BRYAN, Texas — The Brazos County Commissioners Court spent a workshop session reviewing the county’s debt position, borrowing options and the timing required to place certificates of obligation or voter-approved bonds.

County Auditor Marcy Turner opened the session and reviewed the county’s debt management policy, stressing that “debt for operating and maintenance expenditures would not generally be considered appropriate” and that debt terms should not exceed an asset’s useful life. Turner said the county will propose clarifying edits to the policy in coming meetings.

Advisers from PFM, the county’s financial adviser, and Winstead P.C., the county’s bond counsel, gave the court a market update and an in-depth look at Brazos County’s outstanding obligations. Dennis Whaley of PFM said recent Federal Reserve actions had lowered short-term rates but longer-term municipal yields remain elevated, and he told the court that 20‑year, AA+ rated county bonds would likely price in the high 3% to low 4% range.

Blake Roberts of PFM presented the county’s debt profile and capacity analysis. He said Brazos County has issued about $121 million in original par and currently has roughly $81.2 million outstanding with a final maturity in 2043. Roberts said the county’s descending, fixed-rate debt service schedule leaves capacity to issue about $70 million of previously authorized but unissued debt from the county’s prior authorization and that, under recommended conservative assumptions (AA+ rating, $30 billion taxable value, 20‑year terms), scenarios up to roughly $30 million in new debt would keep Brazos in the highest S&P debt-per-capita category.

Roberts urged the court to consider an S&P site visit to help rating analysts understand local economic diversification and governance. “We’re in a very good spot from a debt‑outstanding position as well as an affordability position in your debt service tax rate,” he said.

Bond counsel Dan Martinez explained legal and statutory limits on debt instruments, described recent changes to the Certificates of Obligation (CO) statute that narrow permissible public‑works uses and impose a three‑year look‑back to prevent back‑door elections, and reviewed tax‑law and tax‑opinion requirements for issuers.

Advisers laid out the issuance timeline the county would face if it chooses to borrow. They recommended reverse‑engineering from project need dates: a CO requires a notice and roughly a 45‑day petition period, the bond‑pricing phase runs about three months from start and then a further three to four weeks are typically needed for the Texas Attorney General’s review before proceeds are received. Turner emphasized that the tax assessor‑collector needs projected principal and interest numbers by July 15 to include any FY27 I&S impacts in the tax‑rate discussion.

Turner also said the county has a $40 million committed general‑fund emergency reserve and noted a $15 million agreement with TxDOT tied to the Bush‑Welborn exchange, both of which affect timing and the scale of any new issuance.

In public comment, Kathy Beanes of Precinct 4 asked which projects the court was considering borrowing for; Turner and advisers said the 101 building and road projects — including the Bush‑Welborn exchange — are among possibilities and that staff will analyze whether paying cash or issuing debt makes more sense for each project.

The court did not take formal action during the workshop. Commissioners asked for follow‑up analysis; staff and advisers were directed to return with refined scenario modeling, a proposed timetable tied to project spending needs, and recommended next steps for rating engagement and any necessary legal steps. The workshop adjourned at 3:21 p.m.

The court is expected to review the advisers’ recommended scenarios and timeline before any decision to proceed with issuance or bond elections.