Bourbon County

Bourbon County Clerk Files Lawsuit Seeking to Block Recall Petition

Leave a comment

Fort Scott, Kansas — Bourbon County Clerk Susan Walker filed a lawsuit in Bourbon County District Court on May 22, 2026, asking a judge to stop the recall petition currently being circulated against her. The case, Walker v. Crux et al. (BB-2026-CV-000048), names Bourbon County Attorney James Crux and the three members of the recall committee — Kyle R. Parks, Kevin Wagner, and Lyle K. Owenby — as defendants. Hon. Richard M. Fisher Jr. is assigned to the case.

Walker also filed an emergency motion asking the court to halt signature-gathering immediately while the case is decided.

What Walker is arguing

Her 28-page lawsuit makes two main arguments:

  1. The county attorney never officially signed off on the version of the petition being circulated. Under K.S.A. 25-4322(b), the county attorney has to review any recall petition and notify the official, the recall committee, and the county election officer in writing before signatures can be collected. Walker says Crux did that for the first draft (see his letter on April 27, 2026) but not for the amended version.
  2. The reasons listed don’t legally qualify as grounds for a recall. Under K.S.A. 25-4302, a Kansas official can only be recalled for a felony conviction, “misconduct in office,” or “failure to perform duties prescribed by law.” Walker argues the petition is too vague to meet the standard Kansas courts have set in earlier recall cases.

What’s the recall about?

The recall traces back to an error on early-voting ballots for the November 4, 2025 general election. According to Walker, USD 235 (Uniontown school district) had not told the Clerk’s office which of three “voting plans” (A, B, or C, under K.S.A. 72-1083) it wanted to use for its school board race. The clerk’s office printed ballots under Plan C when the correct plan was Plan B. By the time the mistake was caught, 52 early voters had cast incorrect ballots. Walker laid out her account in a May 10 statement on FortScott.biz.

What both sides agree on

Both sides agree on the core error: the USD 235 early-voting ballots were wrong, and Walker’s office printed corrected ballots in time for Election Day. Walker’s lawsuit adds (and the recall side does’t dispute) that the election was then certified. No formal challenge was filed regarding the results of the election.

Where they disagree

When Walker found out — and how fast she responded. This is the heart of the recall. The previous no-confidence vote said the ballots were wrong “despite timely notifications from affected residents… while advance voting was actively underway,” and the recall petition echoes it almost word for word: the problem was “brought to her attention by multiple individuals during the early voting period.” Both imply Walker was aware of the issue and chose not to act for some time. Walker tells it differently. Her May 10 statement says the first notification was a call “before 12:00 PM on November 3” — the day before the election. Her lawsuit puts the first call at exactly 9:51 a.m. She says she began fixing the problem immediately, as K.S.A. 25-604(c) requires (“corrected without delay”). Neither the petition nor the no-confidence letter names dates, people, or specifies a timeline for the earlier complaints; Walker says she has a record of the November 3 call.

FortScott.biz contacted Bourbon County Republican party to see if they had any supporting information or evidence for the version of the timeline from the no confidence vote. The chairperson responded with this statement:

The issue that my precinct committeemen and women are focused on is that the wrong ballots were distributed.

(FortScott.biz also reached out to the households of Kyle R. Parks, Kevin Wagner, and Lyle K. Owenby via Facebook messenger asking if they had any information or evidence to support their statements in the recall petition that are disputed by the clerk. Mr. Owenby gave the query a thumbs up, but no other response was received before this article was published.)

Whether this legally counts as “failure to perform duties.” The petition says yes: Walker “caused to be printed and distributed incorrect ballots,” didn’t fix it quickly enough, and made statements “later contradicted by testimony from the school superintendent.” Walker says no: USD 235 failed to certify its voting plan, and she fixed the resulting ballot error as soon as she was notified they intended to use a different plan.

Whether the county attorney has signed off on the current petition. Walker says Crux’s April 27 letter only reviewed the first draft and that the amended version needs a new written determination. But that letter actually ruled on the two grounds separately finding “failure to perform duties” sufficient and “misconduct” insufficient. Crux told the committee, “Only the sufficient reasons for recall should be contained on the petition.” The amended petition does exactly that: it drops “misconduct” and keeps “failure to perform duties.” Whether Crux’s existing determination carries over as approval, or whether the amendment requires a fresh K.S.A. 25-4322(b) letter, is one of the questions for the court.

Whether the petition is specific enough. Kansas court rulings — Reynolds v. Figge, Baker v. Gibson, Unger v. Horn, and Cline v. Tittel — say a recall petition must state its grounds in 200 words or fewer (K.S.A. 25-4320) and specifically enough for the official to respond to (K.S.A. 25-4329). The recall petition’s key allegation reads: “The improper preparation, verification, and distribution of official ballots demonstrate a failure to perform the duties required of the office of County Clerk acting as County Election Officer under Chapter 25 of the Kansas Statutes.” Walker argues that allegation fails the specificity test. As her lawsuit explains on page 13:

“K.S.A. Chapter 25 includes forty-seven separate articles with hundreds of statutes containing thousands of subsections. Defendant Recall Committee must be more specific in its petition if they wish to allege violating a statute as grounds for recall. They could, for instance, cite to specific statutes as Defendant Crux did in his letter evaluating the first proposed recall petition. … There, Defendant Crux says, K.S.A. §§ 25-604(a) and 25-2303(a) are duties of the County Election Officer. Such specificity is nowhere in the Recall Petition, as it must be.”

In other words, Walker argues the petition must meet the same specificity standard Crux himself applied when he reviewed it.

Whether “misconduct” is still being alleged. The first draft used the word “misconduct.” Crux’s April 27 letter found “nothing in the petition supports this allegation.” The amended petition drops the word but keeps the same allegations. Walker says the misconduct claim is therefore still being made, just relabeled.

What this lawsuit does and doesn’t decide

According to  K.S.A. 25-4325, the recall committee and people circulating the petition swear, under penalty of perjury, that the claims are true, but the claims do not have to be proven true in court for a recall to move forward. The law leaves the truth of the allegations to the voters. The only way to stop a recall petition in court is to show that it is legally invalid — not to show that its accusations are false.

That is the kind of challenge Walker has brought. She disputes several of the petition’s factual claims, but her lawsuit does not ask the court to decide whether they are true. It argues the petition is procedurally and legally insufficient: that the county attorney never issued the determination K.S.A. 25-4322(b) requires for the circulating version, and that its grounds are too vague and too disconnected from her actual duties. Kansas courts have drawn this line clearly. In Baker v. Gibson (1995), the Court of Appeals held that “the truth or falsity of the grounds must still be determined by the electorate, not the county or district attorney” — the very sentence Crux quoted in his April 27 letter, where he wrote that he reviewed the petition “assuming the facts are true,” not checking whether they were. Cline v. Tittel (1995) drew the same distinction, holding that the county or district attorney decides a petition’s legal sufficiency but “does not determine whether the grounds asserted should subject the local officer to recall.”

What the county attorney does decide is legal sufficiency: whether the petition alleges one of the three statutory grounds, states it specifically enough for the official to answer, and follows the required steps. If the court sides with Walker on any of those, it could block the petition without ever ruling on what she knew, when she knew it, or how fast she acted.

Timeline

  • October–November 3, 2025 — Early voting underway. Walker says her first notification of the ballot problem came November 3; the recall side says residents notified her earlier.
  • November 3–4, 2025 — Corrected ballots printed overnight; election held November 4.
  • April 10, 2026 — Bourbon County GOP votes no confidence in Walker.
  • April 22–27, 2026 — Recall committee files first draft of petition with Crux.
  • April 27, 2026 — Crux issues his written determination: petition can proceed on “failure to perform duties,” not on “misconduct.”
  • Early May 2026 — Recall committee files amended petition dropping “misconduct.”
  • May 10, 2026 — FortScott.biz reports the amended petition has been filed; Walker issues her statement.
  • May 22, 2026 — Walker files her lawsuit and emergency motion.

What Walker is asking for

She wants the court to declare the amended petition invalid and block signature-gathering, any recall election, and certification of any results. Her emergency motion, filed under K.S.A. 60-903, argues the ongoing recall is doing harm to her reputation that can’t be undone later. Walker is represented by Jonathan L. Ehrlich, Joshua A. Ney, and Wyatt Hoagland of KN Law Group in Olathe. No defense attorneys had appeared as of filing.

What happens next

Three things are in motion at once:

  • The emergency motion. Judge Fisher can grant or deny it without first hearing from the defendants, but only if he finds Walker is being immediately harmed. This is the soonest milestone: if granted, signature collection stops while the case plays out; if denied, signatures keep being collected.
  • The main lawsuit. The four defendants have been served and typically have 21 days to respond. Expect motions to dismiss and a hearing schedule over the coming weeks.
  • The signature window. Under K.S.A. 25-4324, a recall committee has 90 days to gather the required signatures, and that clock starts when the committee receives the county attorney’s written notice that the grounds are sufficient. The only such notice in the record is Crux’s April 27 letter on the first petition, which would put the deadline on or about July 26, 2026. Walker’s lawsuit argues the amended petition now being circulated never received its own sufficiency notice, so when — or whether — a valid 90-day clock started is itself one of the disputed questions. Unless the court intervenes, signature-gathering continues.

