• HofH-Help-Wanted-Banner
  • HofH-Help-Wanted-Banner1-5
  • HofH-Help-Wanted-Banner2
  • HofH-Help-Wanted-Banner3
  • HofH-Help-Wanted-Banner4
  • HofH-Help-Wanted-Banner5
  • HofH-Help-Wanted-Banner6
  • HofH-Help-Wanted-Banner7

$4.5M bond proposed to fix local streets

Members of the city council and other city officials listened to a presentation from City Manager Jim Crosby on Jan. 30 concerning his proposal for a $4.5 million bond to repair local streets. (Ben Felder)

The city has long complained that a lack of funding and equipment has made keeping up Piedmont’s crumbling roads an impossible task but City Manager Jim Crosby has asked the city council to consider a bond to make some significant progress in street upkeep and repair.

During a council workshop Monday night, Crosby presented a bond proposal worth $4.5 million and said the bond could be brought before voters as early as August – pending council approval.

“Roads have been at the top of the list of what people want,” Crosby said. “We (currently) have absolutely no equipment to go out and fix roads.”

The bond proposal includes money for new road paving equipment, repaving portions or 164th St. and Edmond Road, and performing road repairs on over 10 miles of other roads in Piedmont.

Projected millage rates to pay for the proposed 20-year general obligation bond would cost a property valued at $100,000 an annual rate of $126.72 the first year, decreasing for the next 20 years to a final rate of $35.49, according to projections presented to the council. For a complete list of projected rates click on the “Bond Rates” link below.

Monday’s workshop meeting did not include any votes by the council and provided city leaders and those in the public an opportunity to hear about various issues, including the bond proposal. Council members did not offer any specific comment on the bond proposal but appeared receptive to studying the issue further.

Crosby said there were other issues the city could address with a bond but believed roads were the best place to start. He said it would offer the best chance to show results to the public and build trust with voters.

“We need to show the people, first of all, we are going to get out there and accomplish something,” Crosby said.

Items listed on the $4.5 million bond proposal include:

  • New motor grader ($275,000)
  • A 10,000 sq. ft. building for storing road paving equipment ($850,000)
  • A front axle and duel rear axle dump truck ($115,000)
  • Smooth bore roller ($30,000)
  • Paving 164th Street between Cemetery Road and Piedmont Road ($600,000)
  • Paving Edmond Road between Cemetery Road and Piedmont Road ($600,000)
  • Oil and chip gravel repairs on approximately 10 miles of roads throughout Piedmont ($2,030,000)

Bond Rates


  1. JT says:

    I applaud the city manager for his leadership on this issue. Funny how it seems everyone running for city council in my ward said they wanted to fix the streets, but I never heard them talk about it once they were elected.

    However I would hope they do not go forward with the oil and chip repairs. The majority of the section line roads in Piedmont are oil and chip. It’s fairly obvious that they have failed. It is only a seal over the road sub-grade, i.e. it isn’t structural. Most of the roads in town have major sub-grade failures and smoothing it over and covering it with oil and chips will do nothing to solve this problem. You would get much longer lasting results fixing the subgrade and using a few inches of asphalt. Obviously the amount of roads you could fix would be less.

    Also, there should be some type of ranking system set up for the streets. That way the repairs could be done on a needs basis and not a political basis.

  2. Mary says:

    The first thing we need to do is save face and honor our contract with Williams Grocery store. It’s funny how they didn’t want Bonds for the grocery store, but now they want them for the roads. I agree with you JT, the oil and chip has failed and is a temporary fix. Curbing would help keep the edges from breaking off. We also need to make sure the roads are higher than the ditches. Mike Fina and Ron Cardwell had wonderful ideas on how to fix the roads, but during last years campaign, the mayor said that would only be more government and was against their ideas. Why has she changed her mind? Is there anyway to get grants or government funding for the road???

