Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Inclusive Playground Grant topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Fiscal Court OKs signing of playground-materials grant for inclusive park
Summary
Marshall County fiscal court authorized applying for a state materials grant to build an inclusive playground at Mike Miller Park, scheduled a March 17 groundbreaking and discussed a vendor timeline; installation costs will require a local match.
Marshall County Fiscal Court voted March 3 to authorize signing a state grant application to furnish materials for an inclusive playground at Mike Miller Park.
Parks Director Brian Harper told the court the Energy and Environment Cabinet announced a tire-derived-material grant opportunity Feb. 22 and that the county’s application is due April 1, with awards expected around mid‑May. Harper said the goal is to complete the playground by the end of July pending award and weather. “The deadline to apply is April 1st and then grants will be awarded middle of May,” he said.
Harper described the planned surface as a rubber-tire-derived material that improves safety and wheelchair accessibility while reducing maintenance. He provided participation figures from 2025 — 1,022 facility rentals and about 3,500 students served through 16 schools — and noted the Miracle League of Kentucky and Tennessee as the anticipated vendor for accessible equipment and play features.
The court moved and approved the request to sign the grant application by voice vote. Harper said site prep has already begun and that a vendor would arrive to install materials after the award; the court scheduled a groundbreaking at Mike Miller Park for March 17 at 11:00 a.m., with vendor work expected to start the week of March 18 if the grant is awarded and weather permits.
Harper also described project costs and the county’s expected share during the meeting. He stated the grant would cover materials and transportation and said installation and promotion costs — which he cited as roughly $28,000 in the meeting packet — would be the county’s responsibility, describing the overall funding structure as approximately a 75/25 match. The transcript contains inconsistent figures for total cost and grant amounts; county staff should confirm the final project budget and match before the county obligates funds.
Plans call for site grading, removal of topsoil, and leveling before vendor installation; county road crews would perform finishing work such as surfacing as needed. The court’s authorization allows staff to complete the application and pursue the award.
