Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Economic Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident questions REDI contract and $75,000 funding request during public comment
Summary
A resident asked the Bourbon County Commission to clarify whether the county currently has a contract with REDI, to justify a recent $75,000 funding request, and to produce evidence for claims that REDI brought in $2 million in projects and manufacturing developments.
A Bourbon County resident raised detailed questions during public comments about the county’s relationship with REDI and a recent request for county funds. The resident asked whether a current 2024 contract exists with REDI, when any prior multiyear funding agreement was enacted, and whether the county has received written bills or reports detailing the services provided for a recent $75,000 request.
The commenter recalled a previous multi‑year funding vote and said community members have seen repeated online claims that REDI "brought in $2,000,000 in projects" and that it produced "major developments in manufacturing," and asked commissioners to identify the specific projects and provide verification. The commenter also said Mark McCoy appeared before the commission last week seeking $75,000 for services rendered and asked whether the county had received a bill or documentation explaining the work covered by that request.
The speaker urged the commission to require regular, transparent progress reporting if the county continues to fund economic‑development work, suggesting six‑month reviews and written summaries of calls, meetings and outreach that would be placed on the record at commission meetings. County staff did not confirm the existence of a 2024 contract in the meeting record and said the commission would need to check prior minutes and paperwork to verify past motions and terms.
The public comment concluded with a request that the new commission consider whether to continue any relationship with REDI and to require written deliverables and periodic reporting before approving additional funds. The county did not take a formal vote or direct staff to enter a contract during the meeting; staff indicated further review of records and minutes would be needed before formal action could occur.
