Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Public Safety Security topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Upson County tax commissioner urges board to provide security for office, staff ahead of move to Drake Building

Upson County Board of Commissioners · November 26, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The county tax commissioner asked the Board of Commissioners to ensure armed or dedicated security for his office and staff, citing large daily cash deposits during tax season, a $50,000 bond limit, and personal safety concerns; the board agreed to explore sheriff or shared security options.

The Upson County tax commissioner urged the Board of Commissioners on Nov. 25 to provide security for his office and staff ahead of a planned move to the Drake Building, saying the office handles large daily cash and check deposits during tax season and that current measures leave staff exposed.

At the meeting the commissioner presented deposit slips and photos of cash drawers to illustrate the amounts handled during peak collection periods and said his office is currently bonded for roughly $50,000. “That’s our average daily deposit,” he said while pointing to the paperwork, arguing that the sums warrant protection. He added: “It’s the protection of my staff.” Later he noted, “I have a staff of 6 ladies,” saying he did not want them put at risk during routine trips across the street to the bank.

Attorney Aaron McCullough, representing the tax commissioner, told the board the request raises legal and risk-management issues. “There are equal protection issues,” McCullough said, arguing that other constitutional officers receive security and singling out the tax commissioner for different treatment could be legally problematic. He also discussed potential insurance and bond exposure if funds or checks were lost in transit.

Board members discussed several options. One commissioner noted the sheriff had said deputies would be made available if requested and that a line item for security already exists in the budget. Commissioners said they were open to exploring shared security with the city or assigning a deputy under sheriff control, and asked staff to continue working with the sheriff’s office to define costs and logistics.

The discussion did not produce a formal vote or immediate implementation; commissioners directed staff to continue planning and return with more details, including whether the sheriff can provide a deputy under county control and the per‑person cost the sheriff would require. The tax commissioner asked that security be in place before the office moves to the Drake Building.

The board did not adopt a motion at the Nov. 25 meeting to change staffing or purchasing; the item remains under discussion pending follow-up with the sheriff, additional cost information, and potential allocation of funds.

What’s next: Commissioners asked staff to coordinate with the sheriff, clarify costs and coverage options, and report back to the board before the Drake Building move.