STARK COUNTY, ND — Stark County commissioners have proposed a $3 million proposal to establish a special fund to support infrastructure projects in small cities within the county.
The Stark County Small Cities Infrastructure Proposal aims to allocate the funds over three consecutive years, beginning on Jan. 1, 2025, and concluding by the end of 2027.
The funding targets essential infrastructure improvements, specifically water, sewer, and road projects—areas that small municipalities often
to finance independently.
Under the proposal, the county will match the contributions of small cities towards their infrastructure projects. This match will be equivalent to the pro-rata share of the special fund allocated to each town based on its population size, ensuring equitable distribution of resources.
James B. Miller / The Dickinson Press
The proposal outlines specific funding amounts each city will receive annually based on their pro-rata share:
- Belfield: $385,598.14 annually, totaling $1,156,794.43 over three years.
- Richardton: $267,905.54 annually, totaling $803,716.61 over three years.
- Taylor: $89,043.75 annually, totaling $267,131.24 over three years.
- Gladstone: $104,916.76 annually, totaling $314,750.29 over three years.
- South Heart: $152,535.81 annually, totaling $457,607.43 over three years.
During the discussion, commissioners expressed diverse views on the proposal. Commissioner Cory White, the lone dissenting vote, expressed his reservations, stating, “I’m not a fan of special funds.” White voiced concerns that this initiative could undermine the general fund’s stability.
Conversely, Commissioner Neal Messer underscored the critical need to support smaller communities, particularly in the aftermath of the pandemic. He emphasized the broader implications for the county: “If we don’t keep our small communities alive, that’ll just drag on [the County] and on Dickinson as well.”
Commissioners expressed concerns about the potential impact of the upcoming property tax measure on the county’s finances, should it pass in the November election. This measure is expected to be a pivotal issue in the coming months.
The board expressed a willingness to consider additional criteria, recognizing that the current proposal is not final and stressing the importance of ensuring that the proposal addresses both quality of life and safety in the decision-making process.
Cities like Belfield are an example of how the funds could be used. They recently approved a
increase to boost public safety, highlighting smaller cities’ challenges. Belfield proposed the tax increase to help cover shortages in several city funds, including those for capital improvements, water, sewer, garbage collection, and waterline replacement, all of which are currently in deficit.
