The Sumner County Commission’s General Operations Committee approved payment for architect services and directed a small construction-access payment after a lengthy debate over project authority and budgeting.

Michael Clark, a public commenter, urged the committee to move quickly on restoring the house and asked the body to approve a budget transfer so work could continue. “There’s no statutory or legal basis requiring us to come back to the budget or the full county commission again,” Clark said, arguing the temporary driveway and related work fall within an earlier appropriation of roughly $582,000.

Committee members disagreed over whether routine site work and architect time required further review. The mayor said the $15,000 architect amount was needed to meet state requirements and to allow professionals to prepare plans and a proper request for proposals. “We’ve already approved over $500,000,” the mayor said, framing the architect payment and temporary driveway as tasks needed to advance the approved project.

Several commissioners pressed for stricter financial controls and clearer authorization for an ad hoc committee that has overseen the restoration. One commissioner asked the law director and controller for written confirmation that the expenditures were within proper procedure; the committee voted to request such guidance.

On the motions before the committee, members approved the $15,000 architect engagement and directed the finance department to process up to $5,000 for a temporary construction-access driveway to allow site work to begin. The committee also voted to request a letter from the controller clarifying procedural authority for future expenditures on the project. Where precise roll-call tallies were not recorded in the meeting transcript, the committee announced voice votes or that motions carried by consensus.

Next steps: staff will meet with the selected architect to finalize scope and will proceed with procurement steps required by state law. The controller’s guidance, requested by the committee, is expected to clarify what routine expenditures can be handled administratively versus what must return to committee or full commission.