Incoming magistrates answer questions, address issues By JOE REDMON Over this past weekend, I was able to reach our newly elected magistrates and ask them questions about local issues soon to be on the agenda of Fiscal Court. The magistrates-elect interviewed were Tom Goddard (I-1st), Herbie Chism (D-2nd), Mark Hubbard (D-3rd), Tony Staples, (D-4th), Steve Wardrip (R-5th) and Randall Hardesty (D-6th).
The Meade County Solid Waste and Recycle (MCSW&R) is in dire financial circumstances. Do you have any thoughts about solid waste management you’d like to share? Esq. Goddard: The 109 Board hasn’t handled the job. I’m not a refuse professional, but we need to find a different way to do business. Most people just want the garbage picked up and removed at a reasonable price. All people need to pay for the service and we need to make this happen. Esq. Chism: The county is responsible for the MCSW&R. The 109 Board must document the need for a rate increase and they need to get bids from private haulers for comparison. I’m open to looking at various different ways to getting this function performed. Esq. Hubbard: I think we need to look hard at privatizing collection. We need to compare our ability to do this with private firms and we need to make a decision soon. The county government is responsible and it will cost us money to fix this. We should check how other counties are completing this function and we need to better keep the public informed. (Mr. Hubbard is currently a member of the 109 Board.) Esq. Staples: The whole system needs to be looked at. All avenues need to be looked at. We need to take a hard look at it – I’m open to any solution, including accepting bids. Esq. Wardrip: This is a tough situation and it will cost us money no matter what happens. We can’t keep doing what we’ve been doing. We must get appropriate bids and look long and hard at private carriers. Esq. Hardesty: I’m open to the restructuring of the 109 Board. The county must pick up the garbage, though. Whatever we decide to do, we need to do something differently. What are your thoughts about the prospects of an abandoned property ordinance (APO) in Meade County? Are you in favor of it being used as a nuisance ordinance? Esq. Goddard: They’re very different things. We need an enforceable ordinance to ensure mortgage companies assist us in keeping our county clean. Abandoned properties need to be cleaned up. I’m open to a nuisance ordinance, but it would have to be separate from an APO and it would need to be flexible and reasonable.
Esq. Hubbard: They’re two different ordinances. An APO needs to be fair, manageable, and enforceable against abandoned property. Esq. Staples: We need a workable abandoned property ordinance to regulate abandoned properties; however I think a nuisance ordinance is completely different. Esq. Wardrip: If someone is paying taxes on the property, it isn’t abandoned. The two issues are separate. I could support a true abandoned property ordinance, but not a nuisance ordinance. Esq. Hardesty: I’m against a nuisance ordinance. I could be in favor of an ordinance regulating truly abandoned property. Can you share any thoughts on the efforts to write a new animal control ordinance and its efforts to place the animal control officer (ACO) under the responsibility of law enforcement (sheriff’s office) rather than the judge executive’s office? Esq. Goddard: I agree it is a legal matter. We need to check how other counties, including Hardin County, do this.
Esq. Hubbard: I have not reviewed it. I’m open to any ideas and I think the ACO should control his department. Esq. Staples: I haven’t read the ordinance, but I generally don’t have a problem putting the ACO under the sheriff’s office. However, I need to look more closely at it before I commit one way or another. Esq. Wardrip: I’m open to putting the ACO under the supervision of the sheriff, if he agrees. Esq. Hardesty: I think the sheriff should support the ACO, but the ACO can continue to report to the judge executive.
Esq. Goddard: I have no problem with it. But, I’d want to know we’ll be able to collect owed money via lien, if necessary. Does a tax lien take precedence over other liens? If so, there is no problem. Esq. Chism: No. I’m not in favor of paving the road first because people won’t have an incentive to pay their fair share of the special tax. This would leave the county responsible for the paving of those roads. Esq. Hubbard: Generally, I’m against it. However, I will look into it and would support it if we could be assured of collection. Esq. Staples: It sounds good, but I’d have to look hard to ensure the county isn’t shorted any money. Esq. Wardrip: Of course I’m in favor of this. It will save the county money in the long run as we’ll perform the work now rather than in five plus years. It’s the right thing to do, so long as we collect the appropriate taxes from the residents. Esq. Hardesty: I’m in favor of doing away with the wait. Collect the taxes but pave the roads now.
