Magistrate outlines reasons to replace planning commission member

January 11, 2009

Response to Jim Brooks Comments on Tuesday, January 6th

TIM HUTCHINS

Tim Hutchins
3945 New Shepherdsville Road
Bardstown, KY 40004

I don't think Mr. Brooks understood the detail of my comments on the Brooks and Ken Show on January 6th. He seems to insinuate that appointing Harold Wimsett to the Planning and Zoning Commission was a self-serving appointment by me due to my personal business of developing and building. To clarify my personal interests, not only am I involved in building and developing, I am also involved in retail business (Handy Food Mart), and farming. I have reduced the amount of time I spend farming, but still maintain an interest in the agricultural industry.

My vote to appoint Mr. Wimsett to the Planning and Zoning Board was 100% in the direct interest of the citizens of Nelson County. As far as I am concerned, and have stated repeatedly, anyone with knowledge of Planning and Zoning regulations and who has the best interest of the citizens of Nelson County could be placed in this position. There are other individuals in Nelson County who has this knowledge, but unfortunately, citizens who want to be involved are not numerous. We were very fortunate to find an individual like Harold Wimsett who has Planning and Zoning knowledge, business experience, and an agricultural background who is willing to give up his free-time to assist the taxpayers of Nelson County. However, if another individual with these qualifications can be found, I would be in favor of discussing a different appointment.

I do believe that we need several major changes on the Planning and Zoning board. For several years, Fiscal Court, the Planning and Zoning Board, the Planning and Zoning Director, and the Nelson County Board of Adjustments, and other individuals have repeatedly said we need to revamp and clean-up the Planning and Zoning regulations. No changes have been made.

For over two years, the Technical Committee, which I was a member, met several times. After many meetings, the proposed new zoning regulations were turned down by Fiscal Court. The Planning and Zoning Board voted on New Subdivision Regulations but was asked by Fiscal Court to table them until they could be discussed more fully and revised. The Planning and Zoning Board with the approval of the chairman made the decision to disband the Tech Committee. Fiscal Court requested the Planning and Zoning Board to continue the Tech Committee until changes could be agreed on by both entities. Fiscal Court was ignored. Now, there are Subdivision Regulations that do not match the Zoning Regulations. Technically, State Law gives the Planning and Zoning authority to adopt subdivision regulations, but the intention of the statute strongly suggests that they should mirror zoning regulations.

The Comprehensive Plan was updated by the Planning and Zoning Board with no input or discussion by Fiscal Court. Technically, they do have the authority to do this, but this same law also suggests that the Plan follow Fiscal Court goals and objectives. Fiscal court was never questioned if their goals and objectives should be updated or the need to change the Comprehensive Plan.

Recent examples of why Planning and Zoning regulations should be updated and/or changed include:

I attended the Nelson County Board of Adjustment meeting on January 8th, 2009. On the table to discuss was to remove a 97 year old man from his daughter's farm in a so-called RV Trailer or allow it to stay with a conditional use permit. I commend the board for allowing this World War II veteran to fulfill his wishes and basically die on the land he farmed his entire life. At the meeting, several members of the board and the county judge who was in attendance stated that allowing the RV (not a trailer) to stay on the land probably is illegal but, our outdated and conditional use regulations should be changed.

On Bloomfield Road, a local business man owns storage buildings that he rents to other individuals. The Planning and Zoning board ruled that this business owner could not house his belongings in one of his own storage buildings. Their justification for this ruling was that due to him owning a business it was considered "commercial storage". This ruling was over-turned by Fiscal Court, but during the Planning and Zoning meeting the several commissioners stated that the regulations were wrong and that that they needed the regulations changed and updated.

Do we continue to agree we need to change and redefine our regulations but never actually do so and continue to place a burden on the general public? During my campaign and almost daily I hear complaints from all aspects of the community about Zoning regulations, conditional use regulations, and the inspection process. As an elected official I feel that it is my responsibility to attempt to make these changes. Should I ignore the constituents' wishes as Mr. Brooks suggests and allow the Planning and Zoning committee to run this county? I don't think so. Fiscal court representatives are elected by the tax-payers of Nelson County to look out for their best interests. The Planning and Zoning Board should also listen to the taxpayers of this county.

I have been very involved and vocal about many community issues. I think change is needed and necessary in Nelson County and I will continue to work to better this community. We need to simplify regulations, we need to streamline everything on the table to help our economy and help the taxpayers of Nelson County. When a taxpayer enters the Planning and Zoning office, the taxpayer should be assisted and helped in anyway possible.

No, Mr. Brooks, my ego was not bruised. Yes, I will challenge anyone to get involved in the public arena. It's good for everyone to have good active elections and get people involved. Change can be good. And, yes, I will always listen to the public and work for them as I was elected to do.