[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6416449,"mediaKeyId","2300922-a4367e7aab513b188c58b50e351082c8","parentId",2300922,"title","Marion County Commission approves minutes, early checks and accepts emergency‑management equipment grant; executive sessions held with no action","audioSeconds",72,"startMs",614000,"endMs",686000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2300922-a4367e7aab513b188c58b50e351082c8&start=614&end=686","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2300922-a4367e7aab513b188c58b50e351082c8/thumbnail_614000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6416449/Marion-County/Kansas/Marion-County-Commission-approves-minutes-early-checks-and-accepts-emergencymanagement-equipment-grant-executive-sessions-held-with-no-action","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6416449-0cecce91183bace520300435e97b596b/orig.mp4?Expires=1775481501&Signature=SyBb~S6COTgSAY2MTW1CZcGXfA1RsTmgjtCWAIH3QJA4Rl-HJHQFo7o4jJL~EbGvPQDIbHF1qyscGRDZaiIGliCO-~11MX~e-7smpM~uZwUgjcIu0ce3gbW6zXpoMCL1hrebtezaSRyhxLB7qRZ27km4m8TQ069hGkTM1ADT5t~n193pZpIfbFkRwqMKPgO1v3Yz1p0Uflok6vJNEoK3w4aGglYV9sucp-J-FzgaEiIcXC046UoY4sb-mf-kKwn51KHWXdcqADCs2T8hrCjWsl7twFID8L5T4ozHCfCgtqTjEpiC-jcqHpMsoRjl7Yb4gOpYHvCw2xWCBQgIENqCgw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","MARION COUNTY, KS","date","2025-02-10T00:00:00Z","article","The Marion County Commission on Feb. 10 approved routine meeting business, accepted a small equipment grant and held two executive sessions; no final board action resulted from the executive sessions.

Minutes and early checks
The commission voted to approve the minutes from the previous meeting by voice vote (recorded as “Aye 5–0”). The board then approved early checks totaling $294,010.04, a packet item that included payouts to local fire districts; that approval was recorded by voice vote.

Small grant acceptance
County staff reported receipt of a card printer for the county’s ID badge system through a Kansas Department of Emergency Management grant. The equipment’s reported value was $4,995. A commissioner moved to accept the equipment; the motion was seconded by Commissioner Kent and the board approved acceptance (recorded procedure: motion, second, vote). The transcript does not record a roll‑call tally for the equipment acceptance.

Executive sessions
The commission recessed into an executive session to discuss hiring, citing KSA 75‑4319(b) for matters involving personnel and elected officials; the session lasted about 10 minutes and the board returned to open session with no action taken. The commission later recessed again for a property‑acquisition discussion; Commissioner Goring recused themself from that session. The commission returned to open session and recorded that no action had been taken in the executive sessions.

Why it matters: the votes adopted routine administrative measures that allow county operations to continue: approval of prior minutes, authorization of early payments and formal acceptance of grant equipment. The executive sessions were convened under authority granted by state statute but produced no recorded decision.

Ending: There were no further formal votes on policy or budget items at the Feb. 10 meeting.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Marion County MCC Meeting 2-10-2025","oneSentenceSummary","On Feb. 10 the Marion County Commission approved prior meeting minutes, authorized $294,010.04 in early checks and accepted a $4,995 card‑printer grant, and held two executive sessions under KSA 75‑4319(b) with no action taken.","taxTitle","Marion County, Kansas","taxId",56183,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6416476,"Marion County staff outlines multi‑million road-rebuild estimates and grant strategy; corrects mileage math on one estimate",1544,1306000,2850000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2300922-a4367e7aab513b188c58b50e351082c8&start=1306&end=2850","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2300922-a4367e7aab513b188c58b50e351082c8/thumbnail_1306000.jpg","/articles/6416476/Marion-County/Kansas/Marion-County-staff-outlines-multimillion-road-rebuild-estimates-and-grant-strategy-corrects-mileage-math-on-one-estimate","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6416476-0bff48ce4a2b1173c3656ba9ac0cf929/orig.mp4?Expires=1775481501&Signature=GF4YJAkUkNJc4JF6NPaJGK9rhg8f83m2tEoIjhzHdGortH-Yjg1OlWNSCVEsmZ8sZJuZF38G7wITDORZj5MyyGaB~dvvW-1lYyy434cHlU7xmr-cF3lLjzCD7n-2Hva0g1LMmR5UEGOxONQd7Ix495b7cNCEWKDuQWquEkuGangvq8Q72YR5hQaXfsSa2NSTg1EyAOGrhx79~h1-br-tlFxlNoKFt~~apqECsmORXmI7~Onh3G2Jt~6dTRMnsqkKT6PzE2ooF0lqD1pDa67qXGWXhgeeYw62ZzGQLnPjRaHlEVuiYhxGYNjOUZCf6EEp0WnNrJoGpUr8vPQ7VhKSmQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","County road staff presented rough design and cost estimates for three major road projects and discussed grant strategies with Marion County commissioners on Feb. 10, outlining construction approaches, drainage challenges and program timing for KDOT cost-share and other grants.

