A JOINT RESOLUTION designating the Les Leatherman Memorial Bridge in Laurel County.
Summary
SJR27 is a joint resolution that names a specific bridge in Laurel County, Kentucky, the “Les Leatherman Memorial Bridge.” The resolution honors Leslie “Les” Roger Leatherman, a longtime emergency medical technician, dispatcher, volunteer firefighter, fire rescue instructor, and public servant who died during the May 2025 tornado outbreak while protecting his wife and others. The bill recites his career, service, and sacrifice as the basis for the memorial designation.
The resolution directs the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet to designate the bridge on Kentucky Route 363 at Interstate 75 mile point 8.03 in Laurel County as the memorial bridge and to erect appropriate signage within 30 days after the resolution takes effect. It does not change criminal, civil, or regulatory law beyond this naming and signage requirement, but it does create an official state-recognized memorial on a transportation asset.
Impact
The bill affects state transportation administration by requiring the Transportation Cabinet to rename a specific bridge and install signage, thereby adding a commemorative designation to Kentucky’s roadway system. It does not amend substantive statutes or create new rights or obligations for the public; its legal effect is limited to the official naming of the bridge and the associated sign installation in Laurel County.
Sentiment
The overall sentiment around the resolution is strongly positive and commemorative. The bill is framed as a tribute to a respected first responder and community servant whose death during a tornado was described as an act of selfless sacrifice. No opposing views or recorded vote controversy are included in the provided materials, and the tone of the text suggests broad respect and support for honoring his memory.
Contention
No substantive contention is evident in the bill text or the provided legislative history. Because the resolution is a memorial naming measure, any discussion would likely center on the appropriateness of the tribute, the specific bridge selected, or the administrative burden of signage, but no such objections are documented here. The measure appears to be noncontroversial and symbolic in nature.