Fatcow Icon
Delayed facilities projects USDA to county: Pursue project funding by Nov. 2 or cancel it
by Chris Berendt
2 years ago | 679 views | 5 5 comments | 5 5 recommendations | email to a friend | print
A joint meeting between the Sampson County Board of Commissioners and three school boards in the county was held Monday to discuss whether to proceed with notable construction projects put on hold a year ago.
A joint meeting between the Sampson County Board of Commissioners and three school boards in the county was held Monday to discuss whether to proceed with notable construction projects put on hold a year ago.
slideshow
The county has decisions to make, and has a deadline to make them by next month.

A joint meeting between the Sampson County Board of Commissioners and three school boards in the county was held Monday to discuss whether to proceed with notable school construction projects, and USDA loan obligations, put on hold a year ago.

No decisions were made, however county manager Rick Moorefield and the county board were seeking feedback from the school boards — the Sampson County and Clinton City boards of education were in attendance, as was the Sampson Community College Board of Trustees — in regards to delayed projects concerning their respective systems.

“I don’t think we will vote on anything tonight,” said commissioners chairman Jarvis McLamb. “Anything we discuss tonight, we will vote on at the next meeting (Nov. 2).”

Among those projects discussed were SCC’s Early Childhood Development Center and Charles E. Perry Elementary School. Amid economic distress and a tight county budget, the Board of Commissioners voted unanimously last October to delay both projects for another year. County officials said both remained a priority for the county, with CEP at the top of the list.

“These are projects that have been on the table for awhile and are still outstanding,” said Moorefield, who presented correspondences sent two weeks ago from Ed Causey, area director for USDA, about the loan obligations for both projects. “These are not loans yet, they’re commitments. He doesn’t want us, and doesn’t need us, to prolong these projects unless we can make a decision if these projects will be pursued, and when they will be.”

Early Childhood

Development Center

In his letter concerning the Childhood Development Center, Causey stated that a $5 million loan for the project has been outstanding for about four and a half years, having been approved in April 2005. It was agreed last October to hold the obligation until next month, Causey stated in the letter.

“By November 2009, the commissioners are to decide whether to proceed with the project or to cancel the obligation,” he stated. “We certainly want to continue a good working relationship with Sampson County. However, we believe it is appropriate and proper for the county to now decide to either pursue this project or request that the obligation be canceled.”

Causey said, if the county moves forward with construction, it is unlikely a payment would be due before 2012. Also, due to stimulus funding, there are additional financing resources to add to the project if original cost estimates are low.

“The Early Childhood Development Center was suspended last fall with the expectation it would be discussed before (next month),” Moorefield said. “Funds are still available to the county for this project. (Causey) assured me that USDA has more funds now than it ever has.”

A change of scope in the project would also be OK, said the county manager.

Last month, Moorefield and the commissioners listened to a presentation by SCC president Dr. Bill Aiken about a potential land acquisition from, and expansion to, the campus’ neighbor to the west, Clinton Pentecostal Holiness Church.

Aiken provided estimates on site work, including reviewing the land and structure for any code issues, as well as additional assessments and appraisal of the property. All totaled, the engineering work would cost $12,400, he said then. The board did not act on the request, with Moorefield stating his intentions to seek financing options before going ahead with those expenses.

“We’ve made no other attempts toward purchase,” said Aiken Monday. “We do continue to have an interest, as that space will fulfill the college’s needs, so we would hope you continue toward funding of that project.”

“When we approached the county commissioners,” said SCC Trustees chairman Larry Barnes, “it was to just get seed money to get appraisal of the property.”

Moorefield said it was important to cover bases at the USDA level before obtaining appraisals on the church property. USDA funding is “pretty flexible,” the county manager said.

Barnes said the church property has a “three-star, 200-capacity” childcare facility already “up and running,” and, along with its proximity, would fit in well with the college’s goal to expand.

“If the church comes back, we are in no position to negotiate or anything at this point,” noted Barnes, who expressed the need for a county appraisal in addition to any appraisal done by the church. “I think that’s the information you need to make a recommendation.”

Moorefield said many concerns would be addressed, and concerns resolved, by next month.

“The reason all of these projects are on the agenda is because what we do in one area is certainly going to impact what we do in another area,” he explained.

Charles E. Perry

Months after a $5 million loan was approved for the SCC Childhood Development Center, a $7 million loan was OK’d for a new Charles E. Perry. That was in September 2005, more than four years ago.

