Woodford County court authorizes contingent sign‑off to pursue USDA buyouts for flood‑damaged properties

The Woodford County Fiscal Court voted unanimously to authorize the judge and county attorney to finalize an Emergency Watershed Protection (EWP) recovery buyout contract with the U.S. Department of Agriculture, contingent on final legal review.

Emergency Management Director Drew Chandler told the court the county has been working with USDA/NRCS since initial post‑flood site visits and has submitted property information to the agency. Chandler said the county received 44 online submissions from property owners; after removing duplicates, 29 properties qualified for consideration and three of those property owners told the county they prefer elevation assistance rather than buyout. "The contract does not obligate us to buy any properties. It is the contract that allows us to buy properties. The acquisition process is completely voluntary," Chandler said.

Why it matters: the EWP buyout would pay for acquisition, demolition, site remediation and permanent conservation easements for eligible properties, but the county must provide a local cost share and follow federal terms. Chandler told the court the grant includes a 25% cost share and about 6% management costs; the county also must document fair market value and other administrative items required by USDA/NRCS. Court members said time is urgent because property owners are calling daily and the county has not yet received a federal public assistance declaration that would unlock other recovery funds.

The motion before the court, moved by Squire Blackford and seconded by Squire Gill, asked the court to approve entering the USDA EWP contract contingent on the county attorney and the judge executive completing a final review. The motion passed unanimously. Chandler asked that, if the contract arrives, staff circulate it to the full fiscal court, post it on the county website, and allow the judge to sign pending county attorney review so the buyout process can move forward promptly.

Chandler described the county's outreach to property owners: an initial meeting with NRCS was held June 4, and on June 9 the county submitted an expanded list (initially 32 properties referenced) after working with the property valuation administrator, John Paul Coyle, to compile property cards. Chandler said Franklin County has been pursuing the same program and recently held a town hall, but noted Woodford County has not yet seen the final USDA terms and conditions. He also said he had called an NRCS contact, "Mr. Stevens," and had not received the agency contract copy at the time of the meeting.

Court members asked procedural questions; Chandler reiterated that participation by owners is voluntary and that the county will hold an information session for owners once the contract is finalized. He said the contract would cover acquisition costs, demolition, utility removal (for example septic tanks) and placement of conservation easements; county staff would prioritize properties because buying many at once would be challenging.

Next steps: county staff will circulate any incoming USDA contract to fiscal court members, post it publicly, and seek the judge's signature after review by the county attorney. A timeline for final approvals and property closings was not specified in the meeting.

Ending: The court's vote allows county officials to proceed with USDA paperwork and owner outreach; the number, timing and selection of buyouts will depend on the final USDA terms and available local match and administrative capacity.