McCormick County council moves to authorize 1% capital-projects sales-tax referendum after notice error; advocates say public input was limited

McCormick County Council heard a motion to authorize placing a 1% capital-projects sales tax before voters and discussed the legal and procedural steps needed to meet state deadlines.

County counsel told the council their recommendation was to proceed with third reading that night so the county could meet the requirement to submit authorization to the Election Commission by Aug. 15 at 12:00 p.m. “Our recommendation is to go forward with the third reading tonight,” counsel said, and clarified that “the tax cannot be imposed until the referendum is adopted by the public.” The ordinance language read into the record as part of the motion included authorization for bonds and disposition of proceeds and referenced a notional figure of $7,300,000 in the recorded reading of the item.

Councilmember Jacqueline Brown raised a procedural objection after noting a legal notice had not been published in the McCormick Messenger as expected: “The fact that it was not posted in the Messenger as is required, even though it was not our fault,” she said, asking attorneys to explain the next steps. County counsel replied that the notice had been posted on the county website and at the courthouse more than the 15-day minimum and that attorneys advised moving forward while scheduling an additional hearing and properly re‑noticing the item in the newspaper.

Councilman Charles Cook urged caution and said the compressed schedule had limited public participation. He said the current statutory process left councils with an all-or-nothing choice over the commission’s package: “I have a hard time believing that the legislature has left us with only the nuclear option,” Cook said, arguing the council did not have line-item control and that limited public meetings hampered meaningful input.

Counsel also addressed whether the county may use public funds to advocate for the measure. After reviewing statutes and attorney general opinions, counsel instructed the council that while the county may educate voters, it should not expend public funds to advocate for passage: “Do not. The role of council would be and the county is to educate, but not use public funding at all,” counsel said.

The motion to proceed with the reading and related authorizations was moved and seconded during the meeting; the transcript does not record a formal roll-call tally or a clear final vote outcome on the record. Counsel advised scheduling an additional, properly noticed hearing so the county meets legal requirements while preserving the option to submit the authorization to the Election Commission by the August deadline.

The meeting adjourned after routine closing remarks.