Atchison County holds public hearing on possible sale of county lake; commissioners say no decision yet

Atchison County commissioners on May 15 held a public hearing on whether to pursue sale of the Atchison County Lake, heard more than a dozen residents urge the county to keep and restore the lake, and said no decision to sell has been made.

The hearing drew neighbors, former caretakers and community groups who described the lake’s historic construction, its wildlife and its social value to families and veterans. Trudy Wishrup, who said she lives just west of the lake, told the commission, “The County Lake is a place of celebration, reprieve, and a gathering spot for neighbors.”

Why it matters: commissioners said the county is still in an information‑gathering phase and that potential repair, dredging and accessibility work would carry substantial costs. Residents argued those investments, paired with volunteer support and grant opportunities, could restore the lake and produce ongoing recreational and economic benefits for the county.

Residents’ testimony and local history

Speakers repeatedly described multi‑generation ties to the lake and local efforts to preserve it. Jessica Saxton, a resident of the Atchison County Lake, said several families who gave land for the project have reported an understanding that the land would revert to families or that descendants would have right of first refusal if the county stopped using the land for its original public purpose. “If the choice is between increasing traffic and tourism to the area or losing the lake completely, we will always choose the lake,” Saxton told the commission.

Thirteen‑year‑old Elizabeth Saxton read a petition she said contained 102 signatures and described family history at the lake: “My great great grandfather actually gave his own farmland so the lake could be made,” she said.

Speakers also laid out practical ideas to increase use and revenue, including improved mowing and maintenance, mountain‑bike and walking trails, expanded camping, fundraising through a community foundation or lake board, and targeted grant applications. Dr. Larissa Rice urged the commission to consider recreation’s value to mental health and economic development and suggested dredging and trail grants that other counties have used to boost visitation.

Usage and contracts cited

Community members and speakers who use the lake for hunting and veterans’ outings described steady—but not large—use in recent years and flagged state agreements that carry conditions. George Shear, who said he runs the veterans nonprofit Fallen Outdoors, told the commission the Kansas Department of Wildlife and Parks (KDWP) logs use where the lake is enrolled in a walk‑in hunting program; Shear reported KDWP records showing 45 hunters in 2024 but said his own group’s sign‑in practices undercounted actual participants. He also noted the state’s walk‑in hunting contract pays the county $1,720 annually and requires that those funds be spent for related hunting/fishing purposes.

Costs and constraints discussed

Commissioners and staff summarized costs and constraints the county is weighing: the lake is silted, the spillway needs repair, and upgrades to restrooms, shelter houses and ADA access would be required to attract more campers or comply with federal funding rules. One resident referenced a posted operating cost figure of about $22,000 per year. A county appraiser’s estimate that appeared in staff research showed a sale—priced by a private broker presentation at roughly $1.6 million—would generate only about $1,192 per year in property tax revenue if sold and remained tax‑producing land, a figure commissioners cited when weighing the revenue tradeoffs.

Several speakers urged formation of a community working group to develop phased plans and pursue grants, volunteer support and potential partner funding. “Once you sell that asset, you only get to sell it once,” said Bill Murphy, who urged retaining the lake as a county asset while pursuing creative uses.

Commissioners’ position and next steps

The commission repeatedly declined to attribute the proposal to a single person and described the meeting as an information‑gathering step rather than the start of a sale process. Commissioners told the public there is no buyer, no final decision and no motion to sell pending. They said staff have been collecting technical information—appraisals, the KDWP contract, and preliminary dredging contacts—and that emergency management was checking the spillway condition. The county clerk and finance staff presented background about tax‑exempt parcels and budget pressures that prompted review of county assets.

Commissioners said they will consider creating a committee or working group that would include community volunteers, local users and staff to further study options and report back. One commissioner said the public hearing and the turnout produced useful information and that the county will continue to collect data and seek input before any formal vote.

Community offers and concerns

Numerous residents offered to volunteer labor and fundraising help; veterans’ groups and nonprofit volunteers described experience in hosting events and maintaining public spaces. At the same time, speakers raised legal and historical questions—several families said they were told in prior decades that land originally donated for the lake would revert in some circumstances, and residents asked the county to examine any such commitments or contract language before proceeding.

No formal votes on sale or transfer

The only formal county vote recorded at the May 15 meeting was approval of the evening’s agenda by a 3–0 vote at the meeting’s start. Commissioners said the next formal steps would follow staff research and potential committee recommendations; they did not schedule a decision date.

What’s next: commissioners said staff will continue to gather information (appraisal details, dredging and spillway estimates, contract obligations and grant options) and will report back. Community volunteers and speakers asked for ongoing transparency and for the county to post meeting materials and technical reports online as they are completed.