Oldham County Fiscal Court voted 6'to 3 on Dec. 18 to adopt a revised comprehensive plan titled "Keeping Oldham County on Track," following a public hearing that included hours of sworn testimony from residents and a lengthy presentation by county planning staff.

Planning Director Ryan Fisher told the court the update condenses the plan's goals from 36 to 19 and objectives from 104 to 44, and that staff engaged the public with five in-person meetings, over 3,400 website visits and 407 completed surveys during the process. "The future land use map does not change anyone's zoning," Fisher said, explaining that the map is intended as a prediction and guide rather than an immediate rezoning of private property.

Opponents urged stronger, mandatory language and more citizen involvement. Barry Laws, a District 3 constable, asked the court to restore earlier language and to replace dozens of instances of "should" and "encourage" with the stronger term "ensure," arguing that softer wording removes accountability. "Should and encourage are used 57 times in this document," Laws said in sworn public testimony. Residents including Amanda Dreckman and Mary Lowery pressed for clearer protections for conservation areas, steeper septic-lot minimums, and firmer environmental safeguards.

Planning staff responded that some prescriptive requirements belong in implementing regulations rather than the plan text, and noted that certain deletions reflect statutory notice requirements under state law. Fisher said some wording changes were introduced at the Study Review Committee or by Planning Commission members, and defended the staff outreach and technical analyses used to craft the draft.

Magistrates debated several amendments to the goals and objectives at length. One proposed amendment to strike a clause in LU1-3 that referenced property rights ("when it does not infringe on the development rights of property owners") failed on a 6'to 3 roll-call vote. The ordinance to repeal and replace the 2021 plan then passed by the same margin.

Fisher and senior planner Anna Barge provided data in support of the update: the county recorded 67,607 residents in 2020, with projected growth that could push the population above 85,000 by 2035'1040; staff also noted school-capacity standards that influence how many housing units may be approved in a given year. Fisher said the proposed future land use map consolidates agricultural and conservation designations into a single rural/agricultural category while mapping deeded conservation easements from a national database as a separate layer for clarity.

Those who testified in opposition called for measurable goals and deadlines so the plan's effectiveness can be tracked; they also criticized the sample size and geographic concentration of the public input. Planning staff acknowledged the limitations of voluntary public response rates and said implementing regulations and future ordinance changes would address many technical protections such as septic requirements, steep-slope mitigation and lighting standards.

The plan adoption is a legislative action that guides subsequent zoning and subdivision decisions; site-specific zoning changes would still require separate hearings and votes. The court's decision ends the chapter of formal judicial review of the goals and objectives, and the planning department will proceed with the next steps to implement regulations and guidance under the new plan.

The next procedural steps include publication of the adopted ordinance and continuing work on implementing zoning and subdivision regulations as needed; several cities in the county had already taken their own actions (LaGrange adopted the goals earlier in December; Pewee Valley had a pending vote).