Public works head questions funding source for publishing resolutions

The cost to publish a resolution on the method of selling industrial park lots plus the cost to appraise those lots will exceed $6,000, not including attorney fees for writing the resolution and contacting appraisers for a bid on the project. (Journal file photo)

By Charlene Sims, Journal staff

LCJeditor@icloud.com

MOUND CITY – At the Linn County Commission meeting on Monday, June 22, Public Works Administrator Jesse Walton presented an invoice for $2,770 from the Linn County News for resolutions that were published in that newspaper. During the meeting, nothing was said specifically about what resolution was published, in fact the biggest concern seemed to be what county fund was going to pay for the publication.

County Clerk Chasity Ware clarified by email that it was for two resolutions, 2026-08 and 2026-17, both of which were published twice, once on June 3 and and again on June 10.

Resolution 2026-08 was the legal notice given for the county to sell parcels from the Linn County Industrial Parks at La Cygne and Pleasanton. Each parcel was listed separately making the resolution cover approximately 60% of the page. The notice stated that the county would rely on appraisal-based pricing and evaluation.

Resolution 2026-17 publication was an amendment to Resolution 2026-17, which originally was voted on May 11, 2026, to put a 12-month moratorium on the acceptance, filing, processing, hearing, and approval of applications for battery energy storage systems, data centers, and bit coin for cryptocurrency mining facilities.

On May 18, Linn County Commissioners Alison Hamilton and Jim Johnson voted to adopt an immediate, temporary moratorium on the acceptance, processing, approval, permitting, construction, expansion or administrative authorization of public utility and public service uses identified in Table 12-1 in the Industrial Zone district, section 23 of the Linn County Planning and Zoning Regulations. But they failed to vote on a resolution for this change to the zoning regulations. Commissioner Jason Hightower was not present.

The issue that came up was Walton was not sure what department to bill this to. He said that there was not enough money in the Planning and Zoning Department budget to pay for the bill.

“Where do we know where they pay it out of?" Commissioner Jim Johnson asked. “Do you have any idea, Jacklyn?” he asked County Counselor Jacklyn Paletta.

Ware said that this was an exception because it is an extremely lengthy publication and very much larger than normal.

“Well, we don’t have the budget in the commission, so that’s not going to happen,” Commission Chair Alison Hamilton said. “Maybe in the future we can allocate funds.”

“Do you guys have a suggestion?” asked Hamilton. “Chasity, do you have an idea?”

Ware said her recommendation would be the courthouse budget as it had to do with the whole county.

Johnson asked, “We have money there?”

Ware answered there were funds in that budget and Hamilton said she was fine with that.

A motion was made to pay the bill for the publication out of the court house fund. It passed unanimously by Hamilton and Johnson. Commissioner Jason Hightower was absent from the meeting.

One of the issues of the resolution for the county to sell parcels from the Linn County Industrial Parks at La Cygne and Pleasanton is that the notice stated that the county would rely on appraisal-based pricing and evaluation. That condition has made it difficult for the county to get started on the process because so far the county has been unable to find a qualified person to make the appraisals.

“I had reached out,” Paletta told the commissioners at Monday’s meeting. “We had put it in the paper. I had reached out to a handful of appraisers as well. And I got only one, Walter Appraisal, was the only one that actually gave a quote for getting all of those parcels appraised.

“The quote was $650 each for the eight land appraisals and it would take three weeks to complete it. I mean, I called a dozen. Three or four actually returned my call and a couple said they weren’t able to do it. I thought another one was going to send me a quote but never did. I followed up and they just said they don’t have time. I understand that Chasity did run it in the paper as well and we just haven’t gotten any response.”

Commissioner Jim Johnson asked, “So, we only had the one? What was that figure?”

Paletta replied $650 each.

Johnson said $5,200 for all of them.

Hamilton said, “We have to do it though. Legally.

Paletta agreed, “Unless you want to redo the resolution all together and figure out a different way to list them and that sort of thing. I think this is the best way to go about it.”

Hamilton agreed, “I think it is too. We’ve already spent the money on going out, you know, into the paper. She’s made the phone calls, probably put time into that.”

Johnson questioned, “That just leads us up to the point that then we can negotiate if somebody comes to this that wants it. With the negotiation of what we’re expecting from them to buy it at that price, right?”

“Sure we have to have it listed for sale at a posted price like folks do when they list other types of properties,” Paletta answered. “And then in the same way like in the ordinary, of course folks can negotiate or folks can offer what you ask. They can offer more, they can offer less, and then it goes into the regular negotiation process.”

Johnson asked Paletta if then the county could negotiate what is expected of them if we sell it to them.

“I mean as far as them being in our . . . .,” said Johnson.

“Within our comprehensive plan and all of that stuff, sure,” said Paletta.

Hamilton and Johnson both agreed to go with the one appraisal quote they had received. They approved hiring Walter Appraisal in the amount of $650 for each of the eight parcels and to move forward with their resolution to sell those properties.

Once the commission approved the published resolution to require the property be appraised, it could not use a real estate broker to promote and sell the properties without amending or cancelling the published resolution.

The amendment to Resolution 2026-17 to adopt an immediate, temporary moratorium on public utility power lines came shortly after the commission learned that Clearway Energy was running transmission lines from a solar farm facility in Missouri to the Evergy power plant. Clearway proposed a solar farm facility in Linn County a couple of years ago until the commission voted to prohibited all utility solar energy conversion systems.

The amendment to the resolution, voted on May 26, added “and private (non-utility) renewable energy transmission lines in the unincorporated area of Linn County” to the resolution that had already been made on May 11, 2026. The resolution repeats that it is only applicable to transmission lines from renewable sources of energy, which would be from solar or wind farms.