Holmes County commissioners discussed whether to authorize roughly $198,964 to finish paving the remaining section of Rum Road and how to cover that cost after state advance funding for DOT projects was not available.

The quote from a contractor based just over the Alabama line covers an 18- to 20-foot-wide, 2-inch overlay and carries no mobilization charge because the crew is already working nearby, a county staff member told commissioners. The county was urged to approve the work while the contractor is in the area to avoid higher future costs.

County officials said the project could be paid from local gas-tax-style funds (referred to in the meeting as LOGT/LAGT), but several commissioners expressed concern that the state is not providing the expected advance payments for this funding cycle. “They just pretty much told me to keep doing what we’re doing,” a county official said about the Department of Transportation’s response to questions about front funding.

Why it matters: Commissioners said the county has a large slate of DOT-related projects — roughly $15 million in work across multiple sites was discussed — and that the inability to get direct advance payments or pre-funding raises cash-flow challenges. Several speakers recommended the county investigate a short-term line of credit so it can pay contractor invoices while awaiting monthly reimbursements from state programs.

Discussion and next steps: Commissioners and staff described how reimbursement currently works: the county pays invoices, waits for the contractor’s check to clear, and then submits for reimbursement (limited to one reimbursement submission per month). That process can produce a several-week cash-flow gap that can be costly if many projects are overlapping. One commissioner said the county already has about $600,000 of borrowed or “floating” funds tied to previous projects and suggested staff examine the total interest cost of carrying a short-term credit line.

The board asked the county manager and the county attorney to investigate line-of-credit options and report back. A motion to have staff check into the terms of a line of credit and return with numbers was moved and seconded and carried.

Quotes from the meeting reflect the cash-flow concern: “We can only submit reimbursement once a month. So if we have an engineer come with a $500,000 invoice, we have to wait for the check to clear,” a staff member said. Commissioner discussion emphasized exploring credit costs and whether to pursue delegation meetings in Tallahassee to press for the advance-payment language in the legislation that commissioners said had been intended to allow pre-funding.

What wasn’t decided: The board did not approve immediate payment for Rum Road at this meeting. One commissioner said he would hold the contractor’s proposal and put the item back on the next agenda to see whether the contractor will still honor the quoted price.

Context: Commissioners referenced recent legislative changes and state agency practice that, in their view, have made pre-funding less available than previously expected. Staff said they will pursue both local financing options and continued conversations with state delegation and agency contacts.

Ending: Staff will return with numbers on a potential short-term borrowing option and recommendations for how to handle multiple concurrent DOT projects; the Rum Road overlay proposal was left to be reconsidered at the next meeting.