February 17, 2026, Camden County Commission meeting at 10:00 a.m.

I attended the February 17, 2026, Camden County Commission meeting at 10:00 a.m.

All commissioners were present.

The first agenda item was “MoDOT Cost Share Program.”

Danny Roeger, the MoDoT Area Engineer for Camden County, discussed the MoDot Cost Share program. A plan has been developed to mitigate the traffic congestion in Camdenton where Highway 54 crosses Highway 5. This project has been prioritized by the Transportation Advisory Committee as the #3 priority project in the four county lake area.

Annually, MoDoT establishes three tiers of projects. The project is currently a Tier 2 project which could take up to ten years to complete. Tier 2 projects represent a total of $800 million of project funding which could be completed in the next five to ten years if the money was available.

The project was intended to reduce traffic congestion from Cecil Street (Walmart) to Highway 5. When Representative Vernetti originally worked to secure $4 million in general revenue funding for the project, MoDoT established an initial phase of the project that would meet that funding amount. This would be focussed on Highway 54 from Laker Pride Rd / Jack Crowell Road to Highway 5.

It would add an additional auxiliary lane on both directions of Highway 54 and include a dedicated on-ramp to North Highway 5. A median would also be installed on Highway 54 to prevent left turns. Some properties along Highway 54 would have their highway access impacted by the project.

The cost share program allows local governments to contribute a minimum of 50% of the cost of a project to speed up its completion. A total of $50 million in state funding has been set aside and made available to pay for cost share projects.

Since the $4 million in state funds is currently not available, Roeger proposed that the cost share program could be used to complete “Phase 1A” of this project which would be only the westbound Highway 54 portion. This sub-phase is estimated to cost between $2 million and $2.5 million. He stated that he would be presenting this same proposal to the Camdenton City Council later that evening.

Presiding Commissioner Skelton asked Roeger about the $4 million that State Representative Vernetti had secured for the project?

Roeger explained that Governor Kehoe had a slightly more “conservative” approach to the estimated annual revenue and placed this project on the restricted funding list along with thirty other road projects. The chances of the project being funded from that list weren’t good. Roeger did point out that it’s possible that the initial use of local government funding to start the endeavor might encourage the Missouri General Assembly to dedicate funding later on to complete the entire project.

Roeger also confirmed that the City of Camdenton and Camden County could split the 50% contribution between them.

Commissioner Gohagan asked Roeger what the proposed completion for the project would be?

Roeger estimated it could start in 2027 and be completed by 2028. Without the cost share, it might take ten years to even start the project. The funds for the cost share would have to be available in 2027 at the latest.

Commissioner Dougan wanted to be sure that the city would contribute.

The Commission unanimously voted to commit $625,000 of the TCLA funds for the county’s cost share contingent on Camdenton agreeing to also contribute $625,000.

The second agenda item was “AirMed Care Presentation.”

Austin Webster from AirMed Care described the terms of the AirMed Care subscriptions which covers the excess helicopter ambulance costs of transporting patients for medical care. The company offers 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year memberships. A 1-year membership covers an entire household for $99. The annual cost becomes cheaper the longer the contract lasts or if a larger group enrolls from the county. The county could sign everyone up and pay the cost itself or individual employees could enroll with a payroll deduction.

It did sound like you had to be transported in one of “their helicopters” so I’m not quite sure how you would have a traffic collision injury and wave off the helicopter, telling them you were waiting for a specific type of helicopter?

The Commission decided to review the information and reschedule the matter for a later meeting.

In Public Comment, a citizen spoke to the Commission about the problems he his having with his neighbor’s cats. She has adopted at least twenty feral cats and is feeding them. The cats are roaming loose across his property and using it for a litter box. Animal Control has responded several times and recognized the problem, but has not done anything to address it.

The citizen told the Commission that cats are a protected species by Missouri statute so he can’t simply kill the trespassing cats. He did reference a 2019 county ordinance that lists a $50 fine for every free-roaming animal.

The lady also has two monkeys which piqued my interest, but to my great disappointment, the monkeys didn’t seem to play a significant role in this story. A younger, more energetic Gadfly would have probably just made one up.

The Sheriff and his Chief Deputy were present for this meeting, so the Commission referred him to them. After the meeting, the Chief Deputy was discussing the issue with the complainant.

Chief Deputy Hines also asked the Commission if the recently passed UTV ordinance had a grandfather clause for older UTV’s that don’t meet the safety equipment requirements of the ordinance?

The commissioners confirmed that there was no grandfathering of older vehicles included in the ordinance, but UTV’s could be retrofitted with equipment to make them eligible.

As the meeting was about to adjourn, Commissioner Dougan interjected that he would like to say a few things.

Dougan complained that he did not appreciate Presiding Commissioner Skelton’s comments on the radio that the other commissioners did not have the courage to support him (about the recent failed motion to litigate the License Plate Reader ordinance.) He was concerned that Skelton wanted to file a lawsuit when Skelton had no idea how much the suit might cost the county. Especially when the budget money was already tight. Dougan said he had heard just that very morning that a low water crossing was going to cost Camden County $1 million.

Dougan noted that Skelton said on Facebook that he wasn’t going to use county resources or money for his criminal defense, but Dougan recalled that Skelton had come to him seeking his support for a $150,000 budget line item for Skelton’s defense. Dougan said that when he declined, Skelton walked away and told Dougan, “I knew you wouldn’t support me.”

Dougan also alleged that Skelton had asked the County Attorney to contact Travellers Insurance to see if the insurance would defend him. Dougan asked Commissioner Gohagan if he had seen the emails about this?

Commissioner Gohagan responded that he had received a call from McGrath Insurance about it.

Dougan also did not appreciate that Skelton had spent $16,000 on trips like the NACO Conference.

Commissioner Dougan said he would place Camden County first. His priorities were the budget, public safety, transparency, decision making, infrastructure, and treating all citizens equally. Dougan continued by saying he wanted road improvements and repairs to be conducted based on the grades assigned by the road surveys, not by who had helped who during their campaigns.

Presiding Commissioner Skelton responded by stating that the “not for or against” position on the LPR issue was an easy position to take because it was no position at all. He took an oath to the Constitution when he assumed office. He felt that the LPR were an example of government overreach. He did ask if the county insurance could cover his criminal defense for removing the LPR camera but he felt he was within his rights to make that inquiry. He would not have used any county resources or funds without the approval of the Commission.

He felt that it did require courage to defend the Constitution and stand up against surveillance tracking. Skelton told Dougan that he was not surprised that Dougan wouldn’t support him on the LPR lawsuit.

Commissioner Gohagan said that Skelton’s “courage” comment also bothered him. He acknowledged that Skelton had more of a libertarian mindset where law enforcement was concerned.

Skelton agreed and expressed his concern that this type of surveillance was only going to get worse. He didn’t trust the federal government and was concerned how these cameras could be used.

Commissioner Gohagan asked Skelton is he liked the idea that ICE was using surveillance cameras to conduct their operations? Commissioner Skelton explained that he was more worried about the fact that Flock was the entity that was actually running these camera systems and in his opinion, “You either support a surveillance state or you don’t.”

After an extended conversation, unsurprisingly, no consensus was reached.

And that was that.