The Ray County Commission addressed multiple infrastructure and legal issues. During public comments, citizens raised questions about Sunshine request procedures, a washed-out culvert on Route 216 slated for immediate repair, and an unpermitted wedding venue currently in litigation. The commission approved the bid from Hollis and Akers for property and liability insurance. Discussions were held regarding the installation and conduit costs for courthouse security cameras and a potential battery operation annexation in Orrick. A key action included approving an invoice for the Myers Bridge. The commission also voted to demolish the Henrietta overpass due to safety concerns and contracted Great Rivers Engineering to manage the project.

===== FULL DESCRIPTION =====

**Podcast Show Notes: Ray County Commission Meeting Recap**

**Episode Summary:**

In this episode, we review the proceedings of the recent Ray County Commission meeting. The session covered a wide array of critical county issues, including heated public comments regarding the enforcement of zoning violations on an unpermitted wedding venue, updates on bridge and road closures, and the controversial decision to move forward with the demolition of the Henrietta Overpass. The commission also addressed administrative hurdles concerning Sunshine request processes, approved a new county insurance policy, discussed the implementation of a security camera system for the courthouse, and received updates on a proposed battery plant annexation in Orrick.

**Segment 1: Opening Formalities and Administrative Business**

The meeting commenced with the Pledge of Allegiance and an opening prayer. The invocation focused on seeking guidance for the county's decision-makers, safety for county workers, and continued blessings for the community. Following the opening remarks, the commission quickly addressed administrative duties by approving the minutes from the previous session.

**Segment 2: Public Comments – Transparency and Sunshine Requests**

During the public comment period, citizen Kirk Croy inquired about the status of proposed changes to the county's Sunshine request process, a topic that was tabled the previous week. The commission clarified that the new process is not yet finalized. They noted that they are actively reviewing the procedures to ensure strict compliance with state statutes while creating a system that functions efficiently for both the county administration and the public.

Mr. Croy also raised a question regarding a previously requested budget document, expressing frustration over delays in receiving it via email. The commission explained that emailing the massive 327-page document is not feasible due to its file size and potential security risks to the county's server. Instead, they offered an alternative solution: if a citizen provides a fresh, unopened flash drive, the county will securely load the requested 10-page summary document onto the device.

**Segment 3: Public Comments – Highway 216 Bridge and Culvert Repairs**

Another significant topic raised by the public involved road and bridge infrastructure, specifically concerning a washed-out road and closed bridge on Highway 216 near Bright Lane. A citizen expressed concern regarding a failed culvert that has been causing the road to wash out. The commission provided an immediate update, confirming that the county road crew is scheduled to be on-site the following day. The repair plan involves installing a brand-new tube, extending it out properly to mitigate future drainage issues, and stabilizing the roadbed.

The discussion also touched upon the ownership and maintenance liability of the nearby railroad bridge. The citizen reported contacting a senior director of public affairs for the railroad, who claimed the railroad has no legal agreement to maintain or replace the bridge. However, the commission stated that the Missouri Department of Transportation (MoDOT) has located historical documentation proving otherwise. MoDOT is currently taking the lead as the primary point of contact to work with the railroad and resolve this jurisdictional and legal issue.

**Segment 4: Public Comments – The Wedding Venue Zoning Dispute**

A substantial portion of the public comment session was dedicated to a highly debated issue regarding an unpermitted wedding venue operated by Tim Rash. A local citizen voiced deep frustration over the county's enforcement procedures, noting that a cease-and-desist order was issued over a year ago. The citizen pointed out that the venue continues to host events despite lacking the necessary permits and inspections. Comparing it to an unlicensed restaurant or an illegal strip club, the citizen questioned why the county has not taken more aggressive steps, such as boarding up the property, locking it, or filing a probable cause statement with the prosecuting attorney to halt operations.

The commission responded by explaining the limitations of their authority, noting that as a smaller county, they rely heavily on state statutes and the planning and zoning board. More importantly, they stressed that the matter is currently in active litigation. Therefore, they are legally bound not to discuss the specifics of the case. They clarified that the county is utilizing the services of a specialized county law attorney based in Springfield for this matter. The citizen was ultimately instructed to email specific questions regarding the general enforcement process to the official county commission email address, which the commission promised to forward to their legal counsel for a response.