Being named in a lawsuit is not a finding of wrongdoing; defendants may respond and contest the claims. FortScott.biz will continue to follow the case.

Fort Scott Community College, Opinion

From the Bleachers by Dr. Jack Welch

Leave a comment

Who Are You Listening To?

 One of the greatest challenges in leadership is deciding whose voice deserves your attention. Whether leading a business, a school, or even a family, there will always be opinions coming from every direction. Some voices provide wisdom, perspective, and accountability. Others simply create noise.

In The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People, Stephen Covey reminds us to “seek first to understand, then to be understood.” Effective leaders listen carefully before reacting emotionally. They gather facts, consider motives, and stay grounded in principles rather than popularity.

Unfortunately, leadership today often faces a different challenge, the anonymous critic. There are individuals who act like chameleons, constantly changing colors depending on the environment around them. In public, they may smile, shake your hand, and offer encouragement. Behind closed doors, especially when comments can remain anonymous, the tone changes. Frustration becomes anger. Criticism becomes personal. Rumors replace solutions.

Interestingly, anonymous criticism rarely comes from the organization’s strongest performers. Most high-impact employees are too busy working, producing, solving problems, and helping others succeed to spend their energy hiding behind anonymous attacks. More often, the loudest anonymous voices come from individuals struggling with performance, resisting accountability, or frustrated because expectations are increasing around them. Instead of growing through the challenge, they attempt to pull others backward into negativity.

Strong leaders cannot allow anonymous negativity to become the steering wheel of an organization. That does not mean leaders should ignore criticism. In fact, constructive criticism is healthy and necessary. Good leaders need honest people around them who are willing to speak truth respectfully, even when conversations are difficult. Accountability strengthens organizations.

The difference is this: trustworthy voices bring concerns with integrity and solutions attached. Anonymous anger often brings division without responsibility. In coaching, I learned quickly that if I listened to every voice in the stands, our team would never move forward. Some people react emotionally to a single loss, a bad quarter, or one difficult decision. Leadership requires the discipline to stay focused on long-term goals instead of short-term noise.

The same is true in business and education. Listen to people who are willing to stand behind their words. Listen to those who want the organization to succeed more than they want attention. Listen to principled people, not emotional winds. In the end, leadership is not about pleasing every voice. It is about responsibly guiding the mission forward.

Thought for the Week

“Wise leaders do not follow the loudest voices. They follow the clearest principles.” Joshua Welch, Welch Land Development.

Dr. Jack Welch serves as President of Fort Scott Community College. With a career spanning professional sports, public education, and rural community development, he brings a servant-leader mindset and a passion for building trust-driven cultures that empower people to thrive in the classroom, on the field, and in life. He is also the author of Foundations of Coaching: The Total Coaching Manual.

Opinion

Happy Heart by Carolyn Tucker

Leave a comment

Keys to the Kingdom

By Carolyn Tucker

Happy Heart

When I was a youngster attending Vacation Bible School in the summer I liked singing with my friends, “If you’re happy and you know it, then your face will surely show it…”

It’s been said that Christ followers are to watch and see where God is already at work and then join Him. I would suggest that He can also prompt you to do something new as a “solo” ministry. Either way, we shouldn’t hesitate or procrastinate to obey and work in the kingdom of God. You’re bound to find joy in the journey as God provides you with everything you need in order to accomplish what He’s calling you to do. “And my God will liberally supply (fill to the full) your every need according to His riches in glory in Christ Jesus” (Philippians 4:19 AMP). If you, as a believer, do not believe that to be true, you should probably hang up your apron and turn in your key.

Please, don’t argue with God like Moses did when God was trying to give him a most-important assignment. Moses even said, “Please, Lord, send someone else” (Exodus 4:13 CSB). Oh my stars, I don’t blame God for getting angry with Moses! This conversation was getting out-of-hand. When God calls the unqualified and inexperienced to do a job, He will qualify us with ways and means that far surpass anything we could ever do on our own. It’s kinda’ comparable to the movie scene when a New York City thug threatens Crocodile Dundee with a knife. Dundee grins and says, “That’s not a knife, (as he unsheathes his own and holds it up) THAT’S a knife!” In our own eyes, we think we’ve got great ideas, but what we need are God ideas. “Don’t be impressed with your own wisdom. Instead, fear the Lord and turn away from evil” (Proverbs 3:7 NLT).

We can be choosy about our peanut butter, but not the assignment/ministry that God calls us to do. It pleases Him when we wholeheartedly accept it and do it with a happy heart. We should say, “Here I am, Lord – sign me up!” We need to keep our eyes and ears open and listen with our heart to the promptings of the Holy Spirit. “Be still, and know that I am God” (Psalm 46:10 NLT). Stay sensitive to the quiet, all-important leading of God. And don’t scrutinize how other believers are ministering and become envious or jealous. We should thank God that He is the Master Creator of variety. God needs all of us to aggressively obey and happily accomplish what He’s designed us to do.

Jesus prayerfully chose a unique bunch to be His twelve disciples. They were common men, but they became uncommon men in about three years. When Paul and Silas were preaching in Thessalonica, the Jews were jealous and declared them troublemakers. “These men who have turned the world upside down have come here also” (Acts 17:6 ESV). These two guys were simply obeying God’s call, but it brought out the worst in the Jewish authorities. The devil doesn’t like it when we say, “Yes” to God. But who cares! Mr. Lucifer is just going to have to get over it and learn to read upside down.

The Lord called to young Samuel four times. The young lad finally responded, “Speak, your servant is listening” (1 Samuel 3:9 NLT). Let’s be like Samuel so that when God speaks we’ll listen and obey…and be happy! “Happy are the people whose strength is in You” (Psalm 84:5 CSB). God provides everything we need in order to do what He’s called us to do. And that should make us happy!

 The Key: Believers who listen, obey, and minister to others will have a happy heart.

K-State Extension

Great Outdoors Month by Jennifer Terrell

Leave a comment
Jennifer Terrell, K-State Extension Agent

Families Invited to Reconnect with Nature During Great Outdoors Month

As the school year ends and summer begins, families have a perfect opportunity to step outside and reconnect with nature. June marks Great Outdoors Month, a nationwide celebration highlighting the importance of outdoor play—not just for fun, but for the lasting benefits it provides to children and adults alike.

Great Outdoors Month encourages people to explore parks, trails, waterways, and even their own backyards. It’s a chance to slow down, unplug from screens, and spend meaningful time together in the fresh air.

Outdoor activities are one of the simplest and most powerful ways to strengthen family connections while supporting healthy development. Time outside promotes physical health, reduces stress, and improves mood and focus. It also fosters creativity and problem-solving as children build forts, explore nature, and invent their own games—skills that may not develop as naturally in more structured environments.

The best part is that meaningful outdoor experiences don’t require travel or expense. Simple activities close to home—such as taking a walk after dinner, visiting a local park, gardening, or planning a picnic—can make a big impact. Even 20–30 minutes outside each day can make a difference.

One goal of Great Outdoors Month is to help families build habits that last beyond June. When outdoor time becomes part of everyday life, children are more likely to develop a lifelong appreciation for nature and physical activity. It also creates opportunities to slow down and make lasting memories together.

To support families in getting outdoors, a variety of events are taking place across the country. National Play Outside Day is June 6 and continues monthly with the first Saturday of each month. The U.S. Forest Service will waive recreation fees at most day-use sites on National Trails Day (June 6) and National Get Outdoors Day (June 13). In Kansas, the Department of Wildlife and Parks is offering a free fishing weekend on June 6–7, along with free entrance to select state parks: Prairie Dog State Park (June 6), Cedar Bluff and Historic Lake Scott (June 13), and Wilson State Park (June 20).

K-State Research and Extension | Southwind District is also encouraging outdoor exploration by hosting an Outdoor Adventure Day at Gunn Park in Fort Scott for youth ages 7–18 on June 7 from 2–6 p.m. Youth ages 14–18 will have the opportunity to build leadership skills by assisting with activities.

For more information about this event and other youth opportunities, visit southwind.ksu.edu or contact Jennifer Terrell at [email protected].

K-State Extension

Prune Evergreens Now Before Summer Growth Peaks by Krista Harding

Leave a comment

Prune Evergreens Now Before Summer Growth Peaks

As evergreen trees and shrubs across Kansas begin their annual spring growth flush, now is the ideal time for homeowners to inspect and prune landscape evergreens before summer arrives.

Evergreen species — including pine, spruce, fir, juniper, arborvitae, holly, boxwood, and yew — retain foliage year-round and typically hold two to three years’ worth of needles at any given time. These plants generally require less pruning than deciduous trees and shrubs, but proper timing and technique remain critical to maintaining healthy growth and appearance.

Pruning evergreen plants differs significantly from pruning many other landscape plants because most evergreens do not regenerate growth from older interior wood.

