County commissioners weigh-in on county council's decision to table use of ARPA funds

By Sharon Estep

The Scott County Council decided to table a decision regarding the use of American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds for an interlocal agreement with Jefferson County to purchase chip seal equipment. This agreement, aimed at extending the life of roads in both counties, had already been approved by the Scott County Board of Commissioners. However, during the regular council meeting on September 10, concerns were raised about the specifics of the agreement and its implications.

Council President J.R. Ward expressed the need for more information about how the partnership would function between the two counties and highlighted the limited time available to allocate the remaining $1,188,623.35 in ARPA funds before the December 31 deadline. While the council must commit the funds by the end of the year, the money can be spent until December 31, 2026. Ward also stressed the importance of using the funds for local projects rather than returning them to the federal government.

Concerns were voiced about the long-term viability of the funding, equipment maintenance, and insurance costs and hopefully the commissioners had conducted thorough research. Ultimately, the council voted 5-0 to table the decision, with two members absent from the vote.

At the Monday, September 18 Scott County Commissioners meeting, members believe they have the sole authority to decide how these funds are spent once received, while the council insists it must approve any expenditures, positioning themselves as having a say in how the funds are allocated. The commissioners, however, see their role as primarily managing the funds, with the council only acting as a procedural body.

The broader discussion centers on the financial trade-offs between chip sealing and paving. While chip sealing is more affordable and effective given limited budgets, the public's preference for paved roads is a source of frustration for the commissioners who note that significant tax increases would be required to meet those demands. This highlights the balancing act local government must perform – providing necessary infrastructure improvements while managing limited funds and addressing public expectations.

A joint meeting between the commissioners and council, intended to address these issues, has not yet been scheduled.