Russell County Commissioners Meet with New County Attorney, Discuss KNRC Request

Russell County Commissioners met Monday at the courthouse in Russell and visited with new Russell County Attorney and County Counselor Heather Fletcher.

Fletcher asked for an annual salary of $120,000. Commissioners passed it unanimously.

Fletcher takes over for Daniel Krug, who retired at the end of July.

Public Works Director Justin Mermis updated the commission on several bridge and small structure projects and equipment repairs. He also told commissioners about a demonstration he recently attended about rejuvenating blacktop roads. A chemical would be applied that could last up to five years and help prolong the life of blacktop roads without needing to chip and seal.

Commissioner Duke Strobel presented a request from the Kansas Natural Resource Coalition (KNRC) that each member county consider two separate ballots regarding KNRC's proposed participation in federal litigation involving recent Endangered Species Act regulatory changes. 

KNRC is seeking a “Yes” vote from its member counties on both ballots before proceeding with participation in the lawsuits. Because the matters involve two separate federal regulations and two separate lawsuits, the Board of County Commissioners must consider and vote on each ballot independently.

After discussion, commissioners unanimously passed "yes" motions for KNRC to participate in the federal litigation.

Below are the two ballots.

Ballot No. 1 — ESA Definition of “Harm”

This ballot concerns litigation defending the repeal of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s regulatory definition of “harm” under the Endangered Species Act. Under the prior regulatory definition, the federal government could treat certain changes to habitat as an unlawful “take” of a listed species, even when a landowner did not directly kill or physically injure an individual animal. That interpretation could allow ordinary and otherwise lawful uses of private property to be restricted based on claims that an activity modified habitat in a way that might affect a listed species. For counties and landowners, those restrictions may affect activities such as:

• Farming, ranching, grazing, timber and vegetation management;
• Water use, drainage, flood control and irrigation projects;
• Construction, development and maintenance of private property;
• County road, bridge, utility and infrastructure projects; and
• Wildfire mitigation, prescribed burning and other land-management practices.

KNRC’s participation would allow the Coalition to explain to the court how an expansive definition of “harm” can convert the Endangered Species Act from a prohibition against injuring wildlife into a broader federal land-use control. KNRC would advocate for a clearer limit on federal authority so that landowners and counties are not exposed to civil or criminal liability merely because the government claims that a lawful activity altered habitat.

Ballot No. 2 — Blanket Section 4(d) Rule

This ballot concerns litigation defending the repeal of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s blanket Section 4(d) rule. The Endangered Species Act distinguishes between species listed as “endangered” and those listed as “threatened.” However, under the blanket Section 4(d) rule, the federal government generally applied the same broad prohibitions used for endangered species to newly listed threatened species unless the Service later adopted a species-specific exception. That blanket approach could impose immediate restrictions on private land and county activities without first determining which restrictions were actually necessary for the particular threatened species. The repeal requires the Service to evaluate threatened species individually and identify appropriate protections through species-specific rules. This approach can provide counties, landowners and affected industries with a clearer opportunity to participate in the rulemaking process and challenge restrictions that are unnecessary, unsupported or economically harmful. KNRC’s participation would support a regulatory structure that requires the federal government to justify restrictions species by species rather than automatically imposing the broadest possible prohibitions. That distinction is important to private property rights because it can reduce unnecessary federal interference with agriculture, infrastructure, natural-resource management and other lawful uses of land.

The next regular meeting for the Russell County Commissioners will be on Monday, August 17 beginning at 9 AM in the Commission Chambers at the courthouse in Russell.