For pine trees, spring is the key pruning season. New pine growth develops once each year from terminal buds, producing soft shoots known as “candles.”

Gardeners looking to manage size and encourage denser growth are advised to trim back one-half to two-thirds of the candle length before needles fully expand. It is recommended to pinch candles by hand using careful cuts to avoid browning at the needle tips. Because pines naturally produce limited side branching, heavy pruning or shearing is discouraged.

Spruce and fir trees also produce a single flush of annual growth from branch tips. Prune branches back only to side buds or lateral branches while avoiding cuts beyond existing needles. Up to half of the new growth may be removed safely, though experts caution that lower branches on mature trees recover slowly because most vigorous growth occurs near the top canopy. Dwarf and slow-growing varieties may be especially sensitive to pruning and should be trimmed sparingly.

Junipers and arborvitae differ slightly by producing multiple growth flushes throughout the growing season, often from April through October. Selective pruning is recommended in early spring by cutting individual branches back to upward-growing side shoots. This method helps preserve a natural appearance while concealing pruning cuts. Do not cut back into older branch wood lacking needles, as those bare areas are unlikely to recover.

Although formal shearing remains common in many landscapes, the practice often damages the plant’s natural form and increases long-term maintenance demands. If shearing is necessary, at least one inch of previous growth should remain to prevent exposing interior dead zones.

Annual spring pruning is generally considered the safest and most effective approach for controlling evergreen growth. When plants are severely overgrown, replacement may be preferable to aggressive pruning.

Do not prune after mid-August, as late-season cuts can stimulate tender new growth that may not harden properly before winter temperatures arrive.

The guidance was provided through Kansas State University horticulture resources from the Department of Horticulture and Natural Resources in Manhattan, Kansas.

Krista Harding is a K-State Research and Extension horticulture agent serving the Southwind District. She can be reached at [email protected] or 620-244-3826.

K-State Research and Extension is an equal opportunity provider.

Bourbon County, Food, Government, Schools, Youth

Free Breakfast and Lunch for Kids Under 18 Starting June 1 at West Bourbon Elementary School

Leave a comment
West Bourbon Elementary School, Uniontown, KS
There are free meals offered for kids this summer in Uniontown.
The program is for anyone under the age of 18 years and will be located at West Bourbon Elementary School on Fifth Street in Uniontown.
Breakfast and lunch will be served from June 1 to June 26, Monday through Friday.
Breakfast is from 8:30 to 9 a.m. and lunch is available from 12:15 to 12:45 p.m.
The school is having a summer school through a 21st Century Grant for 6th through 12th-grade students.
That program is full at the moment, USD235 Superintendent Vance Eden said.
Government

U.S. Senator Marshall Weekly Press Overview, May 18-May 22, 2026

Leave a comment

 

 

 

Senator Marshall: America Should Lead the World in Fertilizer Production

 

Washington – This week, U.S. Senator Roger Marshall, M.D. (R-Kansas), delivered remarks at a press conference hosted by USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins and joined by Secretary of Energy Chris Wright, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin, and other ag leaders in Congress. This was focused on bringing down the costs of fertilizer by increasing domestic production.

 

Senator Marshall emphasized that high fertilizer prices remain one of the biggest challenges facing Kansas farmers. He called for reduced foreign dependence and swift congressional action on his key fertilizer legislation to bring down costs for American producers.

 

 

Click here to learn more.

 

Senator Marshall Receives Spirit of America Award from National Grocers Association

 

Washington – On Tuesday, U.S. Senator Roger Marshall, M.D. (R-Kansas), joined independent grocers from across the country this week during the National Grocers Association’s (NGA) annual Fly-In for a fireside chat with NGA President and CEO Greg Ferrara, where he discussed his bipartisan Credit Card Competition Act (CCCA) and the challenges facing Main Street grocery stores.

 

Following the discussion, Senator Marshall received NGA’s Spirit of America Award, which recognizes leaders for exceptional contributions to community service and government relations on behalf of the independent supermarket industry.

 

 

Click here to learn more.

 

Senator Marshall’s Investing in All of America Act Signed Into Law

Washington – This week, President Trump signed U.S. Senator Roger Marshall, M.D. (R-Kansas)’s Investing in All America Act into law. The bipartisan legislation strengthens the Small Business Investment Company (SBIC) program by exempting investments in rural and low-income communities — as well as manufacturing and critical technology sectors — from the program’s leverage cap, unlocking more private capital for the areas that need it most.

“America grows from the middle out — not the coasts in,” said Senator Marshall. “Today, President Trump signed into law a bipartisan bill that makes sure the next wave of American growth reaches small businesses in rural and low-income communities, as well as the small manufacturers and innovators keeping this country competitive. This is a win for Kansas and a win for every corner of America that Washington has too long overlooked.”

The SBIC program has supported over 3 million jobs over the last two decades, including $505.4 million invested in Kansas and support for 98 Kansas small businesses. Despite that track record, less than 20% of SBIC investments currently reach low- to middle-income communities. The Investing in All of America Act closes that gap — directing capital where it’s needed, not just where it’s easy.

 

Click here to learn more.

Senator Marshall Calls on TV Ratings Board to Put Parents Back in Control

Washington – U.S. Senator Roger Marshall (R-Kansas) sent a follow-up letter to the TV Parental Guidelines Monitoring Board demanding reforms to strengthen parental transparency in children’s programming — calling out the entertainment industry’s continued failure to disclose radical transgender content and other sexually explicit themes hidden inside programming rated for your young children.

The letter builds on concerns Senator Marshall first raised in 2022, when Disney executives publicly admitted to intentionally embedding sexual orientation and radical gender ideology themes into programming aimed at young children. Four years later, the problem has only gotten worse.

A recent analysis of Netflix children’s programming by Concerned Women for America found that 41% of series rated TV-G and 41% of series rated TV-Y7 contained LGBTQ content, messages, characters, or themes — yet none of that content was disclosed to parents through rating information or descriptors.

Senator Marshall’s letter comes as FCC Chairman Brendan Carr has launched a review process examining whether the current TV Parental Guidelines adequately equip parents to make informed decisions about what their children watch.

Click here to learn more.

 

Senator Marshall: Manufacturing is Booming in Kansas

 

Kansas City – U.S. Senator Roger Marshall, M.D. (R-Kansas), joined Maria Bartiromo on Fox Business’ Mornings with Maria to discuss the Vice President’s trip to Kansas City, passing ICE and CBP funding, a third reconciliation bill to lower the cost of living, thriving manufacturing in Kansas, the conflict in Iran, and Kevin Warsh’s upcoming swearing in.

 

 

Click HERE to download or on the image to watch the full interview.

 

Senator Marshall: We Have Solutions to Bring Down Costs – Now we Have to Finish the Job

 

Kansas City – U.S. Senator Roger Marshall, M.D. (R-Kansas), joined Pete Mundo on Mundo in the Morning live in his KC studio ahead of Vice President Vance’s visit to Kansas City to discuss the importance of the city’s manufacturing industry and its role in the national economy. Senator Marshall also discussed his focus on the cost of living, highlighting his work to address healthcare costs, credit card swipe fees, and year-round E-15.

 

 

Click HERE to download or on the image to watch the full interview.

 

###

 

Bourbon County

Timeline: Bitcoin Mining Noise Complaints, the County Noise Resolution, and the Ranes v. Evolution Technology Lawsuit

Leave a comment

A bitcoin mining operation in rural northwest Bourbon County has been a recurring subject at county commission meetings since October 2025, prompting noise complaints from neighbors, two county moratoriums, a county-wide noise resolution, an unsuccessful proposal for a much broader business moratorium, several opinion pieces, and a private civil lawsuit. This is a chronological summary of the publicly documented events to date.

October 6, 2025 — First commission discussion of bitcoin mining noise

Resident Dereck Ranes brought noise complaints to the Bourbon County Commission about natural-gas generators powering a bitcoin mining operation near his property. Ranes asked the commission for a moratorium and a noise resolution. Neighbors Kimberly Sparks and Jill Franklin also addressed commissioners about noise and vibration. Sheriff Bill Martin said his department was investigating but that enforcement of any noise rule would require county-hired personnel, since the sheriff’s office is not a code-enforcement agency. The commission agreed to continue the discussion and work on a draft moratorium. (story)

October 14, 2025 — Commission unanimously passes a 12-month moratorium on cryptocurrency mining

At its October 14 meeting the commission voted unanimously to pass a 12-month moratorium specifically directed at cryptocurrency mining. Commissioner David Beerbower moved to adopt the resolution; Commissioner Samuel Tran questioned whether the regulation would expose the county to litigation but supported it after Beerbower clarified that the moratorium targeted cryptocurrency mining only, not natural-gas extraction. County Counselor Bob Johnson told the commission that a moratorium applies only to new activity (not existing operations) and that the typical purpose is to give the planning commission time to develop more comprehensive rules. The text was to be published and signed at the next meeting. (story)

