The Arcadia Christian Church held a cookout for the community on Friday evening. Organizers said they estimated 100 to 150 people came through during the evening. Hotdogs and marshmallows were cooked over the small fire and a grill helped keep a supply of food for those less skilled at cooking over the flames. Attendees were entertained by youngsters doing acapella Justin Bieber impersonations on a small sound system and a tractor and trailer provided hay rack rides.
On November 10th, the Chamber, City of Fort Scott, and KansasWorks will be hosting a job fair at the Danny & Willa Ellis Family Fine Arts Center on the campus of Fort Scott Community College. The event will run from 10am until 2pm allowing potential employees to stop by on their lunch break.
If you are a potential employer, please contact the Chamber about getting a booth. If you are a potential employee, you might take a look at this resume template created by a graphic designer for Microsoft Word to get you started with a fresh look. Also, you may be interested in taking a look at these 10 Articles On Creating the Perfect Resume for some tips and ideas.
Tomorrow the final pieces of the old bath house will be hauled off. This evening a number of local volunteers helped comb through the debris retrieving bricks that could be salvaged and used again. The good bricks were loaded onto the flat bed of a truck to be hauled off and stored elsewhere. The hope is that the historic Fort Scott bricks can become part of the new facility in some way.
As you can see from the photos below, the concrete from the old pool has all been removed. There is an orange safety fence going up around the construction site. There were two large trucks parked on the tennis court and two backhoes in the pool area.
In the run up for the last city commissioner election, I was very interested in hearing from the candidates at a forum where they were asked about their plan for downtown. I was very disappointed that most of the ideas consisted of “get businesses” and “get grants.” If anyone had concrete ideas, they weren’t shared at the meeting.
Even a candidate whose family had previously run a downtown businesses didn’t have anything to share about what would have kept them from moving. I’m not trying to criticize anyone, but just point out that there doesn’t seem to be a lot of ideas (at least that I’m aware of) designed to benefit the downtown area and get more foot traffic to those shops.
So to get the conversation started, here are five ideas of mine. I’m not saying that they are all great ideas, but even starting with a bad idea can help get people thinking and eventually produce some winners.
At Wall and Main there is a large grassy area where a building burned down. This space is owned by the city and contains a concrete pad where the Christmas tree is attached around the holidays.
My family eats down town nearly every week with some friends. After dinner we will usually head over to this grassy area so the kids can run around, maybe kick a soccer ball a bit and the adults can talk.
This area could be turned into a very nice small park to help draw people into downtown. A school grade plastic and metal play scape that can accomodate about 22 children would cost around $11,000 for the hardware. A larger unit that can accomodate 50 children would probably be in the $30,000 range. Wooden systems may be considerably less expensive and it might even be possible to get used equipment from schools that close down, etc.
One of the nice things about this idea, is that if there is ever a desire to put a building back there, it wouldn’t be ridiculous to think about moving a play scape to one of the other city parks.
My dad grew up in Arcadia back when it was a thriving little town. To help get people downtown, they would choose one night when all the stores would stay open late and they would do drawings to give away cash and prizes sponsored by the downtown merchants. This produced quite a draw and the only way to fit everyone in was to double park up and down the street.
Could something similar work in downtown Fort Scott? Maybe or maybe not, but it might be worth considering.
Would people come downtown to watch a city sponsored movie on the side of one of the buildings? The downtown concerts are great, but perhaps showing Toy Story 3, would pull in a slightly different demographic. It might mainly help the two restaurants downtown because most of the other shops are usually closed in the evening. I’m not sure what the cost would be to show a movie like that, but I imagine it wouldn’t be outrageous.
One thing that is plentiful downtown are shop windows and unfortunately many of them are empty. I’ve seen some efforts to put up displays in some of these windows, but none of them were things that you’d make a specific trip to go see. Would people come downtown to view local art work? What if high-school & middle school art projects were displayed downtown–perhaps a contest where people could vote for the winner from their cell phones?
Pretty much any downtown business is going to need to pay for Internet. This will probably cost $50 to $150 per month depending on what options are available at a particular location. Offering free wireless can help free up those dollars for businesses that are willing to invest in our downtown and if done correctly, the cost should be fairly inexpensive.
