Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the TSPLOS Committee topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners back a limited T‑SPLOST citizens review committee as oversight, not project‑prioritization
Summary
After debate, Cherokee County commissioners signaled support for creating a five‑member T‑SPLOST Citizens Review Committee limited to oversight and advisory functions to verify the county spends T‑SPLOST funds on voter‑approved projects, with staff to redline the draft resolution and bylaws for future action.
The Cherokee County Board of Commissioners discussed a proposed Transportation Special Purpose Local Option Sales Tax (T‑SPLOST) Citizens Review Committee at its Nov. 18 work session and expressed general support for a narrowly scoped, oversight‑focused group rather than a citizen body with independent prioritization authority.
Staff presented a draft resolution and bylaws modeled on review committees in neighboring counties, proposing a five‑member committee with one appointment per commissioner to review project progress and report on expenditure of T‑SPLOST net proceeds. The draft emphasizes that the committee would be advisory and must strictly comply with the voter‑approved detailed project list; it would not have authority to modify, add, eliminate or reprioritize projects.
Some commissioners had earlier envisioned a broader advisory panel that could help prioritize projects if additional funds became available or costs forced reprioritization. But several commissioners pushed back, saying technical prioritization should remain with engineering staff and the county’s technical experts.
“This is just to make sure that we're following that list, not adding any pet projects,” staff said. Other commissioners echoed that the committee is valuable as an oversight and public‑accountability mechanism to prove projects are spent as voters intended.
Board members asked staff to solicit comments and return a redlined resolution and bylaws for possible placement on the next