October 20, 2025 — Continued discussion; “cease-and-desist” requested

At the October 20 meeting Dereck Ranes thanked the commission for the moratorium but asked for a cease-and-desist directed at the existing operation, saying the noise was causing headaches and ear pain. Commissioner Beerbower asked all commissioners to begin formulating parameters for a county noise resolution, separate from the cryptocurrency moratorium, that would address volume and duration without targeting any specific industry. The noise resolution was added to the November 10 agenda. (story)

October 23, 2025 — Special meeting; proposed noise ordinance presented

At a special commission meeting on October 23, 2025, a proposed noise ordinance was presented for the first time. The draft would establish decibel limits for different zoning areas, define noise violations, and assign enforcement to the sheriff’s department. Commissioners discussed decibel levels, exemptions for agricultural operations, and enforcement mechanisms, and agreed to bring the ordinance back at the next regular meeting after legal review. (special-meeting story · text of the proposed ordinance as presented)

October 27, 2025 — Commission continues noise resolution discussion

Commissioner David Beerbower read a prepared statement and recommended the matter be referred to the planning commission rather than handled by the county commission directly. Commissioners Mika Milburn-Kee and Samuel Tran agreed that the planning commission should formulate the ordinance, with Tran noting that the language in the current draft could be considered zoning, which is outside the commission’s direct authority. Derek Ranes spoke during public comment, describing the noise from the bitcoin mining generator as continuous and unlike intermittent noises. County Counselor Bob Johnson warned about the legal implications of enforcement and selective prosecution. Sheriff Bill Martin reiterated that his department cannot enforce a noise resolution and suggested that a code-enforcement officer would have to be hired. (story)

November 3, 2025 — Work session on the proposed noise ordinance

Commissioner Samuel Tran reported a decibel reading of 58 dB at the gate of the bitcoin mining property — lower than earlier readings — though Commissioner David Beerbower noted that the sheriff’s department recorded higher readings later. Tran raised concerns about enforceability and the potential breadth of the proposed resolution. Beerbower continued working on the resolution and said the planning commission could later repeal or amend it as needed. (story)

November 11, 2025 — Evotech representatives appear before commission

Attorney Ty Patton of Trip, Wolf and Garrison (Wichita) and Adam Couch, one of the owners of Evolution Technology, LLC (operating as Evotech), addressed the commission. They explained that the operation:

  • consists of two shipping containers of computers powered by an on-site natural-gas generator (not the electrical grid),
  • produces approximately 1 megawatt,
  • runs around the clock, and
  • registers 55–77 dB at the site entrance, according to readings the sheriff’s office had taken at different times of day.

Patton said Evotech had added noise-mitigation fencing and that further mitigation would cost between $75,000 and $100,000. Nearby residents Derek Ranes, David Ranes, and Charlotte O’Hara expressed concerns about noise, vibration, and the possibility that similar operations could be sited on other abandoned gas wells in the county. (story)

November 17, 2025 — Planning Commission’s broader moratorium proposal tabled

The agenda packet for the November 17 commission meeting included a recommendation from the Bourbon County Planning Commission for a moratorium that would have required all new non-agricultural commercial or industrial businesses in unincorporated areas of the county to obtain a special use permit from the commission before operating. The commission voted unanimously to table the recommendation. The narrower bitcoin-mining moratorium from October 14 remained the only moratorium on the books at that point.

December 15, 2025 — Commission adopts Resolution 50-25 (Noise Limitations); narrower industrial moratorium directed for drafting

On a 2-1 vote, the commission adopted Resolution 50-25, “Noise Limitations in Unincorporated Areas of Bourbon County, Kansas.” Commissioner Mika Milburn-Kee voted against. The resolution prohibits “loud, unnecessary, or unusual” noise near residences and adopts EPA guidelines for measurement. The thresholds it identifies are noise exceeding 70 dB for a 24-hour duration, 55 dB outdoors and 45 dB indoors between 7 a.m. and 10 p.m., and 45 dB outdoors and 35 dB indoors between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. — measured within 75 feet of the source as prima facie evidence of a violation. The resolution assigns enforcement to the commission or its designee and sets a maximum fine of $500 per day per offense.

At the same meeting the commission directed the county counselor to draft a narrower moratorium covering utility-level power generation, energy storage, cryptocurrency mining, data centers, and waste disposal. (story · Resolution 50-25 (PDF))

January 5, 2026 — Commission unanimously approves Resolution 07-26 (180-day industrial moratorium)

At the January 5 meeting, County Counselor Bob Johnson presented a draft moratorium resolution. Chairman David Beerbower moved to approve Resolution 07-26, “providing for a temporary moratorium of utility scale power generation, crypto mining, data centers, and waste disposal operations in Bourbon County, Kansas.” Commissioner Samuel Tran seconded. The motion passed unanimously. The moratorium runs 180 days and specifically exempts the three solar energy projects previously approved under Resolution 41-25. It does not apply to commercial or industrial businesses generally — the broader moratorium recommended by the Planning Commission in November never advanced.

Ben Hall, a property owner at 80th and Willow Road, used public comment to describe a dispute with Evotech over a gas well on his property: he said Evotech had approached him in summer 2025 about leasing the well, that negotiations stalled over price, and that an Evotech contractor had later told a rural-water-district worker that Evotech had permission to access Hall’s property and could cut locks if needed. Hall said he had received no documentation supporting any access right and characterized Evotech’s actions as bullying and harassment. County Counselor Bob Johnson said the well dispute appeared to be a civil matter between private parties. (story)

February 13, 2026 — Civil lawsuit filed

Dereck Ranes, Cassie Ranes, David Ranes, and Verna Ranes filed a petition in Bourbon County District Court, case number BB-2026-CV-000013, against Evolution Technology, LLC and Charles Rees (the landowner of the site). The case is classified as “CV Other Tort” and is assigned to Judge Richard M. Fisher Jr.

The plaintiffs are represented by Rustin Kimmell of the Kimmell Law Firm LLC, Burlington, Kansas. Evolution Technology is represented by Matthew Hogan of Rasmussen, Dicky, Dioszeghy, Henry, Ijei in Kansas City, Missouri. Defendant Charles Rees is represented by Gary E. Thompson of Mound City, Kansas. The county is not a party to the lawsuit.

February 23, 2026 — Commission considers changes to the noise resolution; changes tabled (resolution remains in effect)

Commissioner Mika Milburn-Kee raised concerns about the complaint form and the process for handling noise complaints under Resolution 50-25, and said she wanted to review the form and the start-to-finish enforcement process with the county attorney. She cited prior difficulty completing enforcement on existing county sanitation codes as a reason to make sure the noise-resolution process would actually work. Commissioner Beerbower agreed. Changes to the resolution were tabled until the next meeting; Resolution 50-25 itself remained in effect. (story)

March 2, 2026 — County Attorney provides analysis of proposed amended resolution

At the March 2 regular meeting, County Attorney James Crux presented his analysis of the proposed amended noise resolution and identified several issues, according to the meeting minutes:

  • It was unclear whether the resolution was intended as a general nuisance statute or as specific decibel-based violations.
  • The listed decibel limits (55 dB during day, 45 dB at night) were characterized as “guidelines” rather than enforceable standards. Crux noted that 55 dB is approximately equivalent to light traffic or nearby conversation, and that 45 dB is comparable to a modern refrigerator.
  • Enforcement would require a county codes inspector with proper training in criminal law and search procedures.

Commissioner Beerbower noted the resolution was intended to address ongoing noise complaints, including in the Xenia area, with additional complaints pending the resolution’s adoption. Commissioner Tran asked Crux to visit the Xenia site to hear the noise firsthand. Commissioner Gregg Motley suggested that civil enforcement might be more effective than criminal enforcement; Crux noted his review found insufficient grounds for criminal public-nuisance charges. Both Crux and County Counselor Johnson indicated that either criminal or civil enforcement would likely involve lengthy, contested litigation. The consensus expressed in the minutes was that affected landowners pursuing individual civil action might be the most practical approach — an option the Ranes plaintiffs had already taken three weeks earlier with their February 13 petition.

March 16 to April 27, 2026 — Motion to dismiss, response, and hearing

Counsel for Evolution Technology entered an appearance and filed a Motion to Dismiss on March 16. The Ranes plaintiffs filed their Response in Opposition on April 6. Return of service on Charles Rees was completed on April 14, perfecting service on both defendants. Judge Fisher held a hearing on the motion to dismiss at 9:00 AM on April 27. The docket reflects “Hearing Held — Motion.”

May 18, 2026 — First Amended Petition filed

On May 18 the Ranes plaintiffs filed a First Amended Petition — a five-page revision of the original four-page petition. The substantive changes are concentrated in newly added paragraphs 16–20 and a related argument throughout: between February 13 and May 18 the defendants temporarily stopped running the generators, and the amended petition invokes the voluntary cessation doctrine to argue that this tactical pause does not moot the case because the defendants retain full control of the equipment and have provided no legally binding assurance that the noise will not resume.

