A judge ruled for the county and objectors appealed to the Supreme Court. Because the argument by those objecting to the $3.2 million portion of the bond issue was essentially the same as the argument against issuing the remaining $10.8 million, attorneys agreed to let the Supreme Court ruling, once issued, stand for both cases. The bond issue will fund recreational projects and improvements to the county courthouse, although it contains language that it could also fund roads and fire protection projects.