Bourbon County Commission Agenda: October 27, 2025

Location: Bourbon County Commission Chambers, 210 S National Ave.
Time: Monday, October 27, 2025, 5:30 PM

10.27.25 Agenda Packet PDF

Summary of Packet

I. Call Meeting to Order

• Roll Call
• Pledge of Allegiance
• Prayer

II. Approval of Agenda

III. Approval of Minutes (unofficial until approved)

• 09.22.25
• 09.23.25
• 09.26.25
• 09.29.25
• 10.06.25
• 10.14.25
• 10.20.25
• 10.22.25

IV. Sign Approved Minutes

• Sign 10.20.25 approved minutes for 09.15.25, 09.16.25, 10.07.25

V. Sign Adopted Resolution

• Sign 10.20.25 adopted Resolution 33-25 Meeting Rules

VI. Payroll Discussion with Payentry (5:40 pm)

• Jolene Ashpaugh & Cassie Johnson

VII. Consent Agenda

• Approval of 10.24.25 Accounts Payable ($74,810.79)
• September 2025 Financials
• 3rd Quarter Financial Publication Approval

VIII. Public Comments for Items Not on The Agenda

IX. Old Business

• Vehicle Lease Program – Sheriff
• Technology Discussion with Sheriff
• Noise Resolution Discussion
• Gov Deals – Beerbower
• Bitcoin Discussion

X. New Business

• Hammond Community Center Discussion – Milburn
• Stop Sign Discussion – Milburn
• Credit Card Policy Discussion – Milburn
• Longevity Discussion – Beerbower

XI. Department Updates

• County Clerk, Election Reminder

XII. Build Agenda for following meeting

XIII. Commission Comments

XIV. Adjournment

Information Packet Summary

This summary provides detailed information from the minutes of previous Bourbon County Commission meetings, including key topics discussed and actions taken, along with the page number where the information can be found in the PDF.

Future Items and Executive Session Forms (Page 2)

The packet includes a standard form to be used for motions to enter Executive Session for privileged discussions (e.g., personnel, attorney-client, negotiations, real estate, security matters).

Future items for discussion include the Elevator, Noise Resolution, Payments (Payroll & AP), Sanitation, Economic Development, and the Juvenile Detention Contract (Spring 2026).

Minutes of September 22, 2025, 5:30 PM (Pages 3-8)

• Budget Discussion (Page 3): Commissioners discussed budget creep, finding savings, and a potential $106,000 shortfall in the Sheriff’s department budget for 2026. They expressed a desire to reduce the mill levy to the revenue neutral rate.
• Law Enforcement Vehicle Leasing (Page 3): A presentation was given by Enterprise Fleet Management for a proposed vehicle leasing program. Commissioners requested legal counsel review the contract.
• Road Closures (Page 3): Discussion on closing a section of 140th Street was tabled for two weeks.
• Planning Commission Selections (Page 4): Seven individuals were nominated and approved for the newly formed Bourbon County Planning Commission.
• Actions Taken (Page 7): Approved $302,193.56 in Accounts Payable from 09/19/25. Approved a Cereal Malt Beverage License for KC Mart, Inc.

Minutes of Special Meeting, September 23, 2025, 5:30 PM (Pages 9-11)

• Budget Review and Cuts (Page 9): Commissioners reviewed the budget line by line, making cuts, notably to the IT department budget, to achieve a revenue-neutral budget.
• Sheriff’s Department Funding (Page 9): There was discussion on the legality of a separate Public Safety fund for inmate housing revenue and whether it should be in the general fund. The Sheriff and his financial advisor were invited to a special meeting for clarity.
• NRP Funds (Page 9): The process for handling the 5% Neighborhood Revitalization Program (NRP) fee was found to be unclear and in need of clarification and formalization.

Minutes of Special Meeting, September 26, 2025, 3:35 PM (Pages 12-15)

• Budget Finalization (Page 12, 15): The Commissioners reached a consensus on the 2026 budget, setting the mill levy at 56.678, which is below revenue neutral.
• Review: The finalized budget was motioned to be sent to a third-party auditor for review at a cost not to exceed $1,500 (Page 15).
• Sheriff’s Fund (Page 12): The Sheriff proposed a 60%/40% split of jail revenue for a separate fund (60% to Sheriff’s office, 40% to county).