Key elements of the amended petition:

  • Two claims: Count I — Private Nuisance; Count II — Negligence, including negligence per se for alleged violation of Bourbon County sound ordinances (Resolution 50-25).
  • Alleged decibel levels: noise “in excess of 80 decibels (dB) and often exceeding 90 dB” on plaintiffs’ property, 24 hours a day.
  • Alleged health effects: sleep deprivation, tinnitus, and other physical discomforts.
  • Relief sought: a permanent injunction capping outdoor noise on plaintiffs’ land at 55 dB between 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. and 45 dB between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. (mirroring the decibel limits used in the county’s Resolution 50-25 discussions), $1.00 in nominal damages, and a jury trial.

Source document: First Amended Petition — Ranes v. Evolution Technology and Rees (PDF). Two new alias summons were issued the same day.

Where things stand today

Item Status
12-month cryptocurrency moratorium (October 14, 2025) In effect through October 2026
Resolution 50-25 (noise limitations) Adopted December 15, 2025; remains in effect. Proposed amendments tabled February 24, 2026 and discussed March 2, 2026; no enforcement action taken to date.
Resolution 07-26 — 180-day industrial moratorium (utility power, crypto mining, data centers, waste disposal) Adopted unanimously January 5, 2026; expires approximately July 4, 2026 unless extended.
Planning Commission’s broader proposed moratorium on all new non-agricultural businesses Tabled November 17, 2025; never enacted.
Evotech bitcoin mine Continues to be located at 668 Willow Rd, Mapleton; per the amended petition, generators were temporarily stopped between February and May 2026.
Ranes v. Evolution Technology, LLC and Charles Rees (BB-2026-CV-000013) Active. First Amended Petition filed May 18, 2026. Defendants’ response to the amended petition is the next scheduled action.

The dispute over the bitcoin mining operation has so far played out on three separate tracks: a county regulatory (the cryptocurrency moratorium, Resolution 50-25, and the broader industrial moratorium), a property-rights (the Ben Hall gas-well issue), and a private civil-tort lawsuit (the Ranes lawsuit). The county itself is not a party to the lawsuit.

FortScott.biz will continue to report on the lawsuit and related county actions as they develop.

Advertisements

Ad: What FSCC Offers

Leave a comment

Looking for a college that gives you options? At Fort Scott Community College, students can choose from associate degrees in Arts, Science, Applied Science, and General Studies, along with a variety of certificates that lead straight to rewarding careers. Whether you’re interested in healthcare fields like Certified Medication Aide, Nurse Aide, EMT, Home Health Aide, Manicuring, or Phlebotomy, or want to take on a technical challenge with certificates in Ag Technology (John Deere), Construction, Cosmetology, Criminal Justice, Environmental Water Tech, Farm & Ranch Management, Harley-Davidson Technology, Heavy Equipment Operation, HVAC, Masonry, or Welding we’ve got you covered!

But college isn’t just about the classroom. FSCC offers plenty of ways to get involved through music and performance opportunities (band, choir, theater), student clubs and organizations (like Collegiate Farm Bureau, Phi Theta Kappa, SkillsUSA, STEAM Club, FSCC Media Team, and more), and even competitive judging teams in livestock and meat.

If athletics is more your thing, FSCC is home to intercollegiate sports for both men and women. Compete in basketball, baseball, softball, volleyball, rodeo, track & field, or cross country, all while building friendships and representing the Greyhounds.

And the best part? We’re still growing. New programs, degrees, certifications, and athletic opportunities are on the horizon! There’s never been a better time to join FSCC!

Fort Scott Community College; where opportunity meets possibility.

Fort Scott

Fort Scott City Commission Meeting, May 19, 2026 Draft Minutes

Leave a comment

FORT SCOTT CITY COMMISSION MEETING

Minutes of May 19, 2026 Regular Meeting

A meeting of the Fort Scott City Commission was held  in the City Commission Meeting Room at City Hall, 123 S. Main Street, Fort Scott, Kansas. The meeting was streamed live on YouTube.

The meeting was called to order at 6:00PM. Roll call was taken. Commissioners Matthew Wells, Tracy Dancer Tim Van Hoecke, Julie Buchta, were present with Mayor Kathryn Salsbury.

In Attendance – Brad Matkin/City Manager, Bob Farmer/City Attorney, Chief Jason Pickert/FSPD, Det. James Birket/FSPD, Lisa Lewis/City Clerk, Jason Dickman/Earles Engineering & Inspections LLC, Stephen Mitchell/IT, Tom Coffman/Public Works Director, Bill Lemke/Waste Water Collections Supervisor, Kathy Dancer/Chairman-FSHPRC, Daniel Wilson/Parks Advisory Board, John Crain/Parks Advisory Board, Gayla Mason/Legal Counsel- Daugherty, Logan Wallace/Legal Counsel- Bradley, Dennis Shawn Daugherty, Zach Bradley, Shelly Bradley,

SALSBURY led the Pledge of Allegiance and VAN HOECKE said a prayer asking God for guidance for the City, the Citizens, our Government and City officials.

Approval of Agenda

                 MOTION:  VAN HOECKE moved to approve the Agenda. DANCER seconded.

        MOTION CARRIED 5-0.

Consent Agenda

 –  Approval of Appropriation Ordinance 1408-A – Expense Approval Report – Payment Dates of April 29, 2026 –

   May 13, 2026 – $497,094.40              

–  Approval of Minutes:  Regular Meeting of May 5, 2026

–  Approval of Renewal of Retailer’s Liquor License – Hole In the Wall Enterprises LLC 124 E. Wall St., Fort Scott, KS –

   Licensing May 26, 2026 – May 25, 2028.

–  April Financials

                 MOTION:  DANCER moved to approve the Consent Agenda. BUCHTA seconded.

        MOTION CARRIED 5-0.

 Executive Session – IT Update

 MOTION:  VAN HOECKE moved that the City Commission recess into Executive Session for the purpose of discussion with IT pursuant to the financial affairs or trade secrets of corporations, partnerships, trusts and individual proprietorships exception in K.S.A. 75-4319(b)(4). The open meeting will resume in the Commission Room at 6:35PM. In the meeting will be the (5) City Commissioners, City Attorney, City Manager, Stephen Mitchell, and Bryce Daly. DANCER seconded.

        MOTION CARRIED 5-0.

                 MOTION:  VAN HOECKE moved to come out of Executive Session with no action. SALSBURY seconded.

        MOTION CARRIED 5-0.

Public Comment – No public comments

Appearances

Tom Coffman/Public Works Director – Department Update

COFFMAN reported that it is currently fully staffed with 18 employees. They are working on developing management skills within the department and implementing in-house training opportunities that have allowed staff members to obtain their Commercial Driver’s Licenses (CDLs). He reported updates on several ongoing street projects, including repairs at the National & Wall Street intersection, crack sealing on Westbury Lane, concrete work on 9th Street, asphalt work on Gunn Park roads, improvements to city-owned parking lots, and various curb repairs. The Cape Seal program remains delayed due to increased oil and diesel costs, which have made it difficult to secure firm asphalt pricing, although the department has the necessary equipment and trained personnel ready to proceed once pricing stabilizes. Water distribution updates included plans for a main line replacement on 7th Street and the recent repair of (27) water leaks. Wastewater Collections staff will also begin camera inspections of sewer lines to identify needed repairs. Parks and facilities initiatives include outsourcing construction of a dock for Fern Lake, pursuing grant funding for a rock wall project, opening bids for airport lighting improvements, and seeking grant funding to repair a leaking dam at the rearing pond.

Kathy Dancer/Chairman of FSHPRC – Historic Preservation Fund Grant

DANCER represented a request from the Historic Preservation Commission requested permission to apply for a $25,000 State Historic Preservation Fund (HPF) grant, which requires a 40% local match that may be satisfied through in-kind contributions. The purpose of the grant is to develop updated design guidelines for the nationally registered historic district, as the current guidelines have not been revised in approximately 40 years. Commission members stated that the updated guidelines would help maintain local control over preservation decisions while also providing guidance and assistance to downtown business owners. The Commission also discussed a separate 100% reimbursable $6,500 scholarship opportunity to send three individuals to a preservation conference, noting that attendance is highly recommended for newly designated Certified Local Governments (CLGs).

ACTION:  MATKIN will make the determination with Lisa Dillon on the application for the scholarship for the training trip to Minnesota for the FSHPR.

MOTION:  WELLS moved to approve to go out for the Historic Preservation Fund Grant for $25,000 with the City doing the match. DANCER seconded.

        MOTION CARRIED 5-0.

Daniel Wilson/Parks Advisory Board – Dog Pound at Gunn Park

WILSON reported that the Parks Advisory Board and public feedback overwhelmingly opposed relocating the dog pound to the Gunn Park caretaker’s house, citing concerns related to noise, liability, and sanitation, particularly for nearby residents and campground users. Discussion included arguments in favor of the caretaker’s house location, including that the property is city-owned, located outside the floodplain, and could provide greater visibility for animal adoptions. Dancer current animal shelter facility was described as being in poor condition and having experienced flooding issues in the past. BUCHTA stated that with a recent visit with the Animal Control Officer, Mr. Rost stated his preference for repairing the existing facility, noting his belief that the new Davis lift station project will address prior sewer backup problems. He also advised that relocating to the caretaker’s house would require construction of an entirely new kennel facility at significant expense. VAN HOECKE clarified that the discussion was informational only and that no vote was being taken at this time, although the matter could be brought back for future consideration.

