Commissioners send contentious ranch-rodeo special-use back to planning commission after public testimony

Leavenworth County commissioners voted to send Resolution 25-6 (Case DAV24125), a special-use permit related to an outdoor ranch-rodeo-style event, back to the county planning commission for a new public hearing and additional conditions.

The move came after roughly an hour of public comment in which veterinarians, residents and former officials urged the commission to require more information and safeguards. Commissioner Steven moved to return the case to planning "for their consideration of additional conditions," and the motion passed on a roll call vote.

The decision matters because speakers said the event, as currently proposed, poses public-safety, animal-welfare and site-capacity risks if held without stricter oversight. Commissioners and staff identified specific issues they want the planning commission to consider at a new hearing: certification that Kansas laws will be observed, a prohibition on horse tripping and bull-tailing, verified out-of-state animal registrations, enhanced liability insurance, bleacher inspections, certification of on-site security and an on-site licensed veterinarian if the event proceeds with animals present.

Several people who spoke at the meeting described specific animal-welfare and safety concerns. "I think the board does not have enough information at this point in time to grant a special use permit," said Dr. Joan Bernan, identifying herself as a large-animal veterinarian. Bernan said she had compiled materials she described as a "compliance study" and cited national veterinary associations and animal-protection groups that oppose particular ranch-rodeo events. She said certain practices commonly called "horse tripping" and "bull tailing" are illegal in multiple states and may cause severe, permanent injuries to animals. She told commissioners: "Horse tripping and bull tailing are considered across the board unethical, illegal in most states, and abuse of animals." (comment attributed to Dr. Joan Bernan)

Other public commenters highlighted community and safety concerns. A resident, Thaddeus Prestowicz, emphasized growth pressures in the county and said emergency-responder capacity would be strained if unregulated events proliferated. A former county commissioner (Dennis, who said he served 2013–2017) said the proposed event site is near creeks and existing ranches and urged the commission to require clearer waste-management and structural-safety plans for bleachers. He noted concerns about who would be responsible for inspection and disposal if animals were injured or died on-site. Benny Phillips, who identified himself as the owner of a local livestock market, told commissioners he believed the event operators cared for their animals but stressed that industry standards vary across states.

County staff and legal advisers advised the commission on procedural limits. The county attorney told the commission the public hearing on the application had opened and closed; new information that the board wants considered should be brought to a new public hearing handled by the planning commission so all parties have due process. The attorney explained that the sheriff's recent letter and other materials submitted after the hearing could not be considered in the current quasi-judicial decision without reopening the public record.

Commissioners who supported returning the case said the additional time and a new hearing would allow the planning commission and the public to examine newly submitted materials and permit the applicant to respond. The motion that passed directed the planning commission to hold a new public hearing and consider the listed conditions, including whether alcohol would be vendor-controlled, an on-site veterinarian, certification of animal registrations, increased insurance limits and an inspection of spectator bleachers.

Outcome: The commission voted to return Case DAV24125/Resolution 25-6 to the planning commission for a new public hearing and consideration of additional conditions. The motion included a directive that planning consider certification that Kansas laws are observed, a prohibition on horse tripping, verification of animal registrations, on-site security paid by the applicant if required, enhanced liability coverage, and an inspection of bleachers; commissioners also requested consideration of requiring a licensed veterinarian on-site.

Next steps: The planning commission will schedule a new public hearing; additional evidence, new letters (including the sheriff's), and testimony may be submitted at that hearing. The county will notify interested parties when the planning commission sets the date.