Minutes of September 29, 2025, 5:30 PM (Pages 16-18)

• 190th Street Benefit District (Page 16): Public Works was directed to assess the district.
• Elevator (Page 16): The courthouse elevator was reported to be non-compliant, and the Commission will get quotes for repairs.
• Credit Application (Page 17): The Sheriff’s Office received a credit application from Enterprise Fleet Management for a leasing program, and the Commission agreed to further review the Master Equity Lease Agreement.
• Action Taken (Page 18): Approved the motion to remove the stop signs going east and west on North National at the 218th street intersection.
• Planning Commission Terms (Page 18): One-year, two-year, and three-year terms were assigned to the new Planning Commission members.

Minutes of October 6, 2025, 5:30 PM (Pages 19-22)

• 140th Street Road Closure (Page 21): A motion to take no action on the application was approved.
• Bitcoin Mining/Noise (Page 21): Residents raised concerns about noise from a Bitcoin mining operation. The Sheriff advised the commissioners to work with the County Attorney and KDHE on a noise resolution.
• Landfill Trailer (Page 21): Public Works requested and received approval to purchase an $85,000 walking floor trailer for the landfill.
• Action Taken (Page 21): Approved the County Clerk as the voting delegate for the KCAMP annual meeting.

Minutes of October 14, 2025, 5:30 PM (Pages 22-26)

• Law Enforcement Fund (Page 23): Approved a Resolution establishing a Law Enforcement Fund for the Sheriff’s Office, giving the Sheriff’s Office full control of the fund (without the previously discussed 60/40 split).
• Vehicle Lease (Page 24): The Master Equity Lease Agreement with Enterprise Fleet Management was approved.
• Bitcoin Moratorium (Page 24): Approved a moratorium on any new Bitcoin mining operations to allow the planning commission to develop regulations.
• Health Insurance (Page 25): Commissioner Milburn-Kee reported that current insurance rates are unaffordable, and new plans are being developed.

Minutes of October 20, 2025, 6:00 PM (Pages 28-31)

• Rules of Procedure (Page 30): A motion was approved to repeal previous resolutions and adopt a new resolution establishing rules of procedures for meeting agendas and conduct.
• Public Works SOPs (Page 29): New Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs for sign installation and culvert installation) were approved.
• Accounts Payable/Payroll (Page 30): The consent agenda was approved (2-1 vote) for Accounts Payable of $377,595.70 and Payroll of $300,350.36.
• Road Projects (Page 29): Public Works discussed the potential option to purchase asphalt from an outside source for road projects.

Minutes of October 22, 2025, 6:00 PM (Pages 31-33)

• Insurance (Page 32): The Commission discussed the critical need to approve a health insurance plan before the end of the month and set an insurance work session for October 23, 2025.
• Longevity Pay (Page 32): Discussed the legal framework and eligibility requirements for a longevity pay policy.

Susan Walker, Bourbon County Clerk read a statement with information about the payroll situation and collaboration issues at the special meeting on October 22nd. FortScott.biz requested a copy of the statement, which is printed below.

I was elected, not appointed when I ran for County Clerk. I ran on the fact of being transparent. I am here today deeply concerned about the direction you have taken regarding major organizational decisions—decisions that were made unilaterally, without consultation with other elected officials. These are not small, routine matters; they are critical components of our county’s operations—payroll & benefits.

Over the past two months, my team has worked diligently to provide all necessary information for the payroll system conversion. However, today was the first time we were given access to view the actual payroll and time management systems. Despite this being our initial opportunity to see the systems firsthand, employees are expected to complete enrollment and begin clocking time by this Sunday. In addition, we must still train department heads how to approve time during the most critical time of an election. The election is my number one priority presently.

I believe this timeline is premature, as not all programming components have been fully configured or tested. At first glance, I see errors that need addressed and do not think it is fair that I must spend 15-hour days and weekends to keep us on this timeline. While I understand that some of these delays are the result of time constraints, I must emphasize that the Clerk’s Office manages many other statutory responsibilities that require significant attention and coordination. At no point was I consulted to determine whether this implementation schedule would be feasible within the existing workload of my office.

