The Lowndes County Board of Supervisors voted unanimously Wednesday to provide $200,000 to the city of Columbus for use on its parks and recreation for Fiscal Year 2018-19 with no strings attached.
But the supervisors did not arrive at that consensus without some heated debate over restrictions and pointed criticism from Columbus Chief Financial Officer David Armstrong, who called the county’s reluctance to remove stipulations on the funds “petty politics at its worst.”
The debate over the issue began when City of Columbus Parks Director Greg Lewis submitted a list of items he characterized as capital improvements for the city’s neighborhood parks totaling $208,850.
The supervisors had agreed to provide $200,000 in funds for the city’s parks last year after the county chose to leave the Columbus-Lowndes Recreation Authority, the joint parks and recreation department of the city and county.
At the time, the resolution placed no specific requirements on the funds, and the $200,000 represented money city residents would pay in county property taxes for parks and recreation.
Months later, after the county still had not given the city that money, Supervisors President Harry Sanders stipulated it should be used only for capital improvements.
So, Lewis put together the list of planned projects.
But the discussions hit several snags. First, Sanders questioned the validity of some of the listed items as being capital improvements.
“My problem is that a lot of the things on the list are regular maintenance,” Sanders said of Lewis’ list. “I don’t know why you come to us and ask us for money to paint buildings or fix things that you should have been doing all along.
“My way of thinking is that if y’all want to do a major capital improvement project, I don’t see why the county can’t be a partner with the city in getting that done. Whether its re-doing Propst Park or work on the amphitheater (at The Island) or building the (Riverwalk) walking trail out to the Lock and Dam. We would be more than happy to help. I just don’t think it’s right for the county to subsidize the city on regular maintenance, like painting a building or fixing a commode or cutting the grass.”
District 5 Supervisor Leroy Brooks said many of the items on the list had been suggested years prior to the CLRA split, a fact confirmed by the county’s parks director Roger Short, who had served for more than 10 years as the CLRA director before Lewis took the job.
“I want to make an observation about almost all of those things on that list,” Short said. “You’re absolutely right about that. They were under my administration. For years, I asked for those things.”
Arguments over the Soccer Complex condition
County Administrator Ralph Billingsley added another wrinkle to the discussion when he said he believed that the repair work needed at the Soccer Complex should come from the $200,000 allocation.
When CLRA split in October 2017, the county agreed to maintain the Soccer Complex near downtown Columbus, and Billingsley said the county inherited a mess.
“We put way over $100,000 into getting the facility back to the condition it should have been in when we took it over,” Billingsley said. “The sprinkler systems were not working. It hadn’t been properly fertilized. It had not been aerated. It had not been top-dressed. The grass was virtually gone. When we budgeted I had no idea that we would have such a huge financial obligation to get it back in condition.”
Both Brooks and District 4 Supervisor Jeff Smith said they felt the county was wrong to attach additional conditions on the release of the funds.
“My recollection is that there were no strings attached to the $200,000,” Smith said. “Later on, we said, ‘Well, it has to be for capital improvements.’ We asked them for a list of things they identified as capital improvements. They did that today. Now, there’s this talk about the Soccer Complex.
“It seems like every time there’s an effort to move forward, the goal posts get moved,” he added.
Armstrong: ‘This is a joke’
The most pointed criticisms came from Armstrong.
“I have nothing but the utmost respect for you all, but this is a joke,” Armstrong told supervisors. “…The fact is, the county made a promise not just to the city, but also to the city taxpayers. You said you were going to give the city $200,000 so they can use it for parks. Then you come back and tell the city to put together a list of capital projects. That’s exactly what we’ve done. We’ve done our part and relied on you to keep your promise. If you’re going to renege on your promise, just say that.
“How is the city and county ever going to progress?” he added. “How are we ever going to grow and work together with this kind of nonsense? This is just petty politics at its worst. That’s all it is.”
Sanders quickly rose to the supervisors’ defense, citing the city had often not paid its full share of 50-50 obligations its had with the county — especially where the former CLRA was concerned.
“I’ve been a supervisor for 18 years and in 10 of them that I know of, the city hasn’t kept up its end on the agreements that were supposed to be 50/50,” Sanders said. “You chewed us out by saying the county has reneged on its promise. Well, the city has reneged on its promises over and over. The reason we decided not to be in partnership with the city in recreation is because the city didn’t live up to what it was supposed to do.”
Brooks said he was tired of bringing up past disputes.
“It’s like when you are married and your wife gets mad at you about something,” he said. “Sometimes, she doesn’t get hysterical. She gets historical. Then you’re not talking about one problem. You’re talking about 10.
“I don’t want to be a part of this rehashing,” he added. “It serves no useful purpose.”
Slim Smith is a columnist and feature writer for The Dispatch. His email address is [email protected].
You can help your community
Quality, in-depth journalism is essential to a healthy community. The Dispatch brings you the most complete reporting and insightful commentary in the Golden Triangle, but we need your help to continue our efforts. In the past week, our reporters have posted 32 articles to cdispatch.com. Please consider subscribing to our website for only $2.30 per week to help support local journalism and our community.