Police Chief Rob Young provided details about a request made by Midway to pay less than its contractually required share of the fiscal year 2026 police department budget at a lengthy Fiscal Court Committee of the Whole meeting, held prior to the regular June 10 meeting.
As reported last week, there are two separate interlocal agreements, one for Versailles and one for Woodford County, for the provision of countywide law enforcement, which began in 2004. Under its current version, Midway has requested Versailles and the county to allow it to pay $404,000 instead of $454,000, which represents 6.5% of the total budget. The county pays 38% of the total budget, with Versailles paying the balance. And, Versailles and the county split 50-50 any capital costs with no contribution from Midway.
Woodford County Attorney Alan George asked several questions of Young about the agreement, the basis for the total budget amount and the obligations of the various municipalities. Young agreed that the percentages are determined by the contracts and said further, the total “reasonably reflects the service required.”
Young added, “I’m not trying to create any controversy, but (in) the budget I prepare, I try to prepare it based on the needs of the department, what I believe is what fairly represents what I need and I don’t put anything in there that is not needed for us to do our job. My job as chief is to provide the best service countywide whether it’s Midway, countywide or Versailles . . . and, that’s what I think it is going to cost.”
He also pointed out, “My job is to come up with a budget and how it is paid for is up to the government leaders.”
George also asked how Young decided what was “reasonably necessary” to go into the budget. Young said he analyzes a variety of factors given the county is divided into four districts — such as the number of officers, crime data and call volume.
When asked about Midway, Young said, “Midway’s district was 12% in FY 2025, and based on its paying 6.5% of the budget, then that’s a bargain.”
“I’m really surprised (Midway) says (the full contractual amount) is not sustainable. I don’t see how that is not sustainable. Their revenues are great in Midway right now, better than they’ve ever been . . . what they are paying doesn’t come anywhere near what it costs to provide services to (Midway),” Magistrate Mary Ann Gill said. “I gess we don’t have any say in it, but I hope (Mayor Dake) doesn’t choose to renegotiate (this year’s agreement with Midway) because it is going to affect the county’s taxpayers. Midway gets a weatheart deal.”
Magistrate Liles Taylor made the point, which others agreed with, “One of the biggest issues is not everyone is at the table at the same time, the Midway and county interlocals are negotiated separately. We need to look at fixing this.”
Taylor also observed that if Versailles does accede to Midway’s request, the amount it pays, though not the full 6.5%, is a higher percentage than it paid in FY 2025.
County Judge-Executive James Kay concluded the discussion by saying, “I discussed this problem with Chief Young before (the court) voted on the FY 2026 budget, we have 365 days to work this out, but our budget will not change, and it cannot change now that (the required state agency) has approved it. The fiscal court supports countywide law enforcement, we think the service is excellent from the department, and this is the highest amount we have ever budgeted for law enforcement in the county.
Treasurer’s Report
County Treasurer Melody Traugott reported the current money market account balance is $15,608,326.28.
Contracts
The court approved the following contracts: $57,706 to Bachman Auto Group Inc. from the Sheriff’s asset forfeiture account; $40,000 to Stryker, Inc. for EMS equipment; $365,539 to the Kentucky Association of Counties (KACO) for the annual all lines insurance premium; and, $382,500 to KACO for annual premium for workers compensation insurance.
Executive Session
The court went into a closed executive session to consider the purchase of real property. Following the meeting, the court approved a motion to allow the judge-executive to discuss the dispensation of property with property owners concerning unidentified property(ies).