The city board approved the allotment ofpaving funds Tuesday during a contentious meeting marked by threatsof court action and accusations of dishonesty.

    As approved, allotments by ward are as follows: Ward One, $80,955;Ward Two, $62,508; Ward Three, $74,935; Ward Four, $114,450; WardFive, $62,500; Ward Six, $73,335.

    Ward Five Alderman D.W. Maxwell objected to what he described asunfair and disproportionate funding to Ward Four. He began to readthe allocations out loud and stopped when he reached Ward Four.

    “Are we going to have to take this thing to court?” Maxwellsaid.

    Ward Four Alderman Shirley Estes, visibly agitated, said she wouldnot accept a reduction in her allocation.

    “I am not in the mode right now to give up what has been given tome,” Estes said.

    The paving budget of $500,000 was divided eight ways among the cityboard in previous meetings.

    Bumgarner had vetoed a 4-3 decision to evenly split the money toeach ward alderman. The eight-way split allowed Mayor Les Bumgarnerand Alderman at Large Karen Sullivan to divide their shares amongthe wards as they wished.

    Maxwell and Ward Two Alderman Terry Bates reiterated their desirefor the budget to be split evenly among the six wards. They bothstated that previous mayors had tried hard to evenly spread moneythrough the city.

    At one point, Bates questioned the motivations of the mayor.

    “One ward gets almost $115,00, and you live in that ward,” Batessaid to Bumgarner. “Be honest, Mayor.”

    Estes stated that in a prior division of paving money she wasfourth on the list but did not complain about it.

    Bumgarner added to Estes’ point, explaining that in previous yearshe had not given any of his paving allotment to Ward Four.

    “We’ve had some people here more interested in taking my share awaythan in asking me for help,” Bumgarner said. “This board voted 4-3to take my money away. That was a slap in the face. Shirley got themoney because she asked. No one else did.”

    A motion initiated by Ward Six Alderman David Phillips to approvethe allotments eventually passed by a 5-2 vote, with Maxwell andBates voting in opposition.

    The motion included the provision that Maxwell and the public worksdirector will collaborate to revise Maxwell’s list of pavingrequests. He submitted to the board $107,895 in projects, far inexcess of his allotment.

    “That’s just the total amount of work I need, and I wanted theboard to know that,” Maxwell explained after the meeting. “All Ireally want is about $80,000.”

    The board also discussed the ongoing task of providing city waterand sewer services to annexed areas. According to the board, allthe annexed areas that remain without city water could be servicedfor $40 million.

    “That’s almost the entire worth of the city’s assets,” Phillipssaid.

    At present, no funding exists for immediate continuation of theproject, and progress will depend on new funding.

    The board agreed a work session would be soon required to makeplans for the project.