Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Sewer Financing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Ward council debates ANRD sewer loan; checking-account resolution fails
Summary
Council discussed a $791,516 Arkansas Natural Resources Division loan paired with a $500,000 AEDC grant to remove an aging vacuum sewer system. A motion to reject the loan was made and later withdrawn; a separate resolution to open the ANRD-required checking account failed, leaving the loan decision unresolved.
Get email alerts on the Sewer Financing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
At its Sept. 16 meeting, the Ward City Council reopened debate over a previously awarded $791,516 loan from the Arkansas Natural Resources Division (ANRD) that was paired with a $500,000 grant from the Arkansas Economic Development Commission (AEDC) to remove the city's aging vacuum sewer system.
The ANRD loan was described in council materials as a 20-year loan at 4% interest; council members said the package had been in development since 2024 and was part of an application that assumed the AEDC grant contribution. Council discussion focused on whether the city should accept financing and proceed immediately, fund the work from reserves, or wait for bids and phase work to reduce borrowing.
A motion to reject ANRD financing was made during the discussion and briefly acted on, but the motion-maker later withdrew the motion and its second, which the mayor said nullified the earlier action and left the matter unresolved. Council then considered a separate, procedural resolution (202532) needed to open a separate checking account for ANRD funds if the city were to accept the loan. That resolution failed on roll call: Council member Brooke and Council member Ruble voted no; Chapman and McMahon voted yes; the measure did not receive a positive majority and was recorded as disapproved.
Council members who opposed accepting the loan cited long-term rate pressure as a concern and said they would prefer to seek bids and consider using reserves or conducting the work in phases. Members who favored keeping the loan available said the package made the project more affordable on paper and preserved the option to act quickly if bids required immediate funding.
Council and staff discussed an estimated project total presented during earlier grant and loan applications (about $1.2 million when the ANRD loan and AEDC grant were combined), but members noted bids had not yet been received and the final contractor estimates were unknown. Staff said bids could come in lower than the estimate, which could change the council's calculus.
Next steps: because the loan rejection motion was withdrawn and the procedural checking-account resolution failed, the loan remains on the table; council members asked staff to continue obtaining bids and to report back, leaving the final decision for a later meeting.
Sources: meeting proceedings, Sept. 16, 2025 Ward City Council meeting.