  3. al ridgely says:

    Finnally acity manager who knows what the people need and is going to do something about it,I hope that the leaders of our town listen to a man who has the know how and experience to get the job done,I for one still want to know what has happened to the money that has been collected for years for DRAINAGE,since there is no drainage fund last I was told,who is responible for the mis-use of the money,is it every mayor,city manager and city treasurer since it started?,and where is the money?,we have a right to know,As it has been said the number one issue in this town has been roads every since I moved here 25 years ago,yet NO ONE has done a thing to move forward in this,If we do roads let’s make sure that they are done right and hold the contractors that do them responible for a good job,Jim I hope they listen to you.

    • Sue James says:

      I think all the answers about the money lie with the PREVIOUS city manager and council.
      Did you know that the tax money collected from Williams was to be put in a separate fund? The tax money for the fire department was to be put in a separate fund as well. Well guess what, the money was put in the general fund by Clark and spent. That is why he always said “we have plenty of money”, when we are just getting by. The previous administration was taking money out of our road fund every year to pay OKC for our water because it cost Piedmont more than they collected. Now we have the situation with the new Police Department because he didn’t take the time to do it right. And people wonder, why was the city manager fired. WOW This is just a small sample of the reasons.

  4. Bob says:

    How about instead of paving Edmond road West to Cemetery Road and 164th from Piedmont road West to Cemetery, pave Stout Dr / 7th Street from 164th to Edmond road. Also you could pave 164th from Sara road to County line road. There are more roads with greater needs North of town, than what is proposed in the initial two asphalt paving recommendations of Edmond rd and 164th West of Piedmont rd. I am pretty sure that everybody is willing to pay to issue a GOB bond to help pay for roads, but you need to listen to the population as a whole to prioritize which roads get fixed and not a developer, helping him and his new housing development.

    What about the $850,000 barn! Who’s pockets is getting lined with that money? Give me the contract and I will make a $600,000 profit or MORE!

    • JT says:

      Bob I agree! A 10,000 sf barn? That’s huge! A standard size machine shed that a farmer might build is only 60’x40′ or 2400 sf. What in the world are they planning on storing in that thing? As far as Edmond Road is concerned, no one lives on it past the water tower. Why fix a half a mile of street that goes no where. I also agree on 164th street. 164th from Sarah to County Line is a joke as is Sarah road north of Edmond Road. 164th is a well traveled road going, it should be one of the top priorities. This is why there should be some kind of a ranking system based on average daily traffic (ADT) and the condition of the pavement. The roads that receive the most traffic should be repaired first.

  5. Darrel Booth says:

    As a member of the “old geezers” that convene each morning Monday through Saturday at Hubbards Ranch Supply let me say that several of you would fit right in. Sue, Bob JT and to some degree Al you make some good points. Before Piedmont electorates are asked to vote on raising taxes there should/must be a clear responsible approach laying out why, what,when and how this money is to be spent. What are the plans for the 2million besides “fixing roads”?
    Why is the 10k sq.ft. building necessary at a cost of $850000 which factors out to $85 per sq.ft.? Beside the schools being located on 164th and Edmond Rd what are the other reasons to justify 1.2 million for 2 miles of paved road and what is the intended design. There will be those who object to Edmond Rd simply because of their hate toward a certain developer who is planning to develope 80 acres west of 7th street. As you can see, it is my opinion that if you people are as concerned as you seem to be you will pursue your efforts to see this through to the end. Just my opinion and thank God I live in a country that gives me the right, at least for now.

  6. John M Simpson says:

    Since the “developer”(in this case phil boevers)according to judy richards; planning commission member who was so kind in quoting some city ordinances on another thread, the developer in this case will have to cough up $150,000 dollars to upgrade the portion of edmond road to the middle of the road to improve the road to the new street standards, so we can now reduce the bond request by that amount of $150,000 dollars or stake it for sara or 164th or county line roads which help many more citizens who travel down those roads. The taxpayers can thank me later for saving them 150k.

    • Sue James says:

      Why should we thank you for anything? You ran Bill Sharp out of office, you were given how many water taps at no cost to you by the previous administration, and costing the city probably $150,000 to defend themselves in frivolous lawsuits.

© 2012-2017 piedmontnewsonline.com All Rights Reserved