Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Legal Proceedings topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Motion to submit amicus brief over Judge Bradley order fails in 2–2 vote
Summary
A motion to authorize the county attorney to file an amicus brief identifying individuals to comply with Judge Bradley’s order failed after a 2–2 split; commissioners were sharply divided over the legal step.
A motion to authorize the Putnam County attorney to file an amicus brief, or its equivalent, with Judge Bradley and the Putnam Development Authority naming individuals who could comply with a judicial order in Case: 2025-SU-CV-0191 failed during the March 6 meeting of the Putnam County Board of Commissioners.
Commissioner Steve Hersey moved the action and Commissioner Richard Garrett seconded the motion. Commissioner Garrett and Commissioner Hersey voted in favor; Commissioner Tom McElhenney and Chairman B. W. “Bill” Sharp voted against it. The motion therefore failed.
The board’s minutes record that Commissioner Hersey explained Judge Bradley’s order and said he had identified two additional individuals who could perform the evaluation referenced in the order, in addition to one the Putnam Development Authority had named. The minutes do not record further debate or a legal opinion delivered on the record during the meeting.
County Attorney Adam Nelson was present and later told commissioners he is updating intergovernmental documents (CPACER Resolution) with Greene County, but the minutes do not record Nelson taking any public position on filing an amicus brief during this vote.
With the motion’s failure there was no board authorization to proceed with filing an amicus brief on behalf of the county; the minutes do not record any alternate direction to staff or a subsequent vote on the matter.
The board adjourned at approximately 12:42 p.m. The minutes indicate the case reference as 2025-SU-CV-0191 and note the failed motion as the most recent development on the item.