Public Hearing:

Consideration to Vacate Portion of an Alley – Petitioner Dennis Shawn Daugherty/Daugherty Enterprises LLC

Transcript of Public Hearing is Attachment “A”

                MOTION:  VAN HOECKE moved to open the Public Hearing. WELLS seconded.

        MOTION CARRIED 5-0.

                MOTION:  VAN HOECKE moved to close the Public Hearing. BUCHTA seconded.

        MOTION CARRIED 5-0.

MOTION:  WELLS moved to not vacate the alley. DANCER seconded. DANCER, BUCHTA, SALSBURY and WELLS voted yes. VAN HOECKE voted no.

        MOTION CARRIED 4-1.

        FARMER left the meeting at 7:48PM and returned at 7:50PM

Action Items

Consideration to Purchase Quick Lock Point Repair System for Sanitary Sewer from Key Equipment

  1. Lemke/Water Distribution/ Wastewater Collections Supervisor

LEMKE requested the purchase of a Quick Lock Point Repair System for sanitary sewer mains from Key Equipment in the amount of $15,223.64. He explained that the system is a permanent “pipe inside the pipe” repair method utilizing stainless steel sleeves designed for no-dig repairs in 8- to 12-inch sewer mains. The system is capable of covering missing pipe sections, stopping inflow and infiltration, and sealing areas impacted by root intrusion. He noted that the equipment would eliminate the need for excavation in many situations, particularly beneath roadways or in areas containing trees, and would significantly reduce repair times from an estimated two to three days to approximately one-and-a-half to two hours per repair. Key Equipment is the only authorized vendor. MATKIN stated it could be paid for from fund 707-550.

MOTION:  VAN HOECKE moved to approve the purchase of the Quick Lock Point Repair System for Sanitary Sewers from Key Equipment for the sum of $15,223.64. BUCHTA seconded.

        MOTION CARRIED 5-0.

        WELLS left the meeting at 7:58PM and returned at 8:00PM

Consideration to Expand Current Agreement with Omnigo Qtel Digital Evidence and Case Management Module –  Chief J. Pickert/FSPD & Det. James Birket/FSPD

BIRKET presented a request for approval to expand its agreement with Omnigo Qtel to include a Digital Evidence and Case Management module at a total cost of $39,364 over a three-year period, with initial funding to be provided through the seizure fund where money is currently available and will then be budgeted for the following years. He explained that the system will centralize digital evidence storage, streamline the discovery-sharing process, allow community members to upload evidence directly, and improve overall efficiency and security by replacing current inefficient storage methods.

MOTION:  BUCHTA moved to approve the current agreement with Omnigo Qtel Digital Evidence and Case Management Module for $39,364 as presented by Chief Pickert. DANCER seconded.

        MOTION CARRIED 5-0.

Consideration of Bids for Lease to Purchase of (6) Police Vehicles – Chief J. Pickert/FSPD

PICKERT presented a request to purchase (6) police vehicles from Olathe Ford, who has the bid for the state of Kansas, consisting of (5) Ford Police Interceptors and (1) Ford F-150 Police Responder, in the amount of $381,068 to be financed over (5) years at an interest rate of (4.9%) through Union State Bank (USB). He stated that the additional vehicles will allow for dedicated day and night shift units, reducing wear and tear on individual vehicles, extending fleet lifespan, and improving coverage for specialized operations, while transferring existing police equipment into the new units. Two bids for financing were received from City State Bank and Union State Bank (USB). PICKERT’s recommendation was to approve the bid from USB. The annual payments will come from the Public Safety Fund.

MOTION:  BUCHTA moved to approve the lease purchase of six police vehicles with terms provided by Union State Bank. WELLS seconded.

        MOTION CARRIED 5-0.

        VAN HOECKE left the meeting at 8:13PM and returned at 8:15PM

Request to Pay Application for Payment No. 3 – Jeff Asbell Excavating & Trucking, Inc. – Davis Lift Station

DICKMAN explained that this billing was for traffic control and side work with the majority going for pipe installation. The inspector for Earles Engineering approved the contents of the billing. A cease work letter was sent to stop work during the (2) week period that work will halt to avoid extra costs. Work will resume on June 1.

MOTION:  VAN HOECKE moved to approve Payment No. 3 to Jeff Asbell Excavating and Trucking for the Davis Lift Station project in the amount of $187,166.14. DANCER seconded.

        MOTION CARRIED 5-0.

Reports and Comments

 City Engineer

– Davis Lift Station Update

– Wall Street Update

City Attorney – No comments

City Manager

–  121 S. Margrave status

–  New Codes Officer starting June 1st

–  Moody building

ACTION:  FARMER will begin tracking down lien details on the Moody building.

–  Barber Shop (118 E. Wall) building update – Owner will be invited to June 2 meeting.

–  Dragoons Baseball begins next week

–  Possibility of a railroad spur in the Industrial Park – more information to come June 2 meeting

Commissioner Dancer

–  Shout out to the Chamber of Commerce for bringing in bus tours

–  Weather Alert System

Commissioner Wells

–  Suggesting City/FSCC/USD234 joint meeting for collaboration

–  Horton asphalt – suggesting to send a strongly-worded letter and add to June 2 agenda

Commissioner Van Hoecke

–  Commissioners putting items on Agendas

–  Status of Interim Contractor’s License Ordinance

–  Comments about raising taxes

–  Will attend June 2 meeting by Teams

Commissioner Buchta

–  Sales tax still low – shop local

Commissioner Salsbury

–  Not intending to raise taxes

–  Clarified position on vacation of alley and commented on behavior during hearing

Adjourn

 MOTION:  VAN HOECKE moved to adjourn the meeting at 9:07PM. DANCER seconded.

MAY 19, 2026, MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:07PM.

Submitted by Lisa A. Lewis/City Clerk

PUBLIC HEARING TRANSCRIPT – May 19, 2026

 Attachment “A” to Minutes of the May 19, 2026, City Commission Meeting

 FORT SCOTT CITY COMMISSION MEETING – 123 S. MAIN STREET, FORT SCOTT, KS 66701

Participants of the Hearing Transcript:  Commissioners Kathryn Salsbury, Julie Buchta, Matthew Wells, Tracy Dancer, Brad Matkin/City Manager, Bob Farmer/City Attorney, Lisa Lewis/City Clerk, Gayla Mason/Legal Counsel for Dennis Shawn Daugherty, Logan Wallace/Legal Counsel for Bradleys, and unidentified gallery members.

Regular City Commission Meeting called to order at 6:00PM – Public Hearing opened at 7:22PM (Time stamps are recorded from beginning of the recorded meeting)

CONSIDERATION TO VACATE PORTION OF AN ALLEY – PETITIONER DENNIS SHAWN DAUGHERTY/DAUGHERTY ENTERPRISES LLC

 SALSBURY (01:21:49)

Next is new business. There’s a public hearing for the consideration to vacate portion of an alley. Petitioned by Dennis Sean Daugherty of Daugherty Enterprises LLC

VAN HOECKE (01:22:03)

I move to open the public hearing for consideration to vacate portion of an alley. Petitioner for Dennis Sean Daugherty and Daugherty Enterprises LLC.

WELLS (01:22:12)

Second.

CITY CLERK (01:22:15)

Kathryn Salsbury?

SALSBURY (01:22:17)

Yes.

CITY CLERK (01:22:17)

Matthew Wells?

WELLS (01:22:18)

Yes.

CITY CLERK (01:22:19)

Tracy Dancer?

DANCER (01:22:20)

Yes.

CITY CLERK (01:22:20)

Julie Buchta?

BUCHTA (01:22:21)

Yes.

CITY CLERK (01:22:21)

Tim Van Hoecke.

VAN HOECKE (01:22:22)

Yes.

SALSBURY (01:22:23)

All right. Who is here to speak on behalf of the position?

SALSBURY (01:22:29)

Hi, Ms. Mason. Hi. Before we get started, I do want to say that I know this is now a new matter before for us because we had to re-Notice. In the interest of being respectful to everyone and the commission as well, I’m going to ask that one person is at the podium at a time and to try to be concise. Thank you so much.

MASON (01:22:51)

Certainly. Thank you. We were here about a month ago and I went through good majority of all of our positions position on this. I mean, obviously we’re asking to vacate the alley. That’s between. I believe it’s 1406 and 1416 East Wall. It is a…the alley has not been used In…well, the city couldn’t even go back that far. From my research of the issue, I believe it hasn’t been used for close to 50 years. There was a car wash there approximately 50 years ago that. The building that actually sits in the alleyway right now. That has been there since before Mr. Kevin Allen owned it. It was part of the car wash. So me and my brother can remember that being there when we were small children. So was built in 19. I was born in 1972, if that gives you any indication of how long that has been there. So. And it is built in the alleyway. So if that gives you an indication of how long the alley has not been used, I would refer to. And I produced some exhibits at the last hearing, but I have some additional exhibits that I added for this hearing. Exhibit F. That is the. What the alley looked like about a year ago before the Bradleys vacated the only access to the alley and excavated and added gravel to that to turn it into a parking lot. So that was. No, not that one. Sorry, Exhibit F. I don’t think it’s that one either. It’s a. It’s an aerial shot. Yeah, it’s an aerial shot from.

