Robert Reynolds and Billy Blann attended the Quorum Court meeting Thursday to clear up confusion and answer questions concerning the Rock Island Greenway.
At the March 15 Quorum Court meeting, Blann presented a proposal concerning a bike and running trail from El Dorado to Ruston, Louisiana, called the Rock Island Greenway.
Blann said the total cost for a feasibility study from Crafton Tull and Associates would be $32,000. The city of Ruston agreed to pay half of that, and individuals agreed to pay $6,000, leaving $10,000 to complete the study.
At the March meeting, the JPs agreed that if the city raised $5,000, the county would provide the other $5,000.
On April 12, the El Dorado Works Board voted to approve the $5,000 to cover the city’s portion of the cost for the feasibility plan.
Later that month, the Quorum Court voted 4-to-3, with two abstentions, to rescind the $5,000 because of “unanswered questions.”
On Thursday, Reynolds and Blann returned to Quorum Court to answer any questions and go over the Rock Island Greenway plan with the court.
“We’re at the very beginning of this,” Blann said. “We’re trying to get into Phase I, which is the feasibility study.”
Blann said they needed everyone’s support to be on board with the plan, which is “why I’m here today.”
Justice Johnny Burson said the El Dorado Works tax is “strictly for stuff like this … Why don’t they cover this?”
Burson added that he thinks that El Dorado Works is the “umbrella where this needs to come from, not the county.”
“I think the one thing that we’ve all missed is that with the participation from the county, any further monies from grants or (other things) will be looked at more favorably if we’re all in this together,” said County Judge Mike Loftin.
Justice Cliff Preston added, “It would be safe to say that it’s not about where the money is coming from necessarily … It’s more about the county putting skin in the game and the project, just supporting it.”
Justice Carolyn Jones said she thought since the $5,000 from the city was coming out of El Dorado Works, that the other $5,000 should be split between the city and the county, making it $2,500 each.
To which Justice Cecil Polk said, “I can also see the negativism here as far as splitting 50-50.”
Blann said they were asking for support for the project because they believed the county would at least get its money’s worth from it, and then some.
“We just think that this $5,000 that we’re asking for is going to be pyramided many times over and this will get us off the ground and running,” Blann added.
The Quorum Court voted 8-2 to approve the ordinance and the $5,000 contribution, with Burson and Justice Ross Burton voting against the motion. Justice Benny Vestal was not present at Thursday’s meeting.
Burson said he felt that the money should come from the El Dorado Works tax, and Burton agreed.
Jones said she “reluctantly” voted to approve the ordinance to show support.
“I think it’s important that we support it as a county, even though I don’t think we should have paid more than half of the $5,000, but I thought it was more important that we support it,” Jones said. “That’s why I said ‘reluctantly.’”
Justice Justin Hendrix said he voted in favor of the project because “it’s important for the county to be supportive of any project having to do with south Arkansas, north Louisiana or any major project.”
“Especially for showing support for future grants and for success of the entire project … It’s important for everybody to be involved,” Hendrix added.
In other business, the Quorum Court tabled a proposed ordinance presented by Burton “to provide protection from dangerous/vicious dogs.”
Burton said that a couple of weeks ago Union County Animal Control Officer Charles Hartsell, who was present at Thursday’s meeting, contacted him about a blue heeler that attacked a 6-year-old and caused $3,700 in hospital bills.
After attempting to take the incident to court, Hartsell said the judge, prosecutor and the defense attorney ruled that the dog wasn’t already declared dangerous and vicious, therefore they couldn’t see any criminal intent and dismissed the case.
After looking over the proposed ordinance, prosecuting attorney John Thomas Shepherd said the ordinance could be rewritten to be made more clear because of the way it could be interpreted by different judges.
Judge Jack Barker, who was also in attendance, suggested tightening up the four-page proposed ordinance before approving it.
The Quorum Court ultimately agreed to revisit the ordinance next month after making revisions.
Kaitlyn Rigdon can be reached at 870-862-6611 or [email protected].