A mesh based solution like Meraki would make it easy to cover the downtown area and add on access points to get to the back of buildings or other places where reception didn’t have good signal from the main antennas. The actual hardware to get started would probably cost somewhere in the $2,500 to $4,000 range and businesses who wanted better coverage could buy an extender for around $200. Monthly costs would probably be in the $50 to $150 range–or virtually nothing if it could be run over the city’s existing connection.
In addition to helping the businesses, it would benefit visitors who need to get to the internet from their phone or laptop. Obviously offering free wifi isn’t going to produce a flood of 100s of visitors each day, but it is a little thing that can make for a more pleasant visit for the people who want or need access.
So there are five ideas. If you’ve read all of them, I bet you have some opinions about what might work and what wouldn’t and chances are you have some other ideas that are much better than what I’ve come up with. Please take a few minutes to share your ideas and thoughts in the comments where everyone can benefit from your perspective.
Julie Saker and Bill Farr are partnering together on buying the old IGA to turn it into a bowling alley–something that Fort Scott has been missing for quite a few years now. They hope to have it open by May or June. The plan is for the new facility to include 12 lanes of bowling. It will also have a grill and arcade area.
Julie wasn’t sure if smoking would be allowed or not under Kansas state law, but there are no plans to make it a private club. They do plan to get a liquor license so beer can be served.
The project is going to be partially financed by investors. Julie said that Macy Cullison is going to help the partners look into getting some grants and they will probably finance any remaining needs with a loan. Julie also said they are open to talking with other people who might be interested in investing in the project.
They haven’t come up with a good idea for the name yet and are looking for suggestions. If you have a good name for a bowling alley in Fort Scott, please leave it in the comments below and we’ll make sure Julie gets to see them.
Macy Cullison is Fort Scott’s new Economic Development Business Recruitment and Retention Manager. She moved her from Pennsylvania where she was working with Economic Development loan fund called Community First. We caught up with Macy at City Hall and asked a few questions about her new position.
I wanted to work in economic development and have always wanted to live in Fort Scott. So when I started looking for a new job I looked at Fort Scott first and was excited to see there was a position here.
Right now I’m working on revamping the marketing for the city to help market ourself to companies outside of Fort Scott. A major component of economic development is fostering the businesses that are already here. So working with them to help them grow is a major part of what I’m doing.
Last week I met with a bunch of our manufacturers to talk to them about how we can help them grow. We found that a lot of them are looking to expand so we are going to be having a job fair with the chamber in November.
They should definitely come talk to me. I can help find a good place for them to locate, help them get demographic information and try to help them get a good building to rent. I can try to help make sure they are in a place where there is traffic for their type of business and I have the resources at my fingertips that may take them a few weeks to find on their own.
No. Definitely not. I want to know about all of our businesses in town. I’m going to spend 60 to 70 percent of my time working with existing businesses helping them grow. Just last week I found out that existing business owners have 20 or so positions open that they are having trouble filling. A huge amount of our growth is going to come from our existing companies.
Yes. Ask people to “like” our Facebook Page!
Work is being done building a new retaining wall at 3rd and 69. Workers were there this morning with equipment including a large crane that was being used to place large concrete blocks into the drainage ditch.
There will be no county commission meeting on Friday due to a large meeting with 17 other South East Kansas counties in Yates Center.
There was some discussion about an individual who was stealing gravel from the roads. There was also
Mike Houston and Larry Beerbower came in to talk to the commissioners about treating the fuel that is used in the county vehicles. It is a fuel additive that they say works for gas or diesel. They claim it will increase the efficiency by 10%. It is called Xtreme Fuel Treatment. They said it will lower the ignition rate of the fuel down to 800 degrees.
Mr. Hueston said that the treatment “knocked 200 RPM off”. He also says he got 11.7 MPG instead of 11.1.
When asked if there are other counties using the product, Mr. Beerbower said that the counties that tested it decided not to use it because it would reduce their budget for next year if they had fuel savings.
There was some paperwork related to the lease for a rock query that was signed.
As preparation for getting bids on insurance, there was a discussion on how the city of Fort Scott handled getting quotes for insurance. The city had limited bids to companies in the city of Fort Scott based on their rules for giving preference to local businesses. The county has similar rules that can be used as part of a bid process.
Fort Scott does not have an insurance program with an “attorney assist” service. This is a service where the insured can call and ask questions of an attorney from the insurance company. The county currently has this and is using it now.
