any individual vote unclear. A ballot whose results can be read more than one way invites challenge, and this process has been derailed once already. The question before the neighborhood is straightforward: Do residents support a Conservation Overlay, yes or no? We ask that the ballot pose that single question. If the Conservation Overlay does not receive the required support, the neighborhood remains free to consider other tools, including a Contextual Overlay, at that time. That is the appropriate sequence, and it preserves every option without confusing the vote. 2. Ballots distributed and returned via U.S. Mail We are proposing that the ballots be sent via U.S. Mail from your Council office to maintain the integrity of the voting results. The ballots would be mailed to the owner on record with a stamped self-addressed envelope for the return, also solving the problem of tracking down rental owners. The informational materials could still be hand-distributed by block captains OR, to save printing and mailing costs, a cover letter from Councilmember Preptit mailed with the ballot would refer everyone to a neutral website where the informational materials would be posted. 3. Updated informational materials. We are proposing an updated set of materials to accompany the ballot with the goal of keeping the information accurate, concise, and easy for every resident to understand. We have no changes to the map or the Neighborhood Conservation Zoning Design Guidelines for Turn of the 20 th Century District: Part I that you circulated to the Steering Committee. We do suggest renaming that document Neighborhood Conservation Zoning Design Guidelines Part 1. We suggest that the document titled Notice_publichearing.pdf that you distributed be renamed Neighborhood Conservation Overlay Part II, and that the first two pages be deleted. We suggest not including Brett’s presentation or the Contextual Overlay Fact Sheet, as there is no correlating fact sheet for the Conservation Overlay. We are attaching the updated ballot and an updated Conservation/Contextual comparison sheet. We appreciate your attention to this and your service to our district. Our neighborhood has done the work, and we are asking for the chance to express its will through a vote that is clear, transparent, and beyond dispute. We are confident in the outcome and ask only that the process allow that outcome to stand. Respectfully, Tom Bauer Claire Gibson Jan Read