Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Opioid Settlement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission addresses opioid-settlement repayment, sends land-use changes for final draft and denies two rezoning requests
Summary
The commission approved repayment agreements tied to opioid-settlement funds after staff said a nonprofit used funds for ineligible bathroom renovations; it also voted to send amended land-use plan language to contractor Grisham Smith for a final draft and denied two rezoning requests that had been turned down by the planning commission.
At its March 23 meeting, the Hickman County Commission voted to approve repayment agreements tied to opioid-settlement funds after staff described contract and reporting misunderstandings at recipient nonprofits.
Crystal, a county staff member, told the commission that audits showed at least one nonprofit — identified in the transcript as the Bernard Community Center — used settlement funds for bathroom renovation, which the county found to be an ineligible expense under the original contract: “We figured out that they had used it for bathroom renovation, which is not something that you could use that for,” Crystal said. Staff said the original application had mentioned renovations tied to plans to house children, but insurance later prevented that use and the change was not reflected in contract language or reporting, prompting repayment discussions. The commission approved the repayment agreements and discussed options for tighter oversight, including moving some services in-house and asking for more-frequent reporting from nonprofits.
On planning, the commission adopted three specific changes proposed by the planning commission and voted to send the amended land-use plan to Grisham Smith for a final draft; staff said the final plan will return to the commission after two public hearings. A planning representative summarized the proposed changes as addressing expanded infrastructure, avoiding reliance on increased property taxes for infrastructure, and conditioning zoning/density increases on demonstrated infrastructure capacity or developer-funded improvements.
On rezoning, the commission approved resolution 26-05 (rezoning property at 81 Highway 50 in Centerville) after the planning commission had passed it; resolutions 26-06 (8901 Prim Springs) and 26-07 (6815 Taylors Creek Road) were both denied by the county following unanimous planning-commission recommendations to deny.
A brief public-comment moment occurred earlier in the meeting when a resident identified in the record as Mr. Thomas thanked commissioners for attending his son’s funeral; the chair acknowledged the comment.
Next steps: the county will finalize repayment agreements with affected nonprofits, return a final land-use plan draft after edits by Grisham Smith and two public hearings, and proceed with implementation of planning updates if public hearings and final votes approve the draft.