The commissioners received copies of the publications from the past years from the treasurer and a copy of the list that was sent to the abstracting company.
On Friday, Dave Martin (City Manager), told the Young Professional’s League that the pool was on schedule. I went by today to check on the process and there was a large backhoe hard at work breaking up concrete.
The construction company said that everything was on target. A contractor was doing the current demolition before the new construction can begin.
Let me preface this article by saying that I have a great deal of respect for the county commissioners. Anyone who thinks their job is easy needs to spend some time in the commission meetings. They make a lot of difficult decisions and citizens of Bourbon county should be very proud of their elected officials in this office. Even if you disagree with a particular decision, I think any reasonable person would have to agree that they are doing a very good job.
That said, I do believe that the decision to conduct two thirty minute executive sessions to discuss the tax sale on October 7th, was not in the best interest of the citizens of Bourbon county. Discussions related to taking people’s property away from them need to be done in the most open manner possible.
In the commissioner’s defense, their legal council for the tax sale suggested the executive session, but ultimately the decision belongs to the commissioners as there is no KOMA (Kansas Open Meetings Act) requirement to go into executive session for these types of matters.
Does a public body have a duty to close certain discussions? Not under the KOMA. The KOMA allows executives session discussions; it does not require them. (source: attorney general website)
On Friday, I asked the commissioners to reveal what had been discussed in the executive session–particularly anything that would be beneficial for the public to know.
This request was made based on the fact that commissioners are free to share what goes on in executive sessions according to the attorney general:
Does the KOMA require members of a public body to refrain from publicly revealing matters that were discussed while in executive sessions?
No. Some other laws, or considerations such as fiduciary duty, personal privacy rights, or contracts, may require or influence such confidentiality. But the KOMA itself does not require that the topics listed in K.S.A. 75-4319 always be kept private. (source)
Part of my logic in asking for that information is that KOMA violations that do not impede the public’s right to know, are deemed technical violations. The big advantage of having a technical violation where the public has been informed is that such a disclosure might prevent the commission from being fined $500 each, if there was indeed a violation of the law.
The court will not void any action and will overlook technical violations of the law if the spirit of the law has been met, there has been a good-faith effort to comply, there was substantial compliance with the KOMA, no one was prejudiced, and the public’s right to know had not been effectively denied. (source)
The commission felt that the discussion needed to be kept secret and declined to reveal what was discussed.
In this article, I want to examine a bit of what happened at that meeting an look at the legalities regarding when and how an executive session can be conducted for attorney-client privilege issues.
Dan Meara is the attorney who will be conducting the tax sale for the county. On October 7th, there were a handful of people attending who were there mainly to find out more about the property tax and tax sale. Mr. Meara suggested that the commissioner’s go into executive session to discuss the tax sale and that Susan Quick be present.
To go into executive session, a body that is subject to Kansas Open Meetings Act must make and pass a motion that gives the legal basis for the executive session along with the subject to be discussed and how long the session will last. After some discussion they agreed that the exception was “attorney/client privilege” and the subject was “tax sale”.
KSA 75-4319 does allow executive session for attorney client privilege for “consultation with an attorney for the body or agency which would be deemed privileged in the attorney-client relationship.” So what constitutes a privileged relationship?
The attorney general website gives three criteria that must be met in order for their to be a privileged relationship.
Acting as the attorney for the tax sale, Mr. Meara certainly falls into the category of attorney for the body, so the question becomes whether or not discussion of the tax sale is privileged information. At first it seems it would not be privileged information because of the public nature. However, other attorney general’s website says the definition of privileged communication rests entirely with the client and there is a great deal of leeway in what can be discussed with the attorney in an executive session as long as a privileged relationship exists.
Confidentiality can attach to any communication between an attorney and a client wherein legal advice or assistance is sought or given, or information imparted in order to facilitate such advice or assistance. With very limited ethical exceptions, the client alone can decide whether to waive such confidentiality. (source)
However, the attorney general has also issued opinion 82-247 basically stating that if a body wants to go into executive session, they need to have a very well thought out reason for it. The weight of an opinion is much greater than text from the attorney general website, so the opinion should be what determines the actions of elected officials.
Since exceptions to the general policy favoring open meetings will be construed narrowly, legislative and administrative bodies or agencies would be well-advised to exercise the right to an executive recess for attorney-client communications very judiciously. … In addition, the nature of the communication should “be of a confidential character” and so regarded at least by the governmental body of agency.