Staff described three candidate projects: a near‑mile segment of Nighthawk Road, a roughly 5‑mile segment on “March” (presented as a 5‑mile job), and a 3‑mile stretch of 1 Fortieth. For Nighthawk staff proposed removing up to 15 inches of material, installing a crushed base with geogrid, and a 3‑inch asphalt overlay; the construction subtotal on that section was presented at about $399,000 in the staff estimate.

For the 5‑mile March project staff showed a similar approach — crushed concrete base over geogrid with a 3‑inch asphalt cap — and presented a construction subtotal of roughly $2.5 million (about $500,000 per mile) under a locally managed design and inspection approach. Staff said KDOT design and inspection requirements would materially raise survey, design and construction‑engineering costs if the county submitted the project to certain KDOT programs.

On the 1 Fortieth stretch staff originally listed two estimates: about $2.0 million if a cement‑treated base were rebuilt for the full 3‑mile stretch, and about $1.1 million for an asphalt‑cap‑only approach. Staff later discovered a formula error: the spreadsheet had used four miles instead of three in some lines. After that correction staff said the construction cost for the cement‑base option would be closer to $1.56 million and the asphalt‑only option roughly $800,000.

Staff discussed tradeoffs in base design, moisture and long‑term performance: “If we've got any spot or spots where the sub the moisture stays high after we put that cement treated base in, … treated base is gonna fail,” staff said, and argued the crushed base plus geogrid approach performed better in wet spots. Staff added that a 12‑inch crushed‑concrete base is roughly highway‑grade and can carry very heavy loads, but that the county must weigh whether to design for rare extreme harvest loads (which would raise costs substantially).

On funding and timing, staff explained KDOT cost‑share cycles and limitations: cost‑share applications are typically due in April, awards announced about 60 days later, and awarded cost‑share funds are often not available until the following fiscal year; staff noted economic‑development grants can be submitted year‑round and, if awarded, may be available sooner. Staff also told commissioners the KDOT cost‑share program has a $1,000,000 maximum award for a single project.

Staff addressed recycled material reuse and logistics: material removed in rebuilds can be crushed and stockpiled for county reuse as base or shoulder material; staff said the county has existing crushed‑concrete piles north of Lincolnville and that reuse can lower project cost if sufficient quantity is available.

Why it matters: commissioners must decide project priorities, budgeting and whether to pursue cost‑share or economic development grants; the corrected mileage in the spreadsheet and the detailed tradeoffs on base design materially change expected local funding needs.

