Oneida County: On the cusp of borrowing?

Oneida County has avoided long-term borrowing for capital improvement projects for a long time now, but those days may be coming to an end, and sooner rather than later, according to one supervisor.

The county’s executive committee last month preliminarily approved the 2026 capital improvement projects (CIP) budget, which includes a $3.6 million general fund transfer as well as a $490,000 general fund loan, and then started to look into the future at 2027 and 2028 proposed projects and estimated costs.

And that’s when they began to see debt floating around inside the Magic 8 Ball — or at the bottom of the spreadsheet, as the case may be.

That’s because the proposed general fund transfer for 2027 blew past $9.3 million and careened beyond $7.6 million for 2028. With the 2026 approved general fund transfer added, that could be problematic, finance director Tina Smigielski said.

“If it was approved as currently put together, the general fund transfers in total over the three years would be $20.7 million, which is more than we have available currently,” Smigielski said. “It doesn’t mean that we wouldn’t be able to build up to that, but that is more than we currently have available.”

Supervisor Rob Jensen said the handwriting was on the wall.

“I think what the spreadsheet shows us is that — we’re looking at 2027, 2028 — if we move forward on these projects, we’re going to be involved in some type of long-term borrowing, and I think it’s inevitable,” Jensen said. “We can’t assume the general fund is going to be there to fund that. Just at this point in the county, with what some of our big needs are, we may have to look at a way of funding capital improvement projects other than through the current process.”

Smigielski wanted to know if the committee wanted her to incorporate potential borrowing as part of the CIP — “a discussion … that the different ways to fund capital projects are pay-as-you-go fund balances, grants or donations, and then financing.”

The figures for 2027 and 2028 are not binding, Smigielski reminded the committee, but there could be a benefit to discussing other funding avenues.

“It does help, though, to map it out so you can look at it and go, ‘wow, that’s $21 million in general [fund], but we don’t have that,’” she said. “So I can add that as a discussion point in the capital improvement plan. I would suggest that the projects that would be the most appropriate for long-term financing would be infrastructure projects — roadway, bridge.”

Smigielski said construction-type projects, especially those that require local matches to secure federal Surface Transportation Program (STP) funding, are typically strong candidates for bonding. Second would be major facility improvements. Vehicles and IT purchases, by contrast, generally don’t meet the test because they depreciate quickly.

“So I’ll be more than happy to incorporate that into the plan,” she said. “You’ll have an opportunity to review that plan at our hearings in the first week of October. We can make amendments to the plan at that time.”

Committee chairman Billy Fried agreed that Smigielski’s suggestion was appropriate.

“We obviously have a lot to discuss,” Fried said. “If you have time to do that, that would be great. So I guess at this point we are noting that we’ve received the ‘27 and ‘28 projects that are on the radar. It does not mean we’re approving them. We’re acknowledging that they’ve been submitted for consideration in the future and we know they might be adjusted.”

Fried had one point he said he wanted to make.

“Last year we sat at the end and found that we had some money that we could finally do the window project,” he said. “I’m hoping maybe there’s a case where we look and say, ‘wow, is there something we can knock off this year that’s on the list for the next couple of years that would maybe save us money and do it while it’s affordable?’ So I guess that discussion still can happen because we have a list to look at.”

2026 projects approved

The executive committee has already given its preliminary blessing to the county’s 2026 CIP package, which includes a mix of facility and infrastructure projects. Among the approved priorities are federal/state highway construction and road rehab, a law enforcement center garage floor, patrol truck replacements (right now to be paid with a general fund loan), and various technology upgrades and projects in the neighborhood of $1 million. 

The real sticker shock comes in the following years. Projected highway facility spending in 2027 is expected to top $5.7 million. Those projects include, among other things, a facility light upgrade ($525,000); parking lot paving ($625,000); second floor renovation ($200,000); security cameras ($150,000); a shop drain upgrade ($675,000); window replacements ($385,000). Major highway resurfacing and reconstruction would cost more than $2 million. 

By 2028, the focus shifts to even bigger-ticket items. On that list is a new highway repair shop renovation of nearly $3.4 million and bridge projects of more than $2.2 million. Of the nearly $7.7 million estimated price tag for the year, highway facility spending would gobble up $3.4 million.

Bonding and debt is something the county has strenuously tried to avoid — and it may well yet again — since it levied an immense sum for the 1999 Oneida County Law Enforcement Center, and kept the debt service levy on the tax roll after the debt was paid.

However,  though Oneida County has been shy since that fiscal fiasco, borrowing for capital projects is hardly unusual in Wisconsin county government. Dane County regularly issues general obligation bonds, financing courthouse upgrades, park facilities, and transportation infrastructure, while other counties have used long-term debt to build new jails, nursing homes, and roads.

More counties may join the bonding bandwagon, especially because interest rates, while higher today than in the ultra-low 2010s, remain historically modest compared to the inflationary 1980s.

Richard Moore is the author of “Dark State” and may be reached at richardd3d.substack.com.