There are obviously many situations that call for attorney-client privilege. If the county is being sued for millions of dollars, it is in the public’s best interest for discussions of the legal strategy to not be a matter of public record.
However, I cannot think of any reason why discussion of the tax sale would “be of a confidential character” other than the fact that someone wanted to keep them from the public. A large group of people may lose their property and have it auctioned off by the county. That is an action that should be done in the public eye and subject to public scrutiny–not something that is handled in secretive sessions.
Now, it is easy to say that something should be open without knowing what was being discussed. Just because it is hard to imagine a discussion where it was in the public interest to keep the tax sale topic out of the public record does not mean such a discussion could not exist. So lets assume that, hypothetically, the discussion did fall into the narrow allowable instances of attorney-client privilege and the matters discussed were of “confidential character.” In other words, lets assume that any reasonable person who knew what was discussed would agree that the meeting should have been closed.
Under that hypothetical scenario, would the executive session have been legal?
The law recognizes that things that fall under attorney-client privilege should not be made public, so it places an additional criteria on how executive sessions must be conducted when they are using the “attorney-client privilege” exception to KOMA. This is the requirement that no other third parties may be present. This makes sense because the attorney will not talk about confidential matters regarding their clients. The client is allowed to discuss matters that were discussed in executive session, but since they are the client, that is their prerogative. However, if you have a third party present, they are not restricted in communicating the contents of the meeting. So the presence of a third party basically means that the subject matter is not confidential enough to be fall under this exception to KOMA. And if it isn’t confidential, it should be available to the public.
So who is a third party?
The 92-56 opinion by the attorney general says:
K.S.A. 75-4319(b)(2) may only be used to close meetings if the attorney for the body is present, if persons other than the client and the attorney and his or her agents are excluded from the executive session, and if the communication in the executive session is privileged in nature.
This gets a little difficult because “other than the client and the attorney and his or her agents” is not clear as to whether or not the agents refer to the client’s agents or the attorney’s agents. A few sentences before this passage, the “client” is referred to as a “body” so the sudden shift to “his or her” seems to indicate reference to the attorney’s agent. This would meant the attorney could bring a paralegal, stenographer or other necessary staff to a closed executive session for attorney-client privilege.
Another opinion 82-247 from the attorney general confirms the above interpretation.
However, the attorney-client privilege may not be invoked if the attorney is not present, or if persons, other than the attorney and his or her agents, are parties to the communication.
So it would appear that the commission is not allowed to have other people in the room during an executive session called because of the attorney-client privilege exception like they are for other executive sessions.
So was Susan Quick (the county treasurer) allowed to be in the meeting?
Back to the 92-56 opinion, it talks about the “attorney for the body” and then mentions the client. The most reasonable explanation seems to be that the body is the client. In this case if the county commissioners are the body in question, it seems they would be considered the client.
Such bodies may include in some executive sessions those individuals whom the body determines will assist with the executive session discussion. Mere observers may not attend executive sessions. Moreover, K.S.A. 75-4319(b)(2) may only be used to close meetings if the attorney for the body is present, if persons other than the client and the attorney and his or her agents are excluded from the executive session, and if the communication in the executive session is privileged in nature.
According to an outline of the KOMA regulations:
Who can be present in an executive session–only the members of a public body have the right to attend executive session. (AG Opin. No. 86-14).
- Mere observers may not attend. Inclusion of general observers means the meeting should be open to all members of the public. (AG Opins. No. 82-176; 86-143; 92-56).9
- Persons who aid the body in its discussions may be discretionarily admitted. (AG Opin. No. 91-31).
- Johnson County school district; members of advisory boards have no right to attend. (AG Opin. No. 86-143).
- County clerk has no right to attend executive sessions. (AG Opin. No. 87-170).
- Non-clients cannot attend executive sessions for attorney-client privileged communication. (AG Opin. No. 82-247) (source)
Whoever is defined as the “client” obviously has the right to attend a meeting with their attorney. Point four seems to indicate that the county clerk is not part of what is defined as the “client” which fits within the idea that the client is the commissioners. If the clerk is not considered a “client” it would be illogical to assume that the county treasurer is considered the client along with the commissioners for the purpose of county commission meetings.