Esq. Goddard: We can’t do without planning and zoning. It should be an organized, rational, and workable plan. It must be fair and shouldn’t be about “who” you know. Esq. Chism: We need to update the plan, but the planning and zoning commission should take the lead. Fiscal Court should support however necessary. Esq. Hubbard: Fiscal Court should lead the effort with input from citizens. We should network with other counties and make the plan workable and updateable. Planning and zoning is needed. Esq. Staples: It should be updated to prepare us for growth and it must be updated on a more regular basis. Esq. Wardrip: The plan needs updating and changing and probably should be reviewed annually. We need professional help writing it. Esq. Hardesty: It needs to be flexible and changeable as the county grows.
Esq. Goddard: We need to get on the ground and examine the budget. Taxes seem too high, but I’m not sure they’re out of whack. We need to ensure we get sound reports from the jail, EMS, etc. Esq. Chism: I don’t want to pay any taxes more than necessary, but we need to maintain our level of services. I’d be willing to look hard at it, though. It would be nice to have more industry in the county. I’ve voted for the compensating rate in the past, which is a small adjustment in property taxes to compensate for inflation. Esq. Hubbard: Fiscal Court doesn’t control all the taxes. I’m for lowering taxes, but I don’t want to cut services. I can’t promise to cut taxes. Esq. Staples: I don’t know enough about the budget to make specific comments. But I do know we don’t have tremendous excess funds. However, I’m open to looking at specific tax breaks to attract new businesses and growth to the county. Esq. Wardrip: Taxes are too high, generally, but the inventory tax must be lowered now in order to bring new business to the county. Esq. Hardesty: Generally, I don’t think taxes are too high. However, the school taxes seem to be growing fast. I’d look for ways to cut taxes. Can you share any thoughts on what county government can do to attract tax-paying, high-growth industries to our new industrial park? Esq. Goddard: Set the infrastructure in place. Rep. Lynn has done an excellent job to this point and we need more. We need to make the acreage look more like an industrial park. We must cut the inventory tax, offer incentives, and work with Frankfort. Esq. Chism: We must continue to work with the industrial authority to promote it and put infrastructure in place. We need upgrade roads, sewer, and electric there. Esq. Hubbard: Our industrial authority is a diverse group. We need sound businesses here. A good marketing plan, updating the comprehensive plan, and our planning and zoning will help attract business. We must give some of our working people the opportunity to work in the county. Esq. Staples: We can offer tax incentives to help businesses establish here. We do have a lot to offer new businesses – with our vocational training and motivated work force. I’m open to hiring some professional assistance, if necessary. Esq. Wardrip: We must cut the inventory tax and be willing to hire some professional assistance. Esq. Hardesty: I’d like to better research this. I’d support the judge executive’s efforts and I’m open to good ideas. I support the industrial park.
|
While talking with each on the phone between 10 and 20 minutes, I was struck by how diverse they are, as individuals. They also seem to share much in common, judging from their general responses to my questions.
Esq. Chism: Our current APO requires the property be abandoned in order to be enforced. However, there is no enforcement officer. I’m not in favor of a nuisance ordinance. Nuisances are generally addressed in planning and zoning.
Esq. Chism: The new court needs to review these changes. The ACO should be under the sheriff. However, there definitely needs to be an effective working relationship between the sheriff and ACO.
Should the county issue a bond (borrowing money) to finish paving public gravel roads?
Judge Executive-elect Craycroft has called for the updating and re-writing of the county’s comprehensive plan. What role do you see Fiscal Court playing in this process? What are your thoughts on planning, generally?
During the past campaign, there was much discussion about the overall taxation in Meade County. We currently have separate fees or taxes for our county government, schools, E-911, the library, soil conservation, solid waste, a health department, and fire protection districts. Additionally, the county taxes inventories, insurance, and cell phone usage. Is the overall taxation in Meade County about right? If not, do you have any ideas to offer in how to lower overall taxes?