There will be a planning commission meeting held on Thursday, October 30, 2025 at 5:00 PM at 210 S National Avenue. These meetings are open to the public.

Commissioners discussed payroll issues, county IT updates, and leasing vehicles for the Sheriff’s department, as well as the noise resolution in their Oct. 27 meeting.

After regular opening exercises, the approval of minutes for: 09.22.25, 09.23.25, 09.26.25, 09.29.25, 10.06.25, 10.14.25,
10.20.25, 10.22.25 was held up, as Commissioner Mika Milburn had several corrections.

Tran also had some corrections for 9/26/25 and 10/22/25.

Sign 10.20.25 approved minutes for 09.15.25, 09.16.25, 10.07.25

These minutes were gone over in the last meeting. Minutes were approved.

Sign 10.20.25 adopted Resolution 34-25 Meeting Rules

Repeals resolutions 1025, 1125, and 2526. Was approved with Milburn against.

State Rep Rick James — Noise Resolution

James, who represents District 4, commented to the commission about the proposed noise resolution.

“I think it’s a good idea, but I don’t know how it’s going to be enforced,” he said. He said that noise issues are usually handled in civil court.

Planning and zoning are so important, he said, giving citizens an opportunity to have a say in what goes on in their county. Working together to create the regulations creates a more informed population.

“It’s so important to have some kind of regulation in the county,” he said. Not having regulations allows outsiders to come in and do what they want without recourse.

“I really feel that something needs to be done, and planning and zoning would really help [the commission do their job],” he said.

Milburn pointed out that the situation in Lynn County was different than it is in Bourbon County because they had zoning before the noise issues arose.

Payroll Discussion with Payentry

Tim Emerson, managing member for Emerson and Co., was contracted by the county to help with payroll, and he addressed the commission, along with Cassie Johnson of Payentry by phone.

“If I were the commissioners, I would be very concerned based on those comments,” he said of what County Clerk Susan Walker and Assistant Clerk Jennifer Hawkins shared with the commission last week.

Emerson said Dr. Steve Cohen of the county’s HR reached out to him in July to ask for help. Emerson then spoke with the commissioners to find out what the situation was, and believed his company could help in Bourbon County as they had in other counties. The county’s agreement with Payentry has been in place since August 26.

Emerson claimed direct accountability for his employees and the contractors his company works with.

“Clearly this county is hurting. It’s not unique,” he said. Everyone is hurting right now.

He then expressed concern with the intentions of the clerk and assistant clerk, saying they don’t appear to be collaborating with the people that are put in place to help with the change to Payentry. He said their comments were short on facts, and he questioned the timing of those comments.

He said that Payentry is ready to take over payroll for the county as soon as the county provides some needed documentation.

Outstanding items needed to set up Payentry are extensive, and they are not getting the engagement from the county that they typically would when they handle a payroll, said Emerson.

He then read through a list of the training supplied by Payentry and the varied levels of engagement the county clerk’s office provided for those trainings.

He also said the software is highly customizable and people cannot change their position or salary. That idea is “absurd,” he said.

Commissioner Samuel Tran asked what would happen if they don’t execute the contract by the first of the year.

Emerson said it sends a message of distrust to the employees, and leads to a loss of historical data for 2025 as well as the need to re-onboard the county all over again starting in 2026.

Cassie Johnson, over the phone, said they have been asked to leave the punch clock module open by Bourbon County, allowing employees to edit their time sheets. This would not affect pay and would be reviewed by each employee’s supervisor before payroll is approved.

Another option is to lock down that area, requiring edits to be made by supervisors or managers. Best practices is to not to allow employees full access to their time sheets, she said.

Tran asked what the biggest limiting factor in implementing the contract is.

Emerson said that they are ready to go on his end, but they need additional information provided by the county, including details of how the blended overtime works. The goal is to automate that as much as possible.

Cassie estimated that they can get it up and running by the end of the week if they get the information from the county. She said the information should be something that’s readily available to the clerk. She thought it would take a few hours.

Tran expressed frustration that it has taken so long to make the change.

