Atchison County holds public forum on planning and zoning after quarry and lease concerns

Atchison County commissioners held a special public forum on May 28 to explain how county planning and zoning would work and to gather resident feedback after neighbors raised concerns about a quarry lease and mapped commercial renewable-energy leases in the county.

The meeting, called by the Board of County Commissioners and attended by dozens of residents, included a short procedural vote to approve the evening’s agenda (motion approved, 3–0). County officials and the county counselor described the legal pathway for creating zoning — appointing a citizen planning commission, conducting a comprehensive study and adopting regulations under Kansas zoning statutes — and answered questions about whether targeted resolutions, moratoria or other tools could address specific threats without countywide zoning.

Why it matters: zoning changes would create a new local regulatory framework affecting property use across Atchison County. Residents and business owners said that could mean higher fees, administrative costs and limits on how people use or improve their land; others argued limited land uses such as commercial quarries or large-scale solar or wind farms pose risks that current resolutions may not be able to stop.

Most speakers at the forum urged commissioners not to adopt countywide zoning. Monica Bion, a property and small-business owner, told the commission that zoning would “bring a loss of property rights and the potential for overregulation,” and that families in the county selected Atchison because it was unzoned. Bion said zoning would add permit fees and red tape to projects and risk harming small businesses and farms.

Other residents repeated that concern. Joseph Mullins said rural residents maintain their own wells, roads and septic systems and do not want urban-style services or regulation. Several speakers, including farmers and building contractors, described high permit and inspection costs they have seen elsewhere and warned that zoning boards can become political and favor some applicants over others.

Speakers who described particular local incidents framed the meeting. Clint Korpstein described a recent experience with a lease for quarrying on land he or his neighbors own; he said the lease “was terminated” but used his situation to warn that residents can be surprised by leases and development if there are no additional protections. Emily (Clint’s spouse) said the family learned the contract gave the lessee a path to demand access and that the couple had 45 days’ notice under the contract.

The Atchison County Farm Bureau, represented by Jay Armstrong, told commissioners the organization opposes zoning and said zoning often becomes political and can block economic opportunity. Armstrong said zoning is a “planning tool that is used by cities and counties that are growing” and argued Atchison County is not yet a place where typical urban land-use conflicts are widespread.

County officials and the county counselor, however, described the formal steps and limits. The county counselor said Kansas statutes provide the path for land-use regulation and that some issues — notably commercial quarries and large renewable-energy projects — are land-use questions that typically require zoning to regulate. The counselor also said a moratorium can be used to pause new leases while the county studies land-use regulation and that a planning study typically requires a citizen planning commission and can cost roughly $75,000 to complete.

Commissioner James Campbell, who identified himself as the District 1 commissioner, said the forum was called after residents asked for help and to inform Commissioners about issues they had not expected. “I am for everybody in this County, and this was something that we honestly looked at and said, can we help this young man?” Campbell said, referring to the resident who raised the quarry concern. He said a mailed survey could help commissioners gauge countywide sentiment about specific topics such as wind, solar and quarries.

Several residents asked whether the county could adopt targeted resolutions instead of zoning. County legal staff said some regulatory actions (for example, sanitation and septic inspection rules under KDHE authority or county environmental and sanitation codes) can be done by resolution, but they told the group that certain land-use decisions — like siting quarries or commercial wind or solar installations — generally fall into the zoning/statutory land-use category and typically require the formal zoning process to create durable restrictions. The counselor added that the Kansas Supreme Court has recognized that zoning regulations must respect procedural protections, and that statutes provide a clear, well-tested framework.

Residents raised practical questions: who appoints a planning commission (statutes outline procedures and local practice typically uses appointed citizen panels, often nine members), whether a ballot could resolve zoning (Kansas law does not provide a countywide zoning ballot initiative as available in some states), and whether a moratorium could pause leases (counsel said yes, as part of a study process).

The meeting produced no policy vote on zoning or a moratorium. Commissioners said they will continue collecting input; they asked staff to explore a countywide survey and to report back on options to address specific land-use threats without imposing countywide zoning. The commission emphasized they do not intend to act without more public discussion.

Ending: Commissioners reiterated contact information and next steps: residents may email commissioners@atcoks.org and will be asked whether they prefer a mailed survey to ensure broader participation. The commission said it will continue to gather information and return with options after the county and any interested residents have had more opportunity to study the tradeoffs and costs involved.