Ending: staff committed to return corrected estimates and a revised packet with updated numbers for commissioner review and capital‑improvement planning.","County road staff presented detailed estimates for three large road rebuilds — Nighthawk, March (5-mile) and 1 Fortieth — discussed use of crushed concrete and geogrid, and reviewed KDOT cost-share and economic development grant timing; staff corrected a mileage error that reduced one estimate.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6416500,"Residents tell Marion County commissioners wind farm caused noise, lights and business losses; ask zoning enforcement",2700,2881000,181000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2300922-a4367e7aab513b188c58b50e351082c8&start=2881&end=181","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2300922-a4367e7aab513b188c58b50e351082c8/thumbnail_2881000.jpg","/articles/6416500/Marion-County/Kansas/Residents-tell-Marion-County-commissioners-wind-farm-caused-noise-lights-and-business-losses-ask-zoning-enforcement","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6416500-449837961443dd7fe224fae621c4508e/orig.mp4?Expires=1775481501&Signature=RUB6bMBHL5h7MRRDKpjL17jorZCWHtm5L4n~ToiPhobsYnfObS87dv8JsXX8gNFVRWIBucKXa42UGHT4NJs8bwuxHagMrcYOgWfqrjt6O06J3C5ZXyZ4rKN2ve4J9iapsBrkymjb2fmeBxfj2wefw3pl5kzAoIJF6gjkK1hObwHey8ZEx6-9C-B9OFPyx5JcRB7Q7G7~pYCGXXy-qHOtoN8RBL5z6dcrJELXtdNG67PlPeRVyhfqRIVylyPVd9ygD1o~XR7Z4VIDwmEzuSXka4ZhGhlq-1pHpmjRyFKKBaogy28Hb2cUsxlpYsqhfDMwua2YxDct6t0-mA0mGteanw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Residents told Marion County commissioners on Feb. 10 that the county’s wind farm has harmed local businesses, produced excessive noise and blinking lights, and altered drainage on nearby roads — and they urged county officials to enforce zoning rules and fix road drainage.

A resident who identified themself during the public-comment period said the county has “lost a couple more tax paying businesses, Wendy’s and Donahue Travers,” and listed other closures. The speaker called the situation “an economical, economic economical and environmental disaster that should have never happened,” and asked why the Zoning Department did not count a property owner on a landowner protest petition. “This community deserves public acknowledgment of the harm caused by the county, and meaningful actions should be taken to mitigate the damage,” the resident said.

The speaker also described ongoing nuisance concerns: “Lights. … people are fed up with the blinking light. Noise … is above the 55 decibel threshold to being compliant. Intermittent cell phones,” and raised drainage problems on an access road near what they called “Tom Tom’s House,” asking why culverts were not installed. The commenter said water did not run across the county road until the windmill went up and asked the county to “do the right thing and enforce the regulations.”

The speaker referenced a prior response from a county commissioner: “Commissioner Durst addressed that already,” and noted the county later installed a culvert “at the taxpayers' expense,” which the speaker said cost “800 or thousand dollars,” and called that expenditure “absolutely worth it.”

Why it matters: commissioners heard multiple public-facing complaints that link the county’s land-use decisions to economic and infrastructure impacts on residents. The remarks asked the commission to clarify whether zoning and public-works rules have been correctly applied and to identify remedies for noise, lighting and drainage problems.

The comment occurred during the meeting’s designated public-comment period; no formal action or vote on the wind farm, zoning enforcement or culvert repairs was recorded during the Feb. 10 session.

What was not decided or proven in the meeting: the county’s responsibility for any particular business closure, any formal finding about decibel measurements or regulatory violations, and any binding change to county zoning policy. The speaker said a neighbor would testify about drainage changes but no formal testimony or technical measurement was entered into the record during the meeting.

The commission later placed an item on a future agenda to ask Planning and Zoning to address enforcement of the wind farm conditional-use permit (CUP), requesting roughly 30–45 minutes for that discussion at a future meeting.

Ending: Commissioners did not make any formal finding or vote during the Feb. 10 meeting on wind-farm enforcement; the public-comment appeals and the request for a Planning and Zoning enforcement briefing indicate the issue will return to the commission agenda.","During public comment at the Feb. 10 Marion County Commission meeting, residents blamed nearby wind turbines for business closures, noise, blinking lights and new drainage problems, and urged the county to enforce zoning and culvert standards.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Marion County Commission approves minutes, early checks and accepts emergency‑management equipment grant; executive sessions held with no action

Marion County staff outlines multi‑million road-rebuild estimates and grant strategy; corrects mileage math on one estimate

Residents tell Marion County commissioners wind farm caused noise, lights and business losses; ask zoning enforcement