It took two tries, but the Sunflower County Board of Supervisors voted 4-1 this week to approve a $1.5 million bond issue to address roads and bridges problems.
In the end, District 3 Supervisor Dennis Holmes was the lone no vote on the issue.
The board expects that taxes will not go up for county residents because of the bond, but they will likely not decrease either.
Payments on the loan should be covered under the current millage rate since 1.5 mils is set to roll off the books at the end of the fiscal year.
“We can ‘t keep kicking the can down the road,” Board President Glenn Donald said. “We have to make a decision.”
The board had previously discussed a bond issue in its last meeting.
Board Attorney Johnny McWilliams told the group during a discussion about infrastructure needs that based on market knowledge given to him by a financial industry expert, the current millage rate should cover a 10-year bond between $1 million and $2 million.
A five-year, $1 million bond would require around $250,000 a year to pay off, while a seven-year bond would be around $150,000. The 10-year bond, which is most common, would be around $118,000 a year.
Based on those numbers, McWilliams told the board he estimated yearly payments on a $2 million, 10-year bond would be somewhere around $236,000.
District 5 Supervisor Gloria Dickerson made the motion to issue a $2 million, 10-year bond.
After it was seconded, Donald opened the floor for discussion. With no comments, the measure passed 3-2, with Holmes and District 4 Supervisor Anthony Clark voting against.
At that point, Clark explained why he voted nay on the issue. “We shouldn’t use up all of the millage,” Clark said. “I’m for the $1 million, but with the $2 million, I think we’re stretching it.”
Clark said the county needed to leave itself enough breathing room in case it had to address an emergency down the road and needed to raise the millage rate again.
Holmes raised two issues with the bond.
One is that the county is proposing to pay 10 years on road fixes he estimates could last only three years.
The second issue is that farmers in his district have communicated that they are not for raising anymore taxes.
“They are fed up with the taxes on their farmland,” Holmes said. “They have told me directly they are against a bond issue.”
Donald said that he wanted the board to be united if it was going to borrow that amount of money.
After Clark indicated that he would vote for a $1.5 million, 10-year bond, Dickerson rescinded her original motion, and the board voted on the lower bond.
“Some people are going to be happy, and some people are going to be unhappy,” Donald said. “It will affect you at election time, but you have to decide whether you did the right thing or not.”
McWilliams originally brought up the notion of borrowing $2 million and making the bond issue broad enough to potentially cover other needs if money was left over.
The reason being that if the county had to go back and borrow additional money to cover bridges or roads, it would incur the same fees as it did on the first loan.
“You can always go back and borrow money for bridges,” McWilliams said. “You can do that, but you will incur the same fees.”
Sunflower County Engineer Ron Cassada told the board that 35 bridges had been closed originally, but now they are down to around 20 that are still closed off.
The county has identified the five most pressing bridge projects.
One of those could use a tanker car as the bridge’s superstructure, but he said the county’s funds cannot cover that cost.
“Y’all don’t have enough money to buy the tanker car right now,” Cassada said.
Cassada said the state has been slow to release money to the county to fix some of the roads and bridges.
Donald said waiting on the state to send aid could keep some bridges out a lot longer.
“If we don’t have the money, some of those bridges may be closed for over seven or eight years,” Donald said.
The board will hold a work session later this month to discuss how the $1.5 million will be used throughout the county.
