JEFFERSON CITY -- State Budget Director Mark Ward said Friday that projects funded by a proposed $250 million bond issue will be constructed as soon as planning and design work is complete.

"All projects can proceed as fast as they can go," said Ward. "We will issue bonds on a cash-as-needed basis."

That is good news for Southeast Missouri State University, which has $12.3 million allocated in the proposed bond issue for a new College of Business Building on campus. Most planning and design work is already completed for the project, and more than $2 million has been raised in private gifts for the local share.

Voters will decide Aug. 2 whether to authorize sale of the bonds, which would provide $134.2 million for 21 projects at state colleges and universities, and another $115.8 million for prisons and other correctional facilities.

Legislators earlier this year approved legislation sending the bond plan to voters, which includes appropriations of the funds for specific projects.

"We have done that intentionally so when voters go to the polls they know what they will get," said Roy Temple, deputy chief of staff to Gov. Mel Carnahan. "The appropriation has already passed, so if the bond issue passes, Southeast gets its business building."

Added Ward: "The projects have been appropriated so the General Assembly has told us, `we want to do those projects.' I don't anticipate having to slow one down to make room for another, so they should all be able to proceed on their own schedules."

Ward explained that in the Fiscal 1995 state budget, the legislature has authorized the issuance of up to $75 million in bonds. Money is appropriated in the public debt portion of the budget to cover debt service on $75 million after the first of the year.

Ward said projects will not have to compete for funds because bonds will be issued as needed and some projects are further along in the design process than others.

"To design and construct all these projects will take at least three years, so it might take us three years to issue all the bonds," Ward said.

"Everybody will get what they need. We did a pretty conservative estimate that $75 million will be enough to cover the cash we need right away. We won't have to tell one project to slow down to make room for another.

"The prisons will still be in the design phase by then, so there won't be a big draw on money for the prisons right away."

Ward said the state will be paying for construction expenses as they are incurred.

It takes a simple majority from voters to approve the bond issue plan.

The new business building at Southeast would be constructed near the corner of Henderson and New Madrid. University officials have said if the bond issue passes, construction would likely begin by next spring.

One cloud hanging over the proposal is the proposed Hancock II Amendment to the state constitution, currently the subject of a petition drive seeking sufficient signatures to be placed on the November ballot.

Currently, supporters of a stronger version of the original amendment named for Southwest Missouri U.S. Rep. Mel Hancock, R-Springfield, are circulating petitions. Petitions must be turned in by next Friday, and it may be early September before the secretary of state's office determines whether there are enough valid signatures to put the amendment before voters Nov. 8.

"The two things do not go together well," said Ward. "Issuing $250 million in bonds is problematic if Hancock II passes. There would also be a mixed message by voters if they approved the bond issue and then Hancock II."

Ward said the impact of the amendment on the state's ability to issue bonds is unclear. "There are a lot of unanswered questions with Hancock II and that is one of them," Ward said.

Under Hancock I, Ward said the sale of bonds would not be included as state revenues. But because of flawed wording in the Hancock II proposal's definitions, Ward said it is possible bond money would be included.

Alex Bartlett, a Jefferson City attorney who helped draft the original Hancock Amendment, was in Cape Girardeau Thursday to discuss an analysis he had done of Hancock II. Bartlett said his opinion is that revenues from the sale of bonds would have to be included in total state revenues, which could lead to triggering massive refunds from general revenue to state taxpayers.