Rusty Greene wanted to discuss the city’s pending annexation plan at the Tuesday evening council meeting in the Municipal Complex.
The majority of his colleagues said no, with some demanding the subject not come up again.
Before the council approved the official agenda at the beginning of Tuesday’s meeting, Greene, who represents Ward 3, moved to add the annexation discussion to the policy agenda — common practice when something a council member wants to discuss is not included on the agenda draft.
Greene told The Dispatch after the meeting he was hoping the council would reconsider going through with the annexation plan, as the city has already spent almost $30,000 on the effort since it passed in March and faces a legal challenge that will go before a chancery judge in July.
“We’ve already spent some money, but we haven’t even gotten to the lawyers yet,” he said. “We’re about to spend some real money.”
However, Ward 1 Councilwoman Ethel Stewart offered a substitute motion to “keep the agenda as it is,” citing the council addressing annexation at several previous meetings.
At first, it appeared Stewart’s substitute motion would fail, with Ward 4’s Pierre Beard seeming to vote along with Greene and Ward 6 Councilwoman Jacqueline DiCicco in favor of discussing annexation. That would have deadlocked the vote and left it to Mayor Keith Gaskin to decide. But after Beard asked for clarification on the motion and Gaskin called for another show of hands, Beard reluctantly voted in favor of quashing it.
“There’s been a lot of figures that have been thrown out and I have yet to see these figures,” Beard said “… Once I’m basically able to see these numbers for myself and get with (Chief Financial Officer Jim Brigham), then I don’t have a problem discussing what anybody up here wants to discuss.”
Greene told Beard those figures, including the costs the city has incurred since approving the annexation plan, were part of what he planned to address Tuesday.
“Well, you know I like to look at stuff before …,” Beard said.
Gaskin, cutting Beard off, said, “We’ll get it to you.”
Vice Mayor Joseph Mickens, who represents Ward 2, then asked City Attorney Jeff Turnage if he could offer a legal opinion, even an Attorney General’s opinion, on if there is a limit to the council discussing the same matter.
“I’m getting sick and tired of this … coming up,” Mickens said. “I know when the mayor vetoes something, he has five days to do so. I want to know … since the council has approved to go forward (with annexation), how many times can you address it?”
Turnage agreed to look into it, but he told The Dispatch after the meeting he isn’t aware of such a limit.
Greene, for his part, wanted to know if he could ever get it on the agenda. Gaskin said he could try to include it on the draft before the next meeting or bring it up at a council work session.
“When a councilman wanted to add something to the agenda I’ve never seen it objected,” Gaskin said.
Counting the costs
A 4-2 council vote in March moved forward a plan to annex two areas south and east of the city.
The first of the two areas borders Ward 2 and Ward 3, and is bounded by Highway 82 in the north, Armstrong Road to the east, Lehmberg Road to the west and Deerfield Drive to the south.
The second is adjacent to Ward 1 and Ward 2. It is bounded by South Lehmberg Road on the east, the area adjacent to Scott Drive to the south, Hargrove Road to the west and Vernon Branch Creek to the north.
The plan would add roughly 2,000 residents to the city, but according to data from the Golden Triangle Development LINK, it would lower the city’s average household income, home value and several other metrics.
Greene and DiCicco opposed the plan and Gaskin vetoed the vote, only to have his veto overridden.
The Lowndes County Board of Supervisors pledged in April as much as $50,000 to help citizens in those areas fight annexation in chancery court.
DiCicco, during the council’s May 7 meeting, successfully added annexation to the agenda, bringing up the city’s mounting costs and asking Turnage what the final tally would be.
Turnage estimated $80,000 but said that would “depend largely on the level of opposition.”
“It’s guesswork,” he said at the time.
A Lowndes County Chancery Court hearing on annexation is set for July 15.
Zack Plair is the managing editor for The Dispatch.
You can help your community
Quality, in-depth journalism is essential to a healthy community. The Dispatch brings you the most complete reporting and insightful commentary in the Golden Triangle, but we need your help to continue our efforts. In the past week, our reporters have posted 51 articles to cdispatch.com. Please consider subscribing to our website for only $2.30 per week to help support local journalism and our community.