Note: The part above is where I found the least amount of clear information. If you find an error in my logic or laws/opinions that I have overlooked, please correct me in the comments and I will do my best to rectify the situation quickly.
When I asked about the legal basis of having the treasurer in the meeting, I was told the commissioners were allowed to bring in people who could aid their discussion. That corresponds to point two. However, point five specifically over-rides point two when attorney-client privilege is the exception used to invoke the executive session. It does apply in other situations where executive session is invoked. For example, when discussing employment matters related to non-elected employees.
The only way I can possibly see that having the treasurer in the meeting would have been legal would have been to consider the treasurer within the definition of “client”. However, if that is the case, then there was no reason for the county clerk to leave because she would be considered a “client” as well–as would any elected county official and possibly all the county employees. In fact, everyone in Bourbon county could in some way be considered a “client” of a lawyer working or the county.
As far as I can find, all the laws and attorney general opinions seem to indicate that the executive session should not have been used due to the general nature of the topics being discussed. Further, even if there was a legitimate reason for a closed session, the presence of the county treasurer appears to have made the legal basis for the executive session questionable.
However, even if it was legal to use attorney-client privilege and even if the inclusion of the treasurer was acceptable, government in Kansas is supposed to be open. If the spirit of open government is being followed, then situations like this should never happen. The default position should be to keep everything open with the rare exception where it is in the public interest to keep something out of the public record. In those cases the topic given for going into executive session should be specific enough that any reasonable person can see the need for a private discussion. “Tax sale” is not a subject with enough specificity to do that.
Note: If I have made any errors in how I interpreted the law or attorney general opinions, please leave me a comment and I will do my best to correct things as quickly as possible.
Evert Tensley came in to say that gravel trucks that weren’t covered and rocks flying off had chipped his windshield. There was some discussion about trying to pack the gravel into the dump trucks a bit better and possibly getting tarps ($1000 each) for the trucks.
The commissioners were asked if they could share the parts of the discussion in the executive session related to the tax sale on Friday that they didn’t feel would put the county at any type of risk. The request was based on the public nature of the discussion and because it seemed that the bulk of the discussion wouldn’t hurt the county’s legal position.
There was some concern that it might not be legal to tell things that were mentioned in executive session. However, Commissioner Warren pointed out that in other meetings members involved in the executive session would come out and tell the public what was discussed. He said it was causing all kinds of problems and confusion.
Note: The Attorney General’s website specifies that discussions made under executive session can be revealed to the public unless other laws apply.
Some other laws, or considerations such as fiduciary duty, personal privacy rights, or contracts, may require or influence such confidentiality. But the KOMA itself does not require that the topics listed in K.S.A. 75-4319 always be kept private. (source)
Chairman Endicott said that since revealing what was discussed would defeat the purpose of the executive session, he didn’t want to say what was discussed.
There was some discussion about bidding out insurance which is currently held by KCAMP. In previous meetings the commission decided to bid out the insurance, but they were looking for the best way to facilitate the process.
The county attorney is going to check with the city to see how they handle their insurance.
The 911 map was proofed by an individual at the chamber who is doing an excellent job of helping catch errors to make it very accurate. She has spent hours comparing it to a bunch of other maps. She is putting a great deal of effort into and the commissioner’s were very appreciative of her help.
The chamber had previously asked if the county would like to buy an ad in the chamber directory. The smallest ad costs $175. The city and BEDCO have ads. The commission decided to buy one of the small ads. The idea was to include the website and a picture of the court house.
The county attorney suggested that commissioners compare people on payment plan as to whether or not they had been published for 2006 and 2007. She felt the county should make sure that the properties were bid-in. The county attorney feels that the publication is necessary in order to trigger the bid-in process which is necessary to create a lein agains the properties necessary to forclose.
The commissioners decided to ask for a copy of the publication of delinquent taxes from the past few years in order to see if the names on the list given to the abstracting company were published or not.
Patty Love won our iPod Shuffle giveaway! We generated a random number from random.org and the number matched Patty’s email address in our list of subscribers.
I took Patty the iPod this morning. She was excited to win, said that now she has to figure out how to use it. She wasn’t too worried because she has a daughter who can help her.
Congratulations Patty! Enjoy your new iPod.
FortScott.biz will be doing some more giveaways in the next few months. Be sure to signup for our emails so you’ll be entered in the upcoming contests.