Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Fairgrounds topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Jackson County advisory committee backs $190,000 purchase of church building for new fairgrounds
Summary
Advisory committee recommended buying a former McKee Baptist Church building for $190,000 as part of a $4.02 million state-funded fairgrounds project; county attorney and state guidance say the purchase fits the line-item grant but the court asked for a formal motion to proceed.
Judge Shane Gabbard opened discussion of a possible acquisition for the county’s new fairgrounds, introducing Brian Murray, chair of the Jackson County Fire Board and the fairgrounds advisory committee, to present a recommendation.
Murray said the committee unanimously recommends buying a 3,600-square-foot building that was built by McKee Baptist Church about 20–25 years ago and includes roughly a half-acre of land. "They are willing to sell the building for what they have in it, which is a 190,000," Murray said, adding the building passed a recent inspection and comes with an appraisal and about $10,000 in legal and inspection work already completed.
The purchase, Murray told the fiscal court, would be funded from a $4,020,000 state line-item allocation for the fairgrounds project. Judge Gabbard reviewed the project accounting and said the court has spent $1,181,636.11 so far, leaving $2,838,363.89 in the fairgrounds account.
Murray said he spoke with the Department for Local Government and the county attorney and that their reading of the line-item language supports using the grant funds for acquisition as part of fairgrounds development. "There is no specific language provided the funds are used in this development," he said, summarizing the DLG guidance that the purchase would be treated similarly to land acquisition already made for the project.
Court members discussed site logistics, including existing easements and driveway access that cross county property, and whether the church building would interfere with the planned entrance. The advisory committee argued the location and price are advantageous versus building new facilities at current construction costs.
Members asked for procedural next steps; multiple members called for a motion to act on the advisory committee’s recommendation so that staff can pursue procurement and legal steps. The transcript records motions to move the matter forward; no roll-call vote or final purchase contract appears in the record.
The court did not record a final signed purchase in the transcript. The advisory committee suggested staff return with procurement steps and a formal contract for the court to approve at a subsequent meeting.