VAN HOECKE (01:25:06)

We got it in our package.

MASON (01:25:07)

Oh, you have it in your packets. So that shows trees. And I’ve marked where that vacated alley beside the Bradley’s property. That was done about a year ago, if you look about a year ago, that was many trees and grass. If you’re looking at F anyway in your packet.

VAN HOECKE (01:25:39)

Does any of the other Commissioners need to see that picture?

MASON (01:25:44)

Okay, so that’s what exhibit F is. The on exhibit G, which is I believe up there. Now that is the aerial of what the fort. The entire 1400 block of Wall street shows that both ends of that unused alley, it is not accessible. You cannot get to that alley. I mean that space of gravel that you see there, that’s what was added by the Bradleys last year because before that it was grass and trees. And now on the east side or the left hand side of that picture are many, many grown up trees. Those were not just grown in the last year or two. Those have been growing for many, many years. On the right side of that, there’s also structures over there on the east side or the left side of the picture. On the right side of the picture is that old structure that is owned by Mr. Allen. That is in the alleyway. There is also on the right side, you will see there’s actually a creek or I believe a drainage ditch that runs through there. That would be on. Just on the right side of that building that sits in the alley. Those are all. Those would be. You would not be able to pass through those. You cannot get to the alley from, from the east or the west. The. Exhibit H, there’s a little bit more close up picture. No, no, sorry. Right there. You’ve got it, You’ve got it. That is the east side or excuse me, the west side of that of a. Where it shows the drainage ditch or that creek running through the alley. That’s from Wall Street view. So standing on Wall Street, that’s what that looks like. And that runs all the way through, through where the alley is and all the way back past that even so. So. Then we move to exhibit I. Yes. And that is the view of the alley from Mr. Daugherty’s property showing the west side of the alley. So just at the very end of that where all those trees are, that’s where that drainage ditches. So to turn that back into an alley, you would have to I guess build a bridge and, and put, put a lot of things in there to try to fix that and turn that into an alley. And that’s just on the west side. Then we move to. And of course the buildings in the way too. That’s the, that green building that’s there in exhibit I. That is where the old car wash was. What that was. Was a. It was where people could vacuum out their cars. And I believe Mr. Allen added sides to that. So when he owned the property, bought the property approximately 35 years ago. So then we would move to exhibit J. That is the view from the. Of the east side of the alley from Lincoln Street. So that is all the trees, those trees you see there. Those are all the trees that are in the. In that exhibit G, that first one. That shows the aerial of the entire block. Those are those trees that are there on the left side of that picture. So you can see there’s no access to the alley from Lincoln Street either. Then we move to exhibit K. And that is the view on the south side of the alley that shows that creek or drainage ditch runs all the way through where the alley would be. Both exhibit L and exhibit M. Those show where the Bradleys, who vacated the only access to the alley park. That was just taken by myself last week, they are parked in the alley. That is the alley right there that they’re parked in. And then M shows just a wider view of that, which shows it’s the truck and a trailer parked there behind or in between Mr. Daugherty’s property. Parking in an alley is a violation of city ordinance, and that was done by the Bradleys without any city approval. You can look at petitioners exhibit N. Those are emails from both Tom Coffman and Public Works and also Norm Nation of the Code’s office, where it says on page two of that exhibit that Mr. Bradley had asked if he could turn that into a parking lot. He was told he would need to talk to Codes. Codes confirmed that they did not give permission for them to put a driveway in there or a parking lot in there. As I stated, that does violate ordinance, both by excavating. You are not allowed to excavate in streets or alleys without a permit, and that was done obviously safety reasons why you need to have a permit before you start excavating things. But it is also a violation of the ordinance that you cannot obstruct alleys by vehicles, trailers or any other item that obstructs the alleys. The bottom line is this an unused, unmaintained alley that the city has not, has had no plans to reopen as an alley. And that’s evident by the emails that are Exhibit N. It is obstructed on both ends by buildings, large trees and even a drainage ditch. It is landlocked. This alley is now landlocked due to the Bradley’s vacating the only part of the alley that you could get access to, to this part of the alley last year. It is being used by every property owner except for Mr. Daugherty as their own property, and overall, Mr. Daugherty has met all the requirements necessary to vacate this alley. Legal notice was published, now two times, no private rights will be injured. No public, no one in the public suffers any loss from this, especially because this has been an unused alley for at least 20 years because Mr. Daugherty has owned it for 20 years, but I’m going to say closer to 50 years. Justice favors the petitioner’s vacation of the alley. We’ve already talked about at the last hearing that the Bradley’s have no legal right to veto this petition. The was confirmed by Mr. Farmer at the last hearing. There’s been no additional objections by the Bradleys. But if I need to further explain why they have no legal right to veto this, I’m happy to do that. But we would request that this alley be vacated.

VAN HOECKE (01:34:31)

Is there anyone else in the gallery that was going to speak during the public hearing?

WALLACE (01:34:43)

Good evening again, Commissioners Logan Wallace for the Bradleys here on this matter again, like we discussed last time, I dare say ad nauseam over each other for quite a while. It’s the city’s property. That’s the way that it is. The city has utilities currently that are in the alley. And while, sure, you can say it hasn’t been used in a while, that doesn’t mean that the city doesn’t want to use it, or the city couldn’t find another use for it in two years, let alone tomorrow if they wanted to. On top of that, any guarantee or promise that say, yeah, sure, we’ll leave the easements open for you or you’ll have access to it is only as good as the current landowner goes. And that being said, in the last committee meeting, he already told us all that this was an investment that he’s keeping. And usually investments are sold in the end. So there’s no way to show that, sure, you’re going to have your easement access in the future, or access to your utilities or something else won’t be constructed on the exact same position. And it’s the public alley, it’s the city’s alley, it’s city property. It’s not just the Bradleys here that are going to to be harmed by this. It’s anyone else for any future purpose, current use, or any other variety that the citizens of Fort Scott might have for the purpose of the Alley.

VAN HOECKE

But what they’re requesting. Isn’t that the same thing that this Commission agreed to do for your client?

WALLACE (01:36:04)

Not in the same format here, no.

VAN HOECKE (01:36:07)

How so?

WALLACE (01:36:09)

It’s a separate issue here entirely as well.

VAN HOECKE (01:36:11)

And it’s a still easement of a vacation of city property in the ease, whether it’s an inch or whether it’s an alley. We’re vacating a piece of city property, correct?

WALLACE (01:36:24)

That is. That is entirely correct, what you’re saying. What I’m saying here is the easements here, you have utility lines that run in the section of the alley that is not vacated, the one that the city still owns. That is the section that they are seeking to have the city vacate, which will mean that all of that public utility access for those buildings and the surrounding area will be now on private property that you will have to enter onto in order to do any maintenance, any work, anything whatsoever. That includes into the future, too.

VAN HOECKE (01:36:52)

And, Bob, that we have access to our stuff. That’s regardless whose property is.

FARMER (01:37:01)

The law is very clear. The easements that we need for our utilities remain ours. They’re not transferred. They’re there. They will be a matter of the public record. And anybody that violates that or gets a building permit wouldn’t be allowed to build over with. They can’t. So he’s incorrect because you folks vacate alleys all the time.

VAN HOECKE

Well, not all the time. Well, but I mean, we always ask these questions. Would we still have rights to our utilities within that.

FARMER (01:37:37)

Yes. The answer is yes.

DANCER (01:37:39)

Oh, I have. I have a question. You know, the other party contended that the alley is not used, but I’ve gotten feedback from the Bradleys and from adjacent property owner Kevin Allen. But that that alleyway is used by members of, you know, the Bradleys, Bradley’s customers, and by Skitch to be able to turn around. They have kind of a reciprocal agreement with each other to drive on each other’s property so that they can exit onto Wall Street going forward instead of backing out onto Wall Street. Is that not correct?

WALLACE (01:38:25)

I don’t have personal knowledge of that, no.

DANCER (01:38:27)

Okay. That’s just information that I’ve acquired.

SALSBURY (01:38:31)

Sorry, I don’t want to cut you off. Are you done? I want you to be able to finish your speaking.

WALLACE (01:38:38)

Thank you very much. No, I think we can. I think we can just sum it up with, like I said before, it is the city’s alley. It is city property. I would highly recommend that the city does not give away its own property and property rights here. In this situation. That’s all I have to say on that.

VAN HOECKE (01:38:54)

I would have one other question then regarding Ms. Mason’s comment about our ordinance state that you can’t park your vehicle or park vehicles in a city roadway or alley.

WELLS (01:39:06)

Actually, the ordinance says that you can’t obstruct the alleyway. You are allowed to park in the alleyway as long as access is still available. So like when people park along the side of a street, they’re allowed to park, park on the side of the street as long as they don’t obstruct the street. And the ordinance says the same thing about alleys. They can park along the side of the alley as long as they don’t obstruct the alley. At least that’s the way the ordinance…

WALLACE (01:39:30)

They effectively operate like a one way street in that regard.