Clerk Susan Walker wanted to clarify some information, but Beerbower denied her that opportunity, requesting that she answer the question about how much time she will need to send the required information to Payentry. He said she had her say last week, and this week, Emerson’s group had theirs.

Walker said she has elections and taxes going on right now, and one of her employees is only part-time. She said it would take her more than a week to get the information.

Emerson questioned the integrity of how long it’s going to take.

Beerbower said he can’t get a timeline to Emerson right now because he isn’t getting the answers he needs from the clerk.

“We are committed to working with you,” said Beerbower.

Walker said in the last meeting she was told to take the time she needed. When she tried to bring up more issues, Beerbower shut her down, saying the commission isn’t going to rehash it again.

Walker then threatened to “go to the media” and walked out.

Tran said everyone has challenges, but as members of the county, they have to work together to move through those challenges. “Putting up roadblocks is not working together,” he said. He asked for a deadline on the eight items needed by payroll.

Beerbower moved to set a date of Nov. 3 for the clerk to have the documentation to Payentry. County Councilor Bob Johnson said they can direct her to do it, but she’s an elected official in her own right, and they can’t make her. He recommended a discussion once emotions calm down. The motion passed.

Consent Agenda
• Approval of 10.24.25 Accounts Payable that was sent for review to the Commission on 10.24.25 (not
mailed until approved on 10.27.25) – Accounts Payable $74,810.79
• September 2025 Financials
• 3rd Quarter Financial Publication Approval

Tran said he noticed EMS is down $103,000. Part of that is due to the holdup of Medicare and Medicaid payments. Walker addressed the issue, saying they should be very concerned, and if they don’t meet the target by the end of the year, it has to be covered by the general fund.

He recommended that the other commissioners review the document.

The commission approved the consent agenda, Milburn voting against because of her objection to the timeline for when the commission receives the consent agenda. Milburn offered to check with other counties to see how much time they get.

Walker said accounts payable go out to the commissioners on Friday mornings, and payroll is distributed to them on the Wednesday before.

Tran pointed out that working for the county is a dynamic job and requires rolling with the punches.

Public Comments for Items Not on The Agenda

Clint Walker — Road and Bridge/Public Works

“I want to give a big kudos to public works for being so professional and doing such a good job,” he said of the work they did trimming trees near his property.

Susan Walker — 911 addresses and flood plan questions

Her office is receiving requests for 911 addresses as well as flood plane management. That is not something her office does, but is done by Emergency Management.

The county is working on replacing the emergency manager.

Old Business

Technology Discussion with Sheriff and Stronghold

Stronghold is the current IT service for Bourbon County. They have a 6-month contract and are working to update and secure the county’s network. The next step in that process is updating switches at Sheriff’s office.

A representative from Stronghold came to update the county on their progress with updates. He said the $11,300 covers more than just the switches at the sheriff’s office. Stronghold would replace unmanaged switches throughout the county with managed switches. While it is possible to have end-of-life switches in the network, in order to segregate each department, the switches need to be replaced.

Commissioner Mika Milburn supported their recommendation as the contracted service for the county’s IT.

Sheriff asked for a breakdown of cost by department. Stronghold offered to do that. They advised that to separate the Sheriff’s department out fully from the county would take a new firewall with a yearly licensing cost of $3,000-$5,000.

Commissioner Samuel Tran said that monetarily, it makes more sense to use Stronghold’s recommendation, with the caveat of coming back to the issue in future as changes are needed.

Chelsea, project manager for Stronghold, said they are 26% of the way through the project after 45 days. They are awaiting approval of the switch change order to keep moving forward.

Stronghold also asked the commission for direction about who should be given access to various parts of the county’s system. Tran agreed that the commission should formalize that process and provide oversight for who gets what access.

Stronghold also suggested that the commission get input from the Stronghold consulting team on any software purchases, which is included in their agreement with the county.

Milburn moved that they go forward with Stronghold’s request to make the hardware updates or changes. Motion carried.

