Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Planning Transparency topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents press Upson County commissioners on planning transparency and vet clinic appeal
Summary
During public comment at the Jan. 27 Upson County commissioners meeting, residents urged improved website access, consistent application of planning rules, and support for a veterinary clinic appeal scheduled for Feb. 10, citing perceived inconsistent treatment by the planning commission.
A series of public commenters at the Upson County Board of Commissioners meeting on Jan. 27 urged greater transparency in county processes and criticized inconsistent decisions by the planning commission ahead of an appeal hearing for a proposed veterinary clinic.
Tammy Boyle opened public comment by thanking the county for live-streaming meetings and urging a modernization of the county website so residents can access up-to-date information and meeting materials. "We need functional user friendly websites that serve as a reliable resource for our community," Boyle said.
Lisa Pierce, speaking as a citizen, urged commissioners to avoid conflicts of interest and adhere to Georgia law and Associated County Commissioners of Georgia ethical standards. "Commissioners are prohibited from using their office for personal gain... When a conflict exists, disclosure and recusal are not optional," she told the board.
Dana Brew focused on a planning commission decision and what she described as inconsistent application of ordinances in September 2024 and a January meeting; Brew asked the board to ensure the appeal hearing for the Fire Tower Road veterinary clinic on Feb. 10 is evaluated fairly. "If you care about our rural agriculture community... you will allow a large animal veterinary practice... in accordance with the county ordinance when we have our appeal hearing on February 10," she said.
Other residents, including Shannon Cox and Ashley Anderson, voiced support for the vet clinic and asked commissioners to consider community benefit when reviewing appeals. Commissioners acknowledged the comments, reiterated they must follow open-meeting and ordinance rules, and said the board would consider public concerns as the appeal approaches.
