Residents press Bourbon County on solar projects and allege improper hospital donation during public comment

During the Sept. 16 public-comment period, residents pressed Bourbon County commissioners on two distinct but related concerns: the tax and public-safety implications of proposed solar projects, and an allegation that county leaders improperly donated a hospital building and roughly 40 acres to a new nonprofit.

Vance Eden, a resident who said he had prepared written calculations, asked the commission to work with solar developers to quantify how large-scale solar development could change the tax base and county levy in the long term. Eden presented numbers prepared for commissioners that, he said, showed possible reductions in county taxable value under several development scenarios and argued the county should assess the long-term fiscal trade-offs before committing large acreage to projects.

Another resident, Mary Pemberton, read sections of KSA 19-211 (the statute governing sale or disposition of county property) and alleged that, following a 2022 executive session and subsequent action, the county had donated a hospital building and about 40 acres to a newly formed Legacy Healthcare Foundation without the public notice, appraisal and unanimous vote she said the statute requires. Pemberton requested that the commission instruct the county counselor to demand rescission from Legacy Healthcare Foundation, notify the building’s lessee (identified in the public remarks as Kansas Renewal Institute), and prepare a petition in district court to rescind the donation if the county does not reverse the transaction. She also called for the resignation of specific commissioners and the county counselor she named as involved.

Commissioners responded in public session. The county attorney reported that one matter remained under investigation and that another had not yet led to retained outside counsel; commissioners said legal counsel would review the matters raised by Pemberton. The board did not take immediate action to rescind or announce litigation; rather, members said counsel would examine the transactions and report back.

Separately, a commenter identified as Pete urged the commission to examine safety and fire-response capacity related to utility-scale solar and battery installations, asking whether the county and local fire departments had assessed the risk of inverter/battery fires and staffing needed to respond. Commissioners said they had consulted with the state fire marshal and emphasized mutual-aid arrangements with neighboring districts for specialized responses, and they noted that some related investigations remain in progress.

No formal action to rescind the donation was recorded in the meeting minutes; commissioners said legal counsel would review the claims and take appropriate follow-up steps if warranted.