A glaringly tepid city council vote Tuesday moved forward a near-$4 million drainage improvement project on Northside.
That vote came with a warning, however, that the city may back out of the deal after next year’s municipal elections.
By a 5-1 margin, the council approved accepting an Army Corps of Engineers Section 592 Grant to clean out and add concrete lining to an earthen ditch that runs down the east side of the Columbus Brick, as well as build a detention pond to catch water that now floods parts of 21st, 22nd and 23rd streets, and 23rd Avenue. The grant would pay for more than $2.9 million of the work, but the city must commit almost $1 million for the 25% match.
The council let the matter die without discussion at its July 2 meeting but opted to revisit it Tuesday.
What’s at issue is how the city will fund the match.
City Engineer Kevin Stafford suggested Tuesday, as he has at previous council meetings since the Corps of Engineers approved the grant application, that the city dedicate a portion of its internet use tax revenue – which must be used for roads, bridges or drainage. The Corps must first complete an environmental study before the project could begin, he said, giving the city about 18 months before it would actually have to pay the match.
By then, the city should have accrued $3 million more in internet use tax since spending down those coffers for a paving project set to begin soon.
“I’m all for the project. I’m not necessarily for putting in my paving money,” said Ward 5 Councilman Stephen Jones, noting the council typically divides paving money evenly among wards. “… My constituents in Ward 5 may not understand, when their roads need to be paved in the future, that we don’t have that money to pave.”
Ward 4 Councilman Pierre Beard, whose ward includes the drainage project area, offered to defer his future paving money if that’s what it took to accept the grant. Almost 80% of his ward’s roads will be freshly paved by next year, he said.
“If I have to relinquish any money in the future, if I will be reelected, I don’t have a problem doing that,” he said.
Both Jones and Ward 3 Councilman Rusty Greene asked for alternate funding options, and Chief Financial Officer Jim Brigham said the city’s cash reserves – which he previously indicated to The Dispatch could be as much as $18 million by Sept. 30 – could handle it.
Stafford said the city had to sign an agreement with the Corps committing to the match, but it still had time to identify the source. If, for some reason, the city either backs out or doesn’t have the match money, it would still be on the hook for the $150,000 environmental study.
Vice Mayor Joseph Mickens, who represents Ward 2 and was the lone no vote, said the city was putting its “cart before the horse,” noting next year’s city elections could usher in a new administration.
“So we could approve this tonight and disapprove it next year,” he said. “… I’m a strong believer … the next administration needs to make that decision.”
Mayor Keith Gaskin said the city had to decide before then whether to accept the grant. He also pointed out the flooding issues date back to the 1970s.
“We make decisions all the time that will affect another administration,” Gaskin said. “If there is a new administration next year, and this is (overturned), they can explain to the citizens why the city is not willing to match a grant in that area.”
Mickens then argued there are areas in the city, besides Ward 4, that need help.
“It’s not about the ward,” Gaskin said. “… This particular grant can fix what is ailing that area. That’s why I think it’s important we take this serious, and if at all possible move forward on this grant. … If it comes up again, if there’s a decision not to do it, then that can be made.”
“It will come up again,” Mickens said.
Claims docket drama
At the outset of Tuesday’s meeting, a pair of councilmen got testy with one of their colleagues over her unwillingness to vote for the claims docket.
The council approves a claims docket – the collection of bills the city needs to pay for various operations – at each of its twice monthly meetings.
Ward 6 Councilwoman Jacqueline DiCicco voted against the docket Tuesday for the second straight meeting. It didn’t affect the outcome, since hers was the only no vote. But it got a rise from Jones, who pressed DiCicco on her specific objections to the docket.
Jones pointed out DiCicco had city-paid travel expenses on the docket, including a recent Mississippi Municipal League Conference she attended with other city officials in Biloxi. Even if she voted against the docket, he noted, the city still had to pay those.
“You don’t have to pay mine,” DiCicco answered. “I will pay it.”
Jones pressed further.
“You got all these people working out here …” he continued. “You vote to approve whatever they do, but you don’t vote for them to get paid. That don’t make much sense.”
“It doesn’t,” DiCicco responded. “But I still have my principles and reasons for voting that way, thank you.”
The two continued arguing before Gaskin gaveled the meeting to order.
“Each council member has the right to vote their conscience,” he said.
Then Mickens asked City Attorney Jeff Turnage to weigh in.
“The problem I see is what if all of y’all decided you wanted to vote no?” Turnage said. “Then you’d have a bunch of vendors not getting paid. What an alternative might be is to ask that a particular item you have a beef with be removed from the docket and discuss that. But that’s up to y’all.”
DiCicco declined to comment to The Dispatch on the record after the meeting, saying she would rather convey her objections to recent claims dockets in a written statement. The Dispatch did not receive that statement by press time.
Zack Plair is the managing editor for The Dispatch.
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 39 articles to cdispatch.com. Please consider subscribing to our website for only $2.30 per week to help support local journalism and our community.
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 39 articles to cdispatch.com. Please consider subscribing to our website for only $2.30 per week to help support local journalism and our community.