**Segment 5: Insurance Policy Renewal**

Moving into action items, the commission addressed the impending expiration of the county's liability and property insurance policy, which is set to renew on April 1st. With the deadline rapidly approaching and the absence of their regular insurance representative, the commission reviewed a proposal from Hollis and Akers. Recognizing the necessity of maintaining continuous coverage, the commission voted to approve the bid and authorized the presiding commissioner to sign the contract.

**Segment 6: City of Orrick Battery Plant Annexation**

The meeting shifted to a discussion on economic development and municipal boundaries regarding a proposed battery operation system adjacent to the City of Orrick. It was reported that the Orrick City Council recently held a heavily attended public meeting to discuss the potential annexation of the land required for the project. Following public input, the council voted to entertain the idea of annexation. The council's attorney outlined the legal recourse for opponents: citizens have a 14-day window to gather signatures from 5% of Orrick's registered voters to petition for a public vote on the matter. The commission viewed this as a reasonable democratic process.

Additionally, there was a brief mention of similar annexation tensions between the City of Excelsior Springs and Mosby. In that separate dispute, both entities have approved annexations on their respective ballots, and the jurisdictional conflict is currently awaiting a ruling in the court system.

**Segment 7: Courthouse Security Camera Upgrades**

A significant logistical discussion took place regarding the installation of new security cameras inside and outside the county courthouse. The commission reviewed a bid of approximately $45,000 from Victory Technology, which covers the cameras, monitors, and initial installation.

However, this bid does not cover the necessary infrastructure work. Wilbur, a county contractor, presented an estimate for the required conduit and internet connection work. Because the drilling and installation must be done on weekends to avoid disrupting daily courthouse operations and posing safety risks to the public, the labor costs are higher. Wilbur estimated his portion of the project—requiring two weekends of work at time-and-a-half and double-time rates—would cost roughly $8,400 in labor and $1,000 in materials, bringing his total to around $10,000.

The total project cost is estimated to be between $55,000 and $60,000. Before proceeding, the commission noted the need to meet with the circuit judges to discuss cost-sharing for the system, as the judiciary utilizes the courthouse space heavily. Furthermore, the commission is investigating the costs and logistics of implementing an off-site, third-party monitoring and cloud backup system to ensure footage is not destroyed in the event of a catastrophic event, such as a fire or tornado.

**Segment 8: Demolition of the Henrietta Overpass**

One of the most consequential decisions of the meeting was the fate of the aging Henrietta Overpass (also referred to as the Henry Oliver Pass). The commission discussed the bridge's severe deterioration, including instances of falling debris. Over the past year and a half, the county has explored numerous options to save the structure or find grants for a replacement. They commissioned a BEATS report that outlined multiple options, including complete replacement or immediate demolition.

The commission noted that building a brand-new overpass would cost roughly $10 million, making replacement financially impossible without state or federal grants, which they have exhaustively searched for without success. Recognizing the imminent safety hazard and liability risks posed by falling bricks striking trains or vehicles below, the commission concluded that they had exhausted all other avenues.

A motion was made and seconded to proceed with the demolition of the overpass. The current bid to safely tear down the structure stands at $532,000. The commission is actively exploring partnerships with MoDOT and various railroad companies to potentially share or offset this significant financial burden. The motion passed with a unanimous vote. Immediately following this, the commission passed a second motion to officially contract with Great Rivers Engineering to orchestrate and manage the demolition project.

**Segment 9: County Financials, Opioid Settlement, and Final Updates**

The final segments of the meeting covered various internal county operations:

* **Myers Bridge Invoice:** The commission approved Invoice #9 for the Myers Bridge project. This involves a $10,000 reimbursement from MoDOT, which will subsequently be apportioned back to Great Rivers Engineering.

* **Opioid Settlement Reporting:** There was confusion regarding the required reporting for opioid settlement funds. The commission and staff struggled to identify who had last accessed the reporting portal and how specific local expenditures—such as a journal entry for a newspaper publication—should be categorized. The staff agreed to work together to log into the system, verify past submissions, and ensure strict compliance with state reporting guidelines.

* **Jail Generator and Water Usage:** A brief update was given on a generator for the county jail. Additionally, a concern was raised regarding a

Transcription: https://kurt-croix.github.io/podstr/transcripts/Ray_County_Commissioner_s_Meeting_3_19-1773946790.srt