Kudos to Russ Cassady for his latest piece of investigative journalism in eastern Kentucky.

Get a load of the latest from the Appalachian News-Express about a provision hidden in the budget bill that could give a couple folks special treatment. Read all about it:

In April, the Kentucky Public Service Commission began investigating the eligibility of Mountain Water District Chair Toni Akers and commissioner Mike Litafik, after the agency received a complaint the two are not eligible to serve because they do not live in the Mountain Water District service area.

The current law requires that anyone serving as a commissioner of a water district be a resident of the district’s service area. The proposed change inserts a provision that allows a commissioner to be either a “resident” or customer” of the water district in order to serve.

-SNIP-

The source of the measure remained a mystery as of presstime.

Because the provision was not added as an amendment, it is not public information who is responsible for the addition of the measure.

Rep Leslie Combs said she was not responsible for adding the provision.

-SNIP-

Sen. Ray S. Jones also said he was not behind the measure, had not seen it until HB1 was before the Senate, and would not support it in its current state.

Fine and dandy so far, eh?

Not so fast:

State Rep. W. Keith Hall, who did not return repeated messages left seeking comment on the provision, has ties with both Mountain Water and Utility Management Group, the company which recently retained a controversial management and operations contract with Mountain Water District.

In a legislative ethics report filed in January, hall (sic) identifies himself as CEO of B.M.M., Inc., a Kentucky corporation. B.M.M. Inc. performs contract work for Mountain Water District, including a recent sewer project at Smith Fork of Phelps, which is estimated to cost more than $800,000.

Hall also has a personal stake in UMG, as his son, Jordan, is employed by the company.

So let’s talk about this for a minute. Everybody but Keith Hall says they’re not responsible. Keith refuses to return calls and/or make an official comment. And it just so happens he stands to personally benefit from this sneaky legislation.

While it’s not unethical to push legislation that you benefit from so long as everyone can benefit from it, it IS unethical to push legislation that only you are directly benefiting from.

We think Keith has a lot of explaining to do. Especially since multiple Frankfort legislators told us he was trying to work people over in support of the corrupt legislation yesterday.

Thoughts?