Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transportation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Scott County board approves revised six‑year road plan amid frustration over unpaved roads
Summary
After public comment stressing the county’s large backlog of unpaved roads, supervisors approved a revised six‑year plan that adds three county‑requested routes and reiterates limited annual unpaved‑road funding (about $950,000–$1.1 million).
Scott County supervisors voted to approve a revised six‑year secondary roads plan after a lengthy presentation and public comment about the county’s extensive network of unpaved roads.
Joey Mullins, the acting residency administrator presenting the plan, said the packet includes three routes the county requested — Hunter Valley East, Dingis Hollow and Timberree — and that the county typically receives roughly $950,000 to $1.1 million annually for unpaved‑road projects. "For fiscal year 2032 that's coming into the plan it's 1.1 million in unpaid road funds," Mullins told the board.
The board pressed for clarity on how the plan is sequenced and how funds are used. Mullins described the six‑year schedule as a first‑in, first‑out queue for projects and said staff attempts to factor inflation into long‑range estimates so future projects remain fundable when their turn arrives.
Supervisors and residents also discussed preservation alternatives. Mullins explained a latex‑based slurry (seal) process used on candidate routes to extend pavement life by three to five years at a substantially lower cost than full repaving, describing it as a cost‑effective way to “get the most bang for our buck.”
Several board members pressed that the county’s mileage of dirt roads dwarfs the program’s pace. One supervisor summarized the sentiment: "I don't think Scott County roads will be paved in their lifetime," underscoring frustration with the scale of unmet need.
Despite those concerns, the motion to approve the plan carried by voice vote. Supervisors asked staff to provide earlier assessments (for example, the Reed Holler assessment) where stabilization work or further review was requested so the board can decide whether to refresh studies or move forward with design.
The board also asked Mullins to follow up with the bridge division on schedules for specific bridge repairs and to check on the status of signage and closures where road work has been delayed.
