Home › News › Northeast Georgia
Hart County commission approves run-off election funding
Run-off elections cannot be anticipated, so they are never part of Hart County’s annual budget, County Administrator Jon Caime said Tuesday.
The county registrar’s office requested at a meeting of county commissioners Tuesday night additional funding of $6,137.97, the amount it is expected to cost to pay for an election that resulted in a run-off and the cost of the run-off voting itself.
In addition, the Hart County Board of Assessors, the office that was the subject of a state investigation several years ago that resulted remapping and revaluation of all property in Hart County, had a contract ready Tuesday for commissioners to sign designating a company to conduct the revaluation.
After discussion and agreement by all commissioners, the contract was not signed and approved. County Attorney Walter Gordon had an opportunity to review the final document before the meeting Tuesday, but none of the commissioners had.
A meeting that had been scheduled to take place Thursday as budget workshop was changed by a vote Tuesday to be a regular meeting so commissioners would have two days to read the recently received document before voting. Commissioners only can take a vote in an official, regular meeting, not a budget work session. The meeting is scheduled to start at 5:30 p.m. at the county administrative building.
Gordon also advised commissioners Tuesday on the status of work by the county’s water and sewer authority. The authority is in the process of drafting a master plan for the county’s water provision services in the future, Gordon said.
Gordon also was charged by the commissioners to create a draft himself of a potential county business license, something that does not exist now in Hart County.
Comments
There is 1 response to this article.
Comments are meant to offer our readers a forum for thoughtful, robust debate about local issues.
Comments are moderated, but you may find the content of the conversations offensive, objectionable or factually disputable.


IndependentMail.com does not necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post or respond to every suggestion for a comment to be removed.
Before you post, consider this:
Please read our official user-contributions policy.
Kudos to the BOC for not rubber stamping this critical document. They should be commended for wanting to review the contract.
(Requires free registration.)