Mr. Beerbower, I appreciate your willingness to listen and treat me with respect the past few meetings. I called you on Tuesday following our training to express my concern that this payroll conversion is moving too quickly. As of today, I have not received a return call. I want to reiterate that my intent in reaching out was to communicate legitimate operational concerns—concerns that directly impact our ability to ensure a smooth and accurate transition for all employees. Timely communication on matters of this magnitude is essential to the success of this process and to maintaining trust among all offices involved.

Nonetheless, I have continued to cooperate in good faith and have made every effort to keep up with the process. It is important to note that the period from August through November represents the busiest time of year for the Clerk’s Office. During this time, we are responsible for producing more than 30 budgets, preparing for elections, open enrollment for benefits, and setting tax levies, each of which requires substantial time, precision, and staff resources.

In addition, I have been removed from benefit-related discussions, which has proven to be problematic as shown earlier. My office has received numerous calls from employees about open enrollment and I have no information, yet I am expected to run the process. Excluding key offices from these conversations has created unnecessary confusion and inefficiencies. It is unfortunate that, as Commissioners, you have not been willing to set aside personal grievances to collaborate on matters as important as payroll and employee benefits—issues that directly affect the very people who keep this county running.

I want to remind you that your employees are also your customers. They are the face of county government to the public and should be valued and appreciated accordingly. A successful organization depends on mutual respect, cooperation, and communication among its leadership and staff. I truly hope that moving forward, we can return to a more collaborative and respectful working relationship—one that serves both our employees and the taxpayers we represent.

The decision to remove payroll responsibilities from the Clerk’s office was portrayed as cost savings and improving processes. I must say plainly this was not an operational improvement; it was a political move. I have repeatedly explained that this change increases costs for taxpayers. Yet, instead of engaging in a transparent discussion or reviewing the data, this Commission has chosen to rely on the assurances of a salesman, who claims this move will “solve all our problems” (Yet, we had none) and “free up time in the Clerk’s office”.

That claim is simply not true. In fact, this decision adds unnecessary administrative oversight, no integration with our current accounting systems, increases the risk of human error, and fails to meet the governance requirements we must adhere to as a county. It undermines efficiency rather than improving it. Even though payroll is not a statutory duty of the Clerk, the Clerk is required to approve all expenditures of the county and book them accordingly per K.S.A. 311-318.

In addition, during recent public discussions and commission comments a commissioner questioned the integrity of the County Clerk’s financial processes and implied a failure to perform statutory duties. The County Clerk’s office is dedicated to transparency and adhering strictly to state law, and I feel I must clarify the established financial controls.

1. Clarification of Statutory Roles and Financial Controls

The duties of the County Clerk and County Treasurer are distinct and are defined by Kansas Statute Annotated (KSA), which establishes a crucial separation of powers:

• The County Treasurer’s Office is responsible for the collection of all county revenues and collector of taxes and tax distributions.
• The County Clerk’s Office is responsible for auditing, recording, and approving all county expenditures, maintaining records of financial statements, and ensuring budget compliance.

This separation is the cornerstone of financial controls and checks and balances for the county. The Clerk and Treasurer work collaboratively to ensure the general ledger and tax accounts are accurate and reconciled. Any action that circumvents these established roles places the county at risk of internal control failures.

2. Standardized Accounts Payable and Payroll Process

Our current process ensures that all expenditures are approved by the Commission before being paid, in full compliance with state law.

• Process Implementation: Since 2021, I assisted in implementing a process where Accounts Payable (AP) and Payroll details are included in Commission agenda packets and must be formally approved prior to payment processing as CFO. In the past this was not included in agenda packets for transparency.
• Commission Oversight: The Commission and County Counselor are provided ample time and opportunity for oversight:
  • Payroll: Details are delivered the Wednesday prior to payday, allowing Commissioners time to review and question any payment.
  • Accounts Payable: Detailed registers are presented at every Commission meeting.
  • The Commission and county counselor has the right and duty to pull any invoice or register item for review and withhold payment.

To imply that any payment has been processed without proper oversight or approval is factually incorrect and misrepresents the established, auditable procedure. The detailed records are available at every meeting, and my staff stands ready to answer any questions regarding invoices or the review process. In addition, another layer of control is in place with the current Human Resources representative, Dr. Cohen, identifying and giving direction on any exceptions to normal procedures.