Vehicle Lease Program – Sheriff

Sheriff Bill Martin said that jail sales tax money can be used for maintenance of county buildings, to pay down the bond debt, and for operations of the sheriff’s office and the jail. It cannot be used for salaries or anything outside the scope. Martin wants to use it to pay for cars for his department through the Enterprise leasing program. He also reminded the commission that it is their responsibility, per statute, to provide cars for the sheriff’s office members to do their jobs.

Martin pointed out that the three most important things they need for the job are food, transportation, and communication.

He asked what it’s going to take for the commission to make the decision.

Beerbower asked for the comparable price for the first 5 years of leasing on 7, 8, or 11 vehicles. He said they are deciding on a long-term plan. “If we’re not going to do it, then we have to decide how we’re going to outfit his fleet that could lose as many as 8 vehicles in the next 2 years,” he said.

It will be late spring of 2026 before the new cars are available for the county.

After discussing numbers that didn’t match up for a while, the sheriff asked to step back and get his numbers together, then send all the information to the commission.

Milburn wanted the cost of maintenance included. Tran asked them to include information covering the highest cost for the extra equipment in the totals.

They will bring it back next week.

Noise Resolution Discussion

Commissioner David Beerbower started the discussion by reading a statement, saying he proposed a noise resolution as an attempt to solve a problem for the citizens of the county. He has received feedback from constituents to the effect that any action by the government is “overreach against conservative values.” He advocated “ordered liberty,” saying they should not rush into any ordinance, but they should hand it off to the planning commission to allow them to handle the review and public hearings that go along with it.

Milburn agreed with the idea that the planning commission should handle it.

“I have thought about this all weekend long. It is a complex issue,” said Tran. He is very aware of how his actions now affect the future and the importance of not introducing unintended consequences. He also suggested that the verbiage in the current draft of the resolution is tantamount to zoning, which they cannot do as a commission. That is the job of the planning commission. “They bring it to us and we approve it, but we don’t formulate it,” he said.

“That does not diminish our responsibility for the core group of constituents that are currently suffering with this dilemma,” said Tran.

Milburn asked if the appraiser had been out to the property to change the taxation category from agriculture to industrial. He has not yet. County Counselor Bob Johnson said that as long as they stay within the state statute, that is an appropriate action for the county to take.

Sheriff Bill Martin said that the detective in charge of the case is meeting with attorneys at the site. Tran said he would take off work to be at that meeting.

Johnson said that all resolutions need to be legal and have a way to enforce them. He said that under home rule powers the commission can make it a crime, but that is not advisable.

Sheriff Martin said that he can’t enforce a noise resolution, but a codes enforcement officer would have to be hired by the county. He suggested it might fall under commerce rules.

Tran said he sees three options available to alleviate the current situation: 1. Citizens litigate in civil court with their own lawyer; 2. Pursue the zoning committee noise ordinance; 3. The county mediates a meeting with both parties and helps them reach a compromise that benefits both parties.

Martin suggested using an emergency management employee as a codes enforcer.

Public Comments

Michael Hoyt said the resolution could easily be rewritten to be enforced in civil court.

Johnson warned about selective prosecution as well as the county setting itself up to take an entity to court.

Dereck Ranes said there is no comparison to the noise his family endures from the bitcoin mining generator and a train horn or motorcycles or dogs or lawn mowing because none of those noises are continuous. Ranes also told the commission they had the power to pass the ordinance and hire a codes officer to enforce it.

“We have no avenue in Bourbon County that requires someone to say, ‘I’m putting a business in,'” said Beerbower.

John Spate’s property adjoins the property containing the bitcoin mine. The peace and quiet, deer and turkeys that he moved to Bourbon County to enjoy, are all gone.

He said he doesn’t think they should use a civil solution.

Tim Emerson said they should pass the resolution tonight with the addition of a special use permit.

Beerbower asked if the commission wanted to continue with the noise resolution or leave it in the hands of the planning commission.

He said he wants to continue with the noise resolution but change it to civil penalties.

They planned to convene the planning commission on 5 p.m. Nov. 30.

Beerbower said he would bring another draft of the noise resolution to the meeting on Nov. 3.

Tran addressed the gallery, asking what they wanted from the bitcoin miners at a minimum. They said quiet is the first requirement and the vibration.

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.