Causey said conditions of the loan were to be met within a year.

“However, USDA has been very flexible because of the construction of the three high schools,” Causey wrote. As with the Childhood Development Center, it was agreed last October to hold the obligation for another year, with the same ultimatum in effect — pursue the package or cancel it.

The original loan approval was for $7 million of a projected $12 million cost. With the recent stimulus funding, Causey noted that it was “quite possible” that USDA could provide the difference. The terms of the interim loan would make it highly unlikely that any payment would be due before 2012, similar to the SCC project.

“He is now willing to 100 percent finance that project,” said Moorefield.

Causey added a stipulation that county commissioners should decide their intentions — pursue or de-obligate the original $7 million loan — by Nov. 2.

The loan money needed would actually be about $11.8 million, with $200,000 in grant money to go toward the project, Sampson County Schools superintendent Dr. Ethan Lenker said. Construction costs have also steadily gone down since 2003, possibly as much as $1 million off the total project.

“It’s down $1 million at best, to about $11 million, but not $10 million,” said Lenker, noting the current construction cost of $134 per square foot, as opposed to the previous $150.

Anthony Vann, executive director for auxiliary services for Sampson County Schools, said those projections are based on today.

“Projections are that in the second quarter of 2010 that changes, with the possibility that it will rise again,” said Vann. He noted that operation expenses for the new CEP would increase over the school’s current expenses, however personnel cost would stay the same.

Commissioner Jefferson Strickland asked if design plans were ready for CEP.

“In October and November (of last year), the county commissioners pretty much told the architect to stop working,” Lenker replied. “We’re within a couple of months of finishing the drawings.”

Moorefield said the county has previously advanced $500,000 for architect fees. Vann said it would cost in the $35,000 to finish the design plans, with those funds to be reimbursed.

Doris Warren, chairwoman of the Sampson County Board of Education, said CEP needs to be first priority.

“Many people here tonight were present when the (first) facilities plan was drawn up,” said Warren. “Charles E. Perry was first. They got bumped down to third. These people deserve a school and I think it’s incumbent upon us to make sure they get one.”

“That’s the first priority,” McLamb responded. “I believe there’s a lot of other people that feel the same way. We will take it under advisement, think strongly about it and see what we come up with.”

Chris Berendt can be reached at 910-592-8137, ext. 121, or by email at sicrime@myclintonnc.com.
Comments
(5)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
SIStrumpet
|
October 14, 2009
LMAO....and travel that dirt two lane road called hwy 24? I doubt it. But again, Sampson County has just formed a committee to study BRAC expansion almost 5 yrs after it was announced.
FT BRAGG
|
October 14, 2009
You all might want to think about Charles E Perry. You can look for a growth spurt on that end of the county when the BRAC families start moving down this way from Ft Bragg.
anonymous
|
October 14, 2009
I totally agree with SIStrumpet. What's going on with Wright and Simpson? Can't they speak up for Roseboro @ all. It takes someone from another district to speak up for Roseboro. And Mr. Blanton and Strickland, you do have a voice, remember? My Goodness, you've spent enough on plans to have the school built already. Heck, I saw them 4 years ago. What more do you need. Don't wait on the powerball. I believe it's now or never. No wonder Roseboro is the laughing stock of the county. Got more representation on County and school board than anyone else, but can't seem to get anything done. Please Mrs. Warren and the rest of the board, help Roseboro out.
Goldjohn
|
October 14, 2009
Hmm i think this issue favor more on the Sampson County Board of Commissioners. I just hope that this canceled project can be mobilized on other form.

SIStrumpet
|
October 14, 2009
SSDD for CEP! Someone please help me understand why we have to have new plans drawn up. As many schools as Sampson County has built lately why can't the plans from one of the newer elementary schools be used? The county doesn't have funds to build a school yet we spent 1/2 mil on drawing a plan up. Am I missing something here? CEP parents, you will have to take drastic measures to accomplish this because your social status and importance is lacking. It's shameful you can't get anything accomplished with two commissioners in your backyard and a school board member as well. What exactly is Telfair's role in this? I see Mrs. Warren speaking up on behalf of CEP but have yet to read any quote by Telfair. He was elected in hopes of this district having some representation....maybe we all need to rethink our position here.
Weather
Sponsored By:

Lottery
Sponsored By:

Stocks
Sponsored By:

Gas Prices
Sponsored By:

Featured Businesses
Recipes
Sponsored By: