NATCHEZ — Some Adams County supervisors said using county funds to make up for the Natchez-Adams School District’s tax increase isn’t the county’s responsibility.

“Every year, they’re going to pass an increase that we make cuts on,” District 1 Mike Lazarus said.

Others thought the board should do what it can to make sure taxpayers aren’t paying more taxes, period.

“It’s still an increase, and I’m not for paying any more taxes,” District 5 Supervisor S.E. “Spanky” Felter said.

The supervisors all eventually agreed at Tuesday’s budget meeting to keep tax rates the same as last year by absorbing the school’s increase through further cuts to the county’s budget.

Even though the school district is asking local taxpayers in the 2011-2012 fiscal year for the same amount of money they received the current fiscal year — $11,121,570 — funding that amount will require a tax increase of 0.58 mills since the value of a mill decreased this year.

The value of a 0.58 increase in school mills equals an approximately $12 increase on a $100,000 house.

The discussion began after supervisors learned they would, for now, have to include more than $500,000 in the budget for a payment toward a bond taken out for this year’s asphalt overlay project.

Chancery Clerk Tommy O’Beirne said the county’s financial advisors are trying to refinance the bond from five-year to 10-year payments. But the county’s advisor, Demery Grubbs of Government Consultants in Jackson, reportedly said he would not know if refinancing is possible until the Trustmark Bank loan committee approves it.

O’Beirne said Grubbs told him he thought the committee would probably approve the refinancing, but suggested the board budget the payment using the worst-case scenario of approximately $522,000.

O’Beirne said the county can alter the budget if the status of refinancing changes before the Sept. 15 deadline to adopt the budget.

“The best scenario is if we adjust the budget and then have a windfall of $200,000,” Watts said.

In order to make up the deficit to include the larger payment in the budget, the county had to make cuts.

Felter suggested cutting from the Emergency Watershed Project budget, which had more than $700,000.

Less than half of the EWP budget included county funds. Most of it the EWP included grant funds the county expects to receive from the Natural Resources Conservation Service under the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

The county has approximately seven EWP projects approved, but contracts have not been signed on any of them.

EWP projects address emergency watershed issues, including runoff retardation and soil erosion prevention to safeguard lives and property from floods.

“EWP seems to be a more logical (fund to cut) because I don’t think we’ll do all of them this year,” District 3 Supervisor Thomas “Boo” Campbell said.

Campbell said even if the economic climate does allow NRCS to fund all of the projects, he doubts construction will be completed on all of them by the end of fiscal year 2011-2012.

Watts agreed that EWP was the best fund to cut because the projects would likely not all be completed.

“I don’t have a problem with (the idea), Boo, but I hate that we have to…make up the difference to the schools,” Grennell said. “(Funding the school’s increase) puts us in a bind.”

Lazarus said the board also made cuts last year to absorb the school’s increase.

Grennell said the bond rating would be affected if the county keeps trying to “close holes” in the budget using county funds.

The board passed a unanimous motion to allow O’Beirne to publish an advertisement in Thursday’s newspaper, notifying taxpayers of a zero-tax increase across the board.

The board will meet for a public hearing on the budget Sept. 8 before adopting the budget Sept. 15.