Commissioner criticizes absence of roadway in $45M Guthrie school bond proposal

District 2 County Commissioner Charlie Meadows expressed frustration that a roadway to ease traffic congestion near Charter Oak Elementary was not included in the upcoming $45 million bond issue for Guthrie Public Schools. At the same time, Superintendent Dr. Mike Simpson suggested that the matter may not have been a priority for Meadows.

At a town hall forum on August 12, Commissioner Meadows discussed his re-election campaign and fielded questions from the public, including concerns about traffic around Charter Oak Elementary, located north of the intersection of Charter Oak and Douglas Blvd. A citizen described the school’s afternoon pick-up line as a “safety hazard” due to its extension onto Douglas Blvd. The citizen also inquired about the potential for school-owned land (north of the school) to create a secondary roadway to alleviate the traffic issue.

Meadows responded, “I’m disgusted to say he (Simpson) didn’t commit $300,000 to pave that road.” In a social media post, Meadows added, “It is very disappointing.”

During a school bond forum hosted by the Guthrie Chamber of Commerce on Tuesday evening, Simpson addressed similar traffic concerns at Charter Oak by citizens. Simpson, who had watched Meadows’ town hall, noted that he, Meadows, and Sheriff Damon Devereaux had met in July 2023 to discuss traffic around the school. However, Simpson added that no further discussions had taken place between him and Meadows.

Simpson informed attendees on Tuesday that he had sent a letter to Meadows addressing the concerns. Through an Open Records request, Guthrie News Page obtained the letter, which was also forwarded to the other two commissioners. In the letter, Simpson challenged Meadows’ claim about the cost of paving a road that currently does not exist, noting that Crossland Construction, the contractor for Charter Oak and Cotteral Elementary, provided an itemized budget of nearly $1.2 million to build the road.

Meadows told his town hall audience that he knows voters who will oppose the school bond due to the roadway issue, citing the same social media post.

“I know some people who will vote against that school bond and say, ‘Come back in six months or eight months, or however long it is, and make sure you include the money to pave that road,’” Meadows said. “The truth is interest rates are starting to head down. They are very high right now. Six to eight months from now, you might save so much in interest rates that you can pave that road just out of savings.”

Simpson countered, “If this issue is approved, the earliest we could sell the bonds is projected to be April 2025. If your projections are correct, we will have lower interest rates, which will give the community more bang for their buck on this bond issue.”

The citizen who addressed Meadows remarked, “That’s a message that needs to get out,” to which Meadows refrained from directly opposing the bond election.

“I am not the messenger there other than right here tonight,” Meadows concluded. “I can’t advocate, I can’t get aggressive.”

Ownership of Road?

During the town hall meeting, a citizen asked Commissioner Meadows, “I believe it’s supposed to be the school’s responsibility [for the road], but can we make it a county responsibility?”

Meadows responded, “No, ma’am, we cannot make it a county (responsibility.)”

However, according to a school attorney, the school district could convey the property to the county, which would then allow the county to construct a public road on the school’s land. If the road were to be built and remain a private road owned by the school, law enforcement, such as the Logan County Sheriff’s Office, would not have jurisdiction to enforce traffic laws.

In a letter, dated Aug. 19, attorney Eric P. Nelson stated that the school district and the county could collaborate on paving the land as a private drive, with the county providing labor and equipment while the school supplies the materials. Attorney John David Weidmann II further confirmed in an email, also dated on Aug. 19, to school officials that bond dollars could be used for “repairs, renovations, and improvements” to sites.

Nelson also noted that multiple Attorney General opinions have concluded that a school district may not expend funds to pay for the improvement of municipal or county infrastructure.