SALSBURY (01:39:36)

Thank you very much.

WALLACE (01:39:36)

Thank you.

VAN HOECKE (01:39:37)

Is there anyone else for public. For the public hearing? Then I move that we close the Public Hearing.

DANCER

Second.

BUCHTA

Second.

CITY CLERK  (01:39:50)

Okay. Matthew Wells?

WELLS (01:39:51)

Yes.

CITY CLERK (01:39:52)

Tracy Dancer?

DANCER (01:39:53)

Yes.

CITY CLERK (01:39:53)

Julie Buchta?

BUCHTA (01:39:54)

Yes.

VAN HOECKE (01:39:54)

Tim Van Hoecke?

VAN HOECKE (01:39:55)

Yes.

CITY CLERK (01:39:56)

Kathryn Salsbury?

SALSBURY (01:39:57)

Yes.

WELLS (01:39:58)

I would make a motion that we do not vacate or give up city property.

DANCER (01:40:02)

Second.

CITY CLERK (01:40:06)

Tracy Dancer?

DANCER (01:40:08)

Yes.

CITY CLERK (01:40:09)

Julie Buchta?

BUCHTA (01:40:10)

Yes.

CITY CLERK (01:40:10)

Tim Van Hoecke?

VAN HOECKE (01:40:12)

No.

CITY CLERK (01:40:13)

Kathryn Salsbury?

SALSBURY (01:40:17)

Yes.

CITY CLERK (01:40:19)

Matthew Wells?

WELLS (01:40:20)

Yes.

SALSBURY (01:40:21)

Do you. Before we go on, I wanted. Am I allowed to make a comment? Okay.

VAN HOECKE

The only comment I wanted to make there was in a situation like this and the way this is laid out and what we did for the other property owner, I think the city finds itself in a position, position of picking winners and losers. I don’t like that.

SALSBURY (01:40:40)

To that point, I want to explain my vote because I think it’ll explain that difference. Excuse me, so sorry. Hang on. Okay, so first of all, I want to say I’m. I want to be very fair. I am not opposed to, to vacating alleys or getting city property on tax rolls in general. That’s not my issue here. So that’s not what it’s about. But I’m going to put here KSA 1255 A2, which Ms. Mason talked about. Excuse me, she, she, she referenced A3 which is about proper parties, but A2 also. And that requires this commission to determine from the evidence that no private rights will be injured or endangered by such vacation. And that is not a discretionary thing. That’s something we have to do. The East West Valley has never been vacated. It is a public right of way. Today the Bradley Salon was built after we vacated the north south one. I voted in favor of that vacation and I stand by it at that time no commercial Building existed in reliance for the east west alley to remain public. So, but now there is a private right and a safety concern for the city and access for the city emergency vehicles, if they were to come into the vacated alley is as the entrance, and then they are. They can traverse the alleyway in back there, you know, the piece of it, and then they can go out between the colored Conex boxes and the two remnant car wash buildings on Mr. Allen’s property, which is what Commissioner Dancer was talking about, and then get on the 54 highway. If we block this back here, our emergency vehicles, if they should need to go on, would be able to enter the property freely on the vacated alley running north south. But then they cannot exit without backing back on the 54 highway, which I believe we’re not allowed to create that situation. We have taken away. If we vacate this alley and it becomes the private property of an individual, we have injured the public, the private rights of anyone who goes to the salon, anyone who wants to any of our city who wants, you know, who would be protected through the emergency vehicles and Mr. Allen, to a degree, because he’s able to get there. I believe Ms. Mason said that the vacated alley was that when we vacated, that was the only entrance to the alley back there that runs east west. But as you can see, you can get there through this property here as well, through Mr. Allen’s land. So I think that that’s. My understanding is he allows people to do that. So if that’s not the case, I do apologize, but we would be injuring a private right by.

VAN HOECKE (01:43:57)

Well, my question then, then, Mayor, is where, in the case of Mr. Allen, where that building is absolutely within the easement, will the city be reaching out to him to have it removed?

WELLS (01:44:08)

I believe the city has already reached out to him. And when that time comes, he will have it demoed, or we will demo it for him,

SALSBURY

But it would be at our expense. That’s what I understand.

WELLS (01:44:18)

Yeah. He is perfectly all right with us tearing that building down at any time.

SALSBURY (01:44:24)

So I know that was long winded, but I wanted to explain why, because I. I don’t. I understand your concern. I don’t. I don’t think it’s picking. I think it is a very different issue.

WELLS (01:44:33)

And I had specifically asked at that commission meeting where I voted against vacating the north south alley, was the east west alley going to remain open? And at that time, statement was made, yes, we will always keep the east west alley open. That was the statement that was made. I’ll never vote for a vacation.

VAN HOECKE (01:44:54)

It doesn’t matter because you’re never going to vote yes anyway.

SALSBURY

All right, thank you very much. I appreciate everyone listening.

GALLERY COMMENT (01:45:03)

I would like to know how I as a private citizen, can access that. Because if I access it on the Bradley side, that’s their property. That’s trespass. If I access it on Kevin Allen’s side, that’s trespass’s private property. I’m just saying.

DANCER (01:45:14)

Well, you can. You can walk along the alley, through the brush, hop the little gully there.

GALLERY COMMENT (01:45:23)

That’s hilarious.

GALLERY COMMENT (01:45:24)

I mean, for real. This is ridiculous.

WELLS (01:45:27)

Well, that was another thing that was brought up by KDOT. If we vacate that alley, you’ll have no access to the property at all because there’s no curb cut right now for you to be able to access the property. So the property would in essence be landlocked in eternity.

GALLERY COMMENT (01:45:42)

The alley is landlocked. How can I. I’m a private citizen. How can I use that alley? Tell me. Explain to me how I can use that alley with my car. None of you can explain it, because I can’t. It’s landlocked. I just. This is unbelievable.

WELLS (01:46:00)

Appreciate your concern. Thank you.

GALLEY COMMENT (01:46:02)

It’s not a concern, but I’ll be back to the city to try to get my access to that alley. Okay.

End of transcription on Consideration to Vacate an Alley – Daugherty – Recorded and transcribed by myminutes.ai

Submitted by Lisa Lewis/City Clerk

Opinion

A Guide to Fishing for People by Patty LaRoche

Leave a comment
Patty LaRoche. 2023.
Author: A Little Faith Lift…Finding Joy Beyond Rejection
www.alittlefaithlift.com
AWSA (Advanced Writers & Speakers Assoc.)

Jesus told his followers to be “fishers of men.”  I have known several serious fishermen, including one who is a professional.  He has learned the secrets of winning derbies by reeling in “the big one.”  Another friend recently posted pictures after landing an enormous bass, a fish he snared at the same place where my husband fishes and catches something akin to a pet goldfish.

Thankfully, Jesus was not saying that we had to be great fisher-people to fish for people. We do, however, need to demonstrate some of the skills employed by successful anglers, and as I write this list, I see where I fall short.

For one, we need to put in the effort, knowing that some days we might throw out our line multiple times but catch nothing.  Still, we have to try.  Sitting in our rowboats, staring at the water, praying for a 30-pound bass to jump into our vessels while telling others that we are “fishing” makes us look rather pathetic.  To truly excel in this skill, we need to do our homework.

The same applies for what Jesus meant. Fishing for men requires us to know what the Gospel says about salvation and be willing to share that knowledge by being sensitive to our listener.  Expecting people to show up at our door and ask to hear what they need to do to be saved just ain’t gonna happen.

Fishermen also need to know what bait to use.  Different seas and locations require research to know what the fish want. Bobbers or feathered lures or worms or cheese will likely have different results. If I were to share the Gospel with a farmer, my best approach would be to use agricultural terms like “sowing” and “reaping.”  Discussing what I know best (baseball or teaching) might cause my listeners to yawn or find an excuse to exit hastily to work their field.

Unfortunately, most of us might be good at talking about fishing, but Jesus never said, “Follow me and talk about evangelizing.”  We read Christian books (maybe even the Bible), attend conferences, listen to Podcasts and skim articles like this one.  We end up with a tackle box full of information and maybe even a few predictable questions (“If you were to die today, where would you end up?”).  Simply discussing what we know is not enough.  We are to act on what we know.

So, why is it so difficult to fish for people? Most Christians know they should evangelize but don’t know where to begin or how.  Researcher George Barna has discovered that nine out of ten people who attempt to explain what they believe to other people come away from those experiences feeling as if they failed. No wonder we don’t do much evangelism. It’s not fun to do something that makes us feel like a failure 90% of the time.

In Mark 16:15, Jesus commands us to “Go and preach the gospel to every creature.” No Christian can wriggle off the evangelism hook. We are to spread the good news about Jesus Christ by seeking opportunities wherever we go, and the best part of all is that we don’t have to seek only that 30-pound large-mouth bass.  Sometimes, a tiny little goldfish might be the biggest win of all.

Bourbon County Local News