3. Call for Collaboration and Education

My office has repeatedly invited the Commission to review our operations and receive clarification on our statutory duties. A functioning government requires clear, consistent communication and mutual respect for all elected and appointed offices. The continued focus on gossip and unsubstantiated opinions, rather than on fact-finding and process education, is unproductive and has had a demonstrable negative impact on the morale and retention of critical county staff.

I say this not out of defiance, but out of duty. It is my responsibility to protect taxpayer dollars, ensure compliance with the law, and maintain the integrity of the Clerk’s office. Decisions made out of spite or political motivation hurt not only the employees who must carry them out, but also the citizens we are all here to serve. In the end, it will be the taxpayers, the employees, and the operations of this county that will suffer the consequences of these shortsighted decisions. I urge the Commission to reconsider its approach to restore collaboration, transparency, and fiscal responsibility in these matters. The people of this county deserve nothing less.

AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF BOURBON COUNTY, KANSAS, REGULATING UNREASONABLE, EXCESSIVE, AND DISTURBING NOISE WITHIN THE COUNTY, AND PROVIDING PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF.

Article I — Purpose and Authority

Whereas public health, safety, comfort, and welfare are best served by reasonable regulation of loud, unnecessary, or unusual noises, the Board of County Commissioners of Bourbon County, Kansas, by authority granted under K.S.A. 19-101a and other applicable laws, does hereby adopt this Noise Ordinance.

Article II — Definitions

1. Noise means any sound that is loud, discordant, or unnatural to the surroundings and which endangers or injures the public health or welfare, or disturbs the reasonable peace, comfort, or repose of persons.
2. Residential property means any property upon which a dwelling unit is located.
3. Plainly audible means a sound that can be heard by an unaided human ear at a distance of seventy-five (75) feet from the source.
4. Stationary source means any sound-producing device which is not mobile, including mechanical devices, fixed engines, or equipment.
5. Motor vehicle means any vehicle intended for highway use, including automobiles, trucks, and motorcycles.

Article III — Prohibited Acts

1. It shall be unlawful for any person to make, continue, cause, or permit to be made or continued any loud, unnecessary, unusual, or unnatural noise which either:

   a. Annoys, disturbs, injures, or endangers the comfort, repose, health, peace, or safety of others; or

   b. Interferes with the comfortable enjoyment of life or property by a person of reasonable sensibilities.

2. Between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m., it shall be unlawful to cause any noise which is plainly audible at a distance of seventy-five (75) feet or more from the source on any residential property.
3. No person shall operate or permit to be operated any motor vehicle or sound amplification system in a motor vehicle so as to make or cause to be made any sound which is plainly audible at a distance of fifty (50) feet or more from the motor vehicle.
4. Stationary sources shall not emit sound that exceeds the maximum permissible levels below when measured at the boundary of another property:

Article IV — Specific Prohibitions

The following acts are declared to be violations of this ordinance, but this list is not exclusive:

1. Operating outdoor power equipment, lawn tools, or machinery between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m..
2. Discharging the exhaust of any engine or device except through a muffler designed to prevent loud or explosive noise.
3. Operating a vehicle or machinery in such a manner as to create unnecessary grating, grinding, or rattling sounds.
4. Operating amplified music or loudspeakers at a volume plainly audible at or beyond the property boundary.

Article V — Exceptions

This ordinance shall not apply to:

• Emergency vehicles and public safety operations during emergencies.
• Activities authorized by county permit (special events, parades, etc.).
• Normal farm and agricultural operations consistent with accepted practices.
• Construction or maintenance activities conducted between 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m., provided reasonable noise control is observed.

Article VI — Enforcement and Penalties

1. Enforcement shall be by the Bourbon County Sheriff or authorized designee.
2. Violations may result in a Notice of Violation, citation, or both.
3. Any person convicted shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and subject to a fine of not more than five hundred dollars ($500.00), imprisonment in the county jail for not more than thirty (30) days, or both.
4. Each day of violation constitutes a separate offense.
5. The county may seek abatement or injunctive relief to stop continued violations.

Article VII — Severability

If any portion of this ordinance is held invalid, the remainder shall remain in full force and effect.

Article VIII — Effective Date

This ordinance shall take effect and be in force after publication once in the official county newspaper, as provided by law.

