ROAD REPORTS
Benton County ordinance 86-4 requires the county judge make quarterly reports on the county’s road plan to the Quorum Court. The ordinance calls for an initial report in April that should include “proposed improvements and new construction and their projected costs for the following year.” Subsequent reports are supposed to include “current actions of the road department, as well as an update on proposed improvement projects and their projected costs. In this way, the Quorum Court will be able to work with the county judge to make the most beneficial use of available funds.”
Source: Benton County
BENTONVILLE — Questions over a proposal to pave Sugar Creek Road have Benton County officials trying to define their roles in managing the county’s road plan.
A number of residents on Sugar Creek Road attended the Committee of the Whole meeting Tuesday and the Transportation Committee meeting Thursday to voice concerns to the justices of the peace. The residents said they oppose the paving plan. They also are unhappy with the way the county selected their road for paving and handled the notification process once the decision was made.
Some of the residents said paving the road would lead to an increase in traffic on a road they use for farm equipment. Others objected to improvements that might increase the value of their property and raise their property taxes. Residents also said work being done to repair flood damage in the area likely has only made the problem worse. Several also said giving the county additional right of way for the road improvements will damage their properties and homes.
Sugar Creek Road is located in northeast Benton County.
Tom Allen, justice of the peace for District 4, reminded the other justices of the peace of a county ordinance that requires quarterly road reports. The Quorum Court needs to get that information in a timely manner, he said. Allen, speaking at the at the Committee of the Whole meeting, said he became frustrated when information on the county’s website was found to be out of date.
Some residents on Sugar Creek Road “were opposed to paving the road,” Allen said. “There was a lot of discussion and one thing led to another. We all came to the same conclusion which is to ask why are we improving a road with asphalt when a lot of people don’t want it improved?”
Kurt Moore, justice of the peace for District 13, said this isn’t the first time justices of the peace have sought more regular information about county road work. Former Justice of the Peace Bobby Hubbard frequently clashed with former County Judge Dave Bisbee over the quarterly road reports required by a 1986 county ordinance, Moore said. Moore doesn’t want the debate to become acrimonious but also said the justices of the peace need to insist on having the reports.
“County roads are probably the No. 1 thing we get contacted by constituents about. More than all other issues put together, I’d say,” Moore said. “The JPs need to be in the loop about what’s proposed, what’s being done and what’s going to be done. We can cut out a lot of calls the judge and the Road Department get if we’re able to answer questions. I would place a very high priority on it.”
The county has so many needs and such limited resources it makes no sense to pave roads if the majority of residents don’t want the work done. Moore said. The county needs to find some way to gauge support before adopting any project, he said.
Moore suggested the county send out certified letters to landowners or residents that include a return envelope and a form for them to say yes they want work done or no they don’t.
“Have them vote on it. If a majority do not want it, move on and put your money somewhere else,” he said.
George Spence, county attorney, said he’s unfamiliar with the ordinance that requires the county judge to make quarterly road reports to the Quorum Court. Spence has not been asked about the ordinance in terms of the separate roles of the county judge’s office and the Quorum Court.
“Generally, the county judge is in charge of all things related to roads and the Quorum Court is in charge of all things related to money,” Spence said.
County Judge Bob Clinard is willing to provide the justices of the peace with information on the county’s road plan, but he wants it clear the reports are for informational purposes only. His office will remain in charge of the work plan.
“If it starts to lean over into them telling us how to do our jobs I’m going to resist that,” Clinard said.
The Road Department already has identified some possible alternatives to the Sugar Creek paving projects, but Clinard said he has to consider factors other than the wishes of some of the residents along the road, or any county road, when he looks at doing road improvements.
“Priority No. 1 is to reduce the maintenance costs to the county,” he said. “Priority No. 2 is to build connectors and bypasses to get people into the cities and to help spread out the traffic. I’ve got to weigh the benefits of the work to all of the county’s citizens.”
Tom Sissom can be reached by email at tsissom @nwadg.com or on Twitter at @NWATom.