Several South Kenton County residents attended the Kenton County Fiscal Court meeting on Tuesday to express their opinions on the county’s site readiness initiative, some of which are currently on pause.
Although the site readiness initiative, which could lead to industrial development in the county’s southern end, was not on the March 25 agenda, it has been a topic of conversation over the past couple of weeks.
In a letter from March 10, Kenton County Judge/Executive Kris Knochelmann said that the county would have a presentation to the fiscal court this spring updating residents on where things are now that “Focus Area 2” is on pause and “Focus Area 1” has been reduced.
The county has not yet finalized what meeting that presentation will happen at.
The site readiness initiative is a joint venture of the Kenton County Fiscal Court, Northern Kentucky Port Authority and Kenton County Planning and Development Services. It aims to catalog available land in the county ideal for industrial development.
A more detailed report of what is involved in focus area one and focus area two of the initiative can be found here.
Three residents from the southern end of the county spoke at the meeting.
“Whether we own large farms or not, people live in rural areas intentionally; we don’t want the increased traffic noise or pollution that comes from urban or even more suburban areas,” said resident Lori Shields. “So, when you present this initiative to push for warehouse or industrial growth in this area the county, it sits in direct conflict with what you are hearing from the majority of this population on a regular basis.”
There were 404 residents who attended two meetings in early February to express their opinions on the site readiness initiative, including 109 who attended both meetings. At those meetings, residents expressed some of the same concerns the fiscal court heard Tuesday night.
Many residents fear the loss of farmland and rural character, especially in two identified focus areas near major transportation routes. Concerns stated at the February meetings include potential environmental impacts, property values and the expansion of roads due to a desire to maintain the area’s rural nature.
A comment frequently heard at both meetings, according to Knochelmann’s letter, was, “Do nothing.”
“I want to be clear- ‘do nothing’ is not an option,” Knochelmann said in the letter. “‘Do nothing’ is not an option for reasons also expressed by attendees of the meetings. Roads are congested; infrastructure is inadequate; warehouses are being built. We cannot ignore these facts.”
Knochelmann announced a pause on further work in Focus Area 2, including advocacy for a new interchange, in his March 10 letter.
“BE NKY Growth Partnership and Planning & Development Services of Kenton County believe Focus Area 1 will require work and provide economic opportunities for the next decade,” he said in the letter. “We have time to deliberate about the future of Focus Area 2, and I plan to approach it with this timeline in mind.”
The county plans to press forward on the southern portion of Focus Area 1, almost all of which is already zoned industrial, rather than the 5,200 acres initially studied.
The new area encompasses roughly 900 acres. The goals for the 900 acres will be presented at a future meeting this spring.
Shields suggested at the meeting that, rather than developing the county’s green space, the county’s abandoned and empty buildings be examined.
“Empty, abandoned buildings left to erode further create eyesores, hazardous conditions for the community, and potentially open the door for more crime in our area,” Shields said. “Why would we not invest in these buildings to incent companies to utilize them?”
Shields also named various leaks or evacuation events from existing manufacturers in Kenton County.
“I would never ever approve any industry, manufacturing firm that was right next to anybody’s property that was going to be noisy or polluting,” said Kenton County Commissioner Jon Draud. “I wouldn’t do that because I don’t want it myself.”
Kenton County Commissioner Joe Nienaber said he was not for or against people selling a property or not, but is for the right to do so. He said what represents his thoughts on the matter is that a major highway is already coming into the exact location underneath the railroad tracks in the south county.
“I believe that if we don’t do this SRI or land use study, and if we don’t address the fact that the development is coming if you want us to stop the study, that’s fine,” he said. “I’ll advocate for that, and then we’ll just see what happens. You do not want that.”
Nienaber said the fiscal court advocates for everybody in South County who has a stake in South County.
“I’m telling you, 100% it’s coming,” he said. “Because your neighbors with big properties wish to sell their land, whether you like it or not, whether I like it or not.”
Nienaber also said that there have been rumors going around about eminent domain. Eminent domain is the power of the government to take private property for public use with compensation to the property owner. He said he has never heard anyone advocate for eminent domain.
“The reality is these meetings, whether it’s at the Independence Courthouse or here [government center], are where the official stance of the Kenton County Fiscal Court is stated,” Nienaber said. “No matter who you talk to.”
Suzann Parker Leist, a South Kenton County Citizens Group member, also addressed the fiscal court during the meeting.
“When the SRI project was presented and approved in October 2024, our group was surprised in two ways,” Parker Leist said. “One, we learned about it from the media. No one had involved us in any of that going on, and I’m sure most of it was during the pandemic from 2020 to 2024 that the committee was working away. Secondly, it was certainly not minimally disruptive to the rural community.”
Resident Tim Grothaus’ comments at the meeting focused on who the site readiness initiative would actually benefit.
Knochelmann and Kenton County Planning and Development Services Community Manager Josh Wice have argued that industrial land would bring better, more highly paid jobs to the county. They argued that warehousing and distribution were already gobbling up much of the available land, potentially crowding out better jobs.
Grothaus said he didn’t think that would be true.
“If you would speak to the Kenton County School District counselors, which was supposed to be part of the 2024 comprehensive plan, our high schoolers have no interest in these jobs,” Grothaus said. “Gateway’s trying to get people in to train, but no one wants these jobs, not even the jobs that are out there now.”
Grothaus agreed with Parker Leist that the county needed a plan to improve and support the agricultural community. He said the citizens of rural Kenton County would like another open meeting with the fiscal court and Kenton County Planning and Development Services.
Draud said the fiscal court would never do anything without an open meeting in which everybody had a chance to give their opinion.
A copy of Knochelmann’s letter can be found below.
Nathan Granger contributed reporting to this story.
The post What’s next for South Kenton? County development debate continues appeared first on LINK nky.