Before discussing a proposed noise ordinance, the clerk’s office addressed the commission concerning the new payroll company the county is changing over to.

Payroll

County Clerk Susan Walker read a statement to the commission about the payroll and benefits problems they are currently having with the new payroll system the county.

“It was not an operation improvement. It was a political move,” she said the commission’s decision to hire Pay Entry to do the county’s payroll.

“It undermines the efficiency,” she said.  It has not saved time for her office but has added to the hours needed.

Walker also stated that recent comments in commission meetings implied a failure of her office. Implying that any payment has been processed without prior approval is false.

Jennifer Hawkins, Deputy Clerk, addressed the commission regarding  the affects of what the new payroll system is doing.

She is working directly with Pay Entry and cited several issues she found in her meeting with them Thursday morning.

“My main concern is employees can change the cost center and their job title,” even by accident, she said, which would change their pay rates and what account their pay comes out of. Pay Entry said they cannot lock employees out of that part of the program without locking everyone else out too, including supervisors.

“The system seems rather clunky compared to what we have now. In my opinion, it’s taking two steps back compared to what we now use,” said Jennifer.

Commissioners Samuel Tran and Mika Milburn both wanted to include the vendor’s representative in a meeting about the issues.

Commissioner David Beerbower suggested putting the changeover to having Pay Entry manage the county’s payroll (which was to take place on Sunday) on hold until they can have a meeting with the payroll vendor at the regular commission meeting on Monday.

This shouldn’t be happening during the election time, Beerbower pointed out, as the clerk has election responsibilities taking her time.

Beerbower told Milburn to reach out to Emerson to ask for a delay in starting up to allow for time to work out the issues.

Walker said she was asked to start up at the end of the quarter, and she suggested waiting to start up until the start of the new year.

Tran said the commission needs to discuss it among the three of them. He also said that when there’s a problem, those involved are either a help or a hindrance.

He said the county officials and employees need to work as a team.

He also said they are trying to make things better.

Walker said that nothing was broken in the system that the county had been using.

Milburn will pass on the clerk’s office issues to Pay Entry, and the changeover will be delayed until the problems can be worked out.

Noise Ordinance Resolution

Tran said he spoke to the county’s attorneys, and the county doesn’t have standing for an injunction or a cease and desist order, so the noise ordinance is the next step they can take. It will give them standing.

Beerbower shared a noise resolution example with the commission that a citizen had given him for review. He said it is similar to noise resolutions in Atchison and Douglas Counties.

Some highlights from the resolution he read include:

Defining “plainly audible” as sound an unaided human ear 75 feet from the source can hear. Tran also requested the addition of reverberation to the ordinance.

The ordinance differentiated between residential, agricultural and commercial/industrial areas. It also distinguished between noise volume allowed during the day and night.

Daytime (7 AM-10 PM) decibel limits in the ordinance are 60 dB in residential, 65 in agricultural, and 70 in commercial and industrial areas.

Actions on the list of violations include: operating outdoor power equipment between 10 PM and 7 AM, operating muffler-less vehicles, operating amplified music or a speaker at a volume heard beyond the property boundary.

Normal agriculture operations, special events, and construction during the day are exempted from the resolution.

Enforcement would be by the sheriff’s department. Violations may result in a citation and misdemeanor charge with fines of $500 and up to 30 days in jail. Each day of the violation qualifies as a separate offense. The county can seek an injunction to stop continuous offenders.

Beerbower expressed concern about adding decibel levels to the resolution because of the issue of who measures the sound.

He said the language of the ordinance, which calls noise that causes damage to another’s health and impedes their ability to enjoy their life a violation, is adequate.

Public Comments

Zach Cross expressed concern that the commissioners consider grandfathering in existing businesses. He owns a kennel business in the south end of the county and is concerned about his ability to continue to operate if a new neighbor doesn’t want the noise of the kennel so close to their property.

Mary Ridge expressed concern about noise from gunfire and fireworks.

Michael Hoyt compared the ordinance to a speed limit change, which is enforced the minute it’s published.

Beerbower asked Tran and Milburn if they had any changes to suggest.

Beerbower asked to bring it back to the regular meeting on Monday. He said he would get legal’s opinion before then.

The Bourbon County Commission will hold a benefits work session on 10.23.25 at 5:00 PM at 210 S National Avenue.