An appropriation ordinance to establish a permit for hauling companies that use county roads became a concern for some justices of the peace during the Jefferson County Quorum Court Budget and Finance Committee meeting Tuesday, which resumed inside the Quorum Court chambers after a year of being held in the mezzanine during the coronavirus pandemic.
According to the ordinance, a hauling permit would need to be obtained through the county road department at least 10 days before any work is performed.
The ordinance states that the cost of the hauling permit would be $50 per site.
A motion was made and seconded but questions and concerns were brought up during the discussion.
Justice of the Peace Conley Byrd felt the process of obtaining a permit would "put a burden on farmers" during harvest. Byrd said larger producers would have to pay more when farmers are already paying the largest road taxes.
"I would like to know more about this before we as a Quorum Court pursue this activity," said Byrd, who made a motion to table the ordinance.
"It will be $50 per site," explained County Judge Gerald Robinson, who compared it to having a building permit for several sites.
Robinson asked environmental officer Kenneth Whitmore to explain the problems he was having and why the ordinance was needed.
"The main problem we've been having is with the loggers tearing up our county roads," Whitmore said. He explained that he found out hauling permits had never been enforced while speaking to the road superintendent about collecting from those who were tearing up the road.
"I took an initiative upon myself to go out and talk to these loggers that if you tear up this road, you are going to have to pay for it," Whitmore said.
In just the past two months, Whitmore added, he has collected close to $15,000.
State law excludes farmers from being fined, he said.
"The main focus that we were doing here was the enforcement of the loggers tearing the county roads up," he said. "There is no law in the books. These guys are paying because I am asking, but it's coming to the point they are telling me 'I'm not going to pay.' If I have a law on my side, I can enforce it."
Byrd said he wanted to visit with a few more of his constituents to gather more information and wanted to make sure that the farmers were truly exempt from the law.
"If the county road department is having an increasing burden, then we got to do what we got to do, but if they are paying when you confront them I don't see any reason to institute an additional permit tax, which is what it is going to end up being," Byrd said
Justice of the Peace Danny Holcomb said he understood the concern about the farmers and believes some verbiage in the ordinance should mention the exemptions. but he also supported the ordinance and what it stood for.
"Right now we really have no way of tracking who is working where," he said. "If this is on the books, and it's a law that they have to get that permit, it allows our people to know exactly where everybody's working."
Robinson pointed out that the legislation was directed toward hauling companies only but would include the additional verbiage to clarify the exemptions:
-- Failure to obtain proper permitting would result in the following fines: $500 for first failure, $1,500 to $5,000 for second failure, and $5,000 to $10,000 for third failure.
"It did not say anything about farmers. It is for hauling companies," said Robinson, who mentioned this would be used as a tracking mechanism. "That will allow us to know who, what, when and where. This is nothing out of the ordinary."
Committee members approved sending the ordinance to Quorum Court by a 7-5 vote with one who abstained.
"By creating an ordinance it makes it a law, so this is the mythology behind what we're doing," Robinson said. "We're not trying to put a burden on farmers. The reason it says hauling companies is because farmers are exempt from this."
