Surely Not THAT Despicable Word…
PROTECTED CONTENT
If you’re a current subscriber, log in below. If you would like to subscribe, please click the subscribe tab above.
Username and Password Help
Please enter your email and we will send you a password reset link.
DAVE’S WORLD
By David Howell
It’s almost a profane word here in Yalobusha County – dare I utter it. Let’s go back a decade, when the system of government the county operates under was the subject of heated discussion. An election was scheduled in November 2015, and voters would decide if they wanted to require the county to operate under the countywide system of road administration, commonly called a unit system, or keep the same form of government, commonly called a beat system.
The vote was triggered by a petition presented to the Board of Supervisors, with over 15 percent of the county’s qualified voters signing it to request a referendum on the county’s system of government. When the ballots were counted, the change failed, with 1,971 voting against moving to the unit system and 1,361 in favor.
That despicable word, or words I should say, is “unit system,” and it can stir strong feelings.
For clarity, I should stop and explain both systems. In the unit system, maintenance for the county’s roads and bridges is overseen by a county road manager, hired by the Board of Supervisors. The unit system abolishes the county’s five road districts, and maintenance is managed based on the needs of the entire county. All existing real and personal property from each of the five beats becomes the property of the countywide system. The authority over the daily workings of the roads falls under the road manager, not each individual supervisor.
The road manager is responsible for purchasing materials, equipment, and supplies for his department, and he or she also has the authority to hire and fire road department employees. Supervisors continue to adopt general policies to be followed by the administration of the county road department, including a four-year road plan for the construction and maintenance of county roads and bridges.
The unit system also requires counties to hire a county administrator, who could be the chancery clerk or another qualified person with knowledge of work projection, budget planning, accounting, purchasing, cost control, or personnel management. The administrator, under policies determined by the board, administers all county affairs falling under the control of the board and carries out the board’s general policies.
The beat system, by contrast, puts each supervisor in charge of his or her own district, or beat, when it comes to road construction, maintenance, and other local services. Each supervisor essentially acts like a road commissioner for their beat, hiring workers, purchasing equipment, and managing the day-to-day upkeep of roads and bridges in that area. Each beat has its own road crews, trucks, and graders, often housed in separate county barns. Supervisors make many decisions independently, with limited central oversight. Funding is allocated by beat, and supervisors have wide discretion over how it is spent within their district.
Like many others, I have always tended to agree that in a rural county a beat system of government seems to be the best fit. It costs taxpayer money to hire a road manager and a county administrator and each supervisor has a strong connection with their constituents.
But things have changed in the last decade. Most notably, the county has a new revenue stream earmarked for roads and bridges – a revenue stream called the use tax. Mississippi’s use tax is a companion to the state sales tax and applies when goods are purchased outside of Mississippi, or from an out-of-state seller, and brought into the state for use, storage, or consumption. The rate is the same as the state sales tax, 7 percent, and it ensures that in-state and out-of-state purchases are treated fairly.
The state uses a formula to distribute use tax collections to municipalities and counties for road and bridge work, and that allocation has grown to a sizable chunk. Yalobusha County receives two checks a year from the Mississippi Department of Revenue, one in January and the other in July. This revenue stream began in 2020, when the county received $167,184.52 that first year as it was phased in.
In 2025, the county has received an astounding $1,335,060.06. That is huge. In fact, the county’s own road and bridge tax levy for the upcoming fiscal year is $1,124,335, which means the use tax now contributes more to the road and bridge budget than local taxpayers pay when buying a car tag or paying property taxes. Think about that: five years ago this revenue didn’t even exist, and now it has surpassed local taxes as the largest source of money for road and bridge work. That is what has changed in the last decade, and now we are talking about a nice chunk of change that can start making a real difference in road improvements.
A few other issues got me to thinking about this. With a road manager, there would be more uniformity across the county in the quality of work. Under the beat system, the quality hinges on the knowledge of each individual supervisor and their respective crews. And to be frank, there are discrepancies at times from one beat to another.
Another interesting fact is that the use tax is divided evenly among each of the county’s beats. That means in 2025 each beat will receive $267,012.01. But the road miles vary drastically by beat. In District One there are 100.11 miles of county roads, paved and gravel. District Two has 51.06 miles, District Three has 103.82, District Four has 102.61, and District Five has 157.68. That’s quite a range. And making it even more interesting is the fact that district lines haven’t changed in the 21 years I’ve covered the news in this county, because there has not been redistricting.
My final point, and what really triggered this whole thought process, was something that happened earlier this month in a supervisors meeting. The board heard a pitch from a sales rep for the potential purchase of two dump trucks. A bid notice followed in the Herald, as District Two Supervisor Kenny Rogers is considering purchasing two new single-axle dump trucks. The trucks will be bid out in accordance with state law, but the price mentioned in the board meeting was upwards of $160,000 per truck, or well over $300,000. If purchased, this would be the largest equipment purchase, dollar-wise, that I can recall in the last two decades. Inflation aside, the price seems extraordinarily high, and making matters murkier are bid specifications that appear favorable to one particular brand. That means taxpayers may not get the best bid or the best buy.
To be fair, District Two likely needs replacement trucks, and Rogers’ district has the largest reserves of the county’s five districts. And he has a limited time to spend his portion of the use tax revenue or the future Use Tax allocations to the county will be reduced.
But think about it. How much equipment is duplicated across the county when there are five different barns and five different supervisors operating independently? How many road graders, dump trucks, tractors, and bush hogs are bought and maintained this way? With use tax dollars now such a major piece of the road budget, are we really getting the best bang for those bucks?
