Dooly County moves ahead on ‘Project Savings’: engineer selected, grants authorized and industrial rezoning approved

Dooly County commissioners took a series of steps this winter and spring to support an industrial prospect the county has dubbed “Project Savings,” including picking an engineering firm, authorizing grant applications and approving a tax‑abatement schedule and related rezoning.

At a Jan. 28 special meeting the board voted to select Ingram & Watkins, LLC, of Tifton as the engineering firm for Project Savings, subject to approval by the county Economic Development Council director. The board also authorized the county’s regional development center to prepare three grant applications to help finance infrastructure for the project: an EIP grant ($500,000), a OneGeorgia grant ($1.5 million) and an EDA grant ($1.5 million). The board’s votes included one abstention on the engineering selection and an abstention and a recorded ‘no’ on parts of the tax‑abatement schedule.

The board approved a proposed property tax abatement schedule for Project Savings that would provide 100% abatement in years 1–5, then phased reductions (90% years 6–10; 50% in year 11; gradual reductions thereafter). That schedule was adopted after a recorded roll‑call vote and is intended to be the local incentive if the prospect chooses Dooly County.

Related land‑use actions followed. On Feb. 21, after a public hearing, the board voted to rezone approximately 200 acres on Highway 215 (Tax Map 68, Parcel 34) from Agricultural to Industrial; the motion passed with some dissent and an abstention on the record and included a contingency that the property could be rezoned back if Project Savings does not materialize.

County officials said they had completed an environmental review that found no significant impact for on‑site infrastructure work and authorized the chairman to sign the documentation. The board also approved a proposed schedule of grant administration fees for the regional development center if grants are awarded.

The series of votes does not obligate the county to construction or company financing; rather, the board approved the county’s participation in planning, incentives and grant pursuit. In subsequent meetings commissioners recorded related contract approvals, grant application authorizations and public‑record resignations and appointments tied to the county’s economic development work. The board recorded that if Project Savings does not proceed, the county intends to revisit rezoning and incentive decisions.

Next steps the board identified include finalizing engineering timelines and grant submissions, and awaiting the private prospect’s acceptance of the engineering firm and other terms. The board recorded all motions in the meeting minutes and the Economic Development Council will coordinate acceptance or alternatives if the recommended firm is not approved by the project director.