Faced with cuts in state funding, Mac Young came before the Crawford County Board of Commissioners on Tuesday to present a revised 2009 budget for the Community Corrections Department.

Faced with cuts in state funding, Mac Young came before the Crawford County Board of Commissioners on Tuesday to present a revised 2009 budget for the Community Corrections Department.
The department had originally submitted a budget of about $524,000, Young said. But that was before the state mandated a 5 percent reduction.
“Our final award for 2009 was about $10,000 less than the 5 percent we were asked to reduce” the budget, Young said. “In that $10,000 that was cut, most of that money came out of travel and training, those types of expenses. We made it work.”
The final Community Corrections budget was presented at slightly more than $488,000. That breaks down to $99,485.23 to cover administrative costs, including salaries and benefits, and $388,543.76 for adult intensive supervision services, which includes salaries and benefits, drug testing supplies and services, substance abuse evaluations and sex offender evaluations and treatment.
“We're looking at about the same money as we had last year,” Young said. “About $416,000 is what we got last year. We tried to put salary increases in there. It was a struggle.”
And the struggle may continue into the future, he said. The Kansas Department of Corrections has already informed the Community Corrections Department to expect additional cuts of anywhere from 2 percent to 7 percent in funding next year. That could result in the need to lay off personnel in the local office, Young said.
“Everybody's feeling the crunch,” Young said. “I just hope it doesn't happen next year as drastically as they're talking about.
“From time to time, we hear we're going to lose 5 percent, 10 percent. Usually, it works out over time. But we just won't know until next year.”
On motion by Commissioner Ralph McGeorge, seconded by Commissioner Tom Moody, the board approved the Community Corrections amended budget and comprehensive plan and authorized the chairman to sign.
In other business, the board:
• Heard a proposal from Matt Sanders of Waste Corporation for an increase in fees at the landfill used by Crawford County.
Sanders told the board he wanted to increase the gate fee to $38 per ton for trash brought in to the local landfill. That would include a $3 per ton fee levied by the state, he said.
“We're basing this on the same loss everybody else has,” Sanders said. “Fuel is about costing us double what it was last year.”
The proposed increase would become effective Sept. 1. It wouldn't impact the fees paid by trash hauling companies that operate in Crawford County. Most of them have contracts with the landfill that sets the fees at a specific rate, he said. But a fee increase could generate more revenue when the contracts come up for renewal, Sanders said.
He further said he plans to increase the rate again, to $40 per ton, at the beginning of the year. Even with the increases, the local landfill would still have about the lowest per-ton fees in southeast Kansas.
• Again discussed the feasibility of paving access to Bone Creek Reservoir in northern Crawford County. Commissioner Moody said the board had requested traffic counts be done on the access roads leading to Bone Creek from U.S. 69, Kansas Highway 7 and on 200 Road, leading into the reservoir area. According to information provided by the county Highway Department, traffic averaged about 200 cars per day on the weekends and slightly less during the week.
“We have roads all over the county we'd like to do something with,” Commissioner McGeorge said. “This is a main-issue road.”
Moody agreed, to a point: “It's a main-issue road, but I'm not sure it's a priority road. A priority road is something with 1,000 cars per day on it.”
The board had further requested estimates on installing a chip-and-seal surface on all or part of the eight miles from U.S. 69 to K-7 and a portion of 200 Road. The full eight miles would cost about $450,000 to install a double-layer of chip-and-seal, Moody said.
Even with two applications, chip-and-seal probably wouldn't accomplish much beyond making the road look better, Commissioner Bob Kmiec said. All three commissioners were concerned how well the road surface would stand up to traffic, given the probability traffic would increase once the hard surface was in place, as more motorists make use of the road as a “short-cut” to northern areas of the county.
The ideal would be to do an asphalt overlay of the road. But that could cost three times the amount of chip-and-seal, if not more, Kmiec and Moody said. And asphalt is virtually impossible to get right now, they said.
“Chip-and-seal is exactly what it says it is — it's to seal a road off,” Moody said. “Sure, we're all in agreement we want to do something up there. But, for the price it's going to cost, I just don't know.”