By Jeremy D. Wells
Carter County Times
Carter County Fiscal Court voted to remove portions of one road from the county system, to begin the process on another, and approve a series of plans and agreements needed to move forward with improvements to water lines in the Rattlesnake Ridge Water district during their regular meeting on Monday night.
The court moved to remove the final portion of Sexton Lane from the county road system, at the request of the property owner. That removal came after informing other property owners along the road, posting notices, and going through all steps – including a public hearing at the outset of the meeting – before approving the removal.
The court further moved to begin the process of removing the last one tenth of a mile from Kiser Branch Road from the county road system. Before they can complete the process they must go through all steps to inform and solicit feedback from any impacted individuals, including a public hearing.
They also discussed the request to take Cattleman’s Lane into the county road system. Before the court can even begin the process, however, the center line of the road needs to be surveyed.
In other road related news, Judge Executive Mike Malone noted that the county has some extra funds to put toward paving this year, but stated unequivocally that no paving will be done on any gravel roads where residents have spread their own salt or hired someone to spread salt. Malone said the county does not spread salt on gravel roads because the salt destabilizes the road bed.
“We can’t build roads on jello,” Malone said.
According to road department head Jason Carroll, any gravel roads treated with salt will continue to degrade and destabilize until all of the surface area infiltrated by salt is removed and replaced – at significant cost to the county.
Malone and Carroll said another problem was with individuals attempting to grade their own roads to remove snow and ice. While they might remove some of the ice in the short term, Malone said, that practice also removed gravel that the county had to replace. He said while they already discourage folks from salting and grading county roads themselves, the county might have to consider levying fines or imposing other penalties against those who continue to do so.Â
In water related news, Rattlesnake Ridge Water District moved one step closer to their much-needed improvements. The court approved a series of agreements and resolutions necessary for the disbursement of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds from the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). While the CDBG funds are only one of several funding streams being utilized for the project, because they are federal funds administered through HUD they do require the county to approve several plans and agreements.
The court took action to approve an antidisplacement plan, which guarantees no one will lose their home for this project, approve a legally binding agreement with HUD, and adopt resolutions related to procurement codes, cost overruns, the fair housing ordinance, section 504 handicap accessibility, and establishing a drug-free workplace. With those issues addressed, project administrator Patrick Kirby explained, the district can solicit those CDBG funds and move a step closer to completing the project.
The court also heard from Eric Patton with FIVCO on reapportionment of voting districts, which is expected to only impact about 120 people. Most of the districts are already evenly balanced, Patton told the court. But there are some areas that will need to be slightly redistricted to keep the districts evenly balanced in population. The court will need to appoint a board to make recommendations, but does not necessarily need to follow the suggestions of that board. Though the requirement to make the changes may be extended until 2023, Patton recommended moving forward with appointing a board to make suggestions regarding redistricting.
In public comments the court heard from Carter County librarian Matthew Parsons, who asked the court to keep the library in mind when budgeting any extra funding they may receive. Parsons discussed needs such as accessibility, with the elevators at both locations, as well as other facility needs. Library board member Mindy Woods-Click also spoke on behalf of the library, discussing specific needs such as repairs to the leaking roof at the Grayson location.
Duane Roberts spoke on behalf of the Olive Hill Trail Town group, asking the court for support with establishing a walking trail and family recreation area around the Olive Hill town lake reservoir.
Max Hammond discussed the Warrior’s Path project and requested fiscal court support. That support might take the form of resolutions or other acknowledgements of support, but would not include any requests for financial support at this time.
Grayson city councilman Jerry Yates also came before the board to discuss the ongoing issue with the county’s animal control officer refusing to pick-up animals within city limits. Malone told Yates that while the Kentucky League of Cities – and the cities of Grayson and Olive Hill – feel that this is the county’s duty, the county’s representative with the Kentucky Association of Counties (KACo), is confident that the county is not beholden to the cities when it comes to animal pick-up. While they are required to accept and house animals no matter where they are from, they are not required to pick them up within city limits.
Malone said he would not support the expense unless legal opinions stated the county was responsible. Yates said he understood, noting that he recently opposed the hiring of a city animal control officer because he didn’t want the city to incur an additional cost when many believed city residents – who also pay county taxes – were already paying for the service.
While Yates and the fiscal court discussed some sort of reciprocal agreement, which could allow the dog warden to pick up animals within city limits if there was a cost offset for the service from the cities, such an agreement has been proposed before. A proposal from the county to enter into an interlocal agreement, which included some shared costs, was rejected by both Grayson and Olive Hill city councils when it was offered up by the county several years ago.
But even if the cities chose to contribute, Malone said, the dog warden may not have the time to add the responsibility for policing animals within city limits to his existing duties.
Both Yates and Malone expressed a desire to keep communication on the issue open as they discuss possible solutions, however.
Contact the writer at editor@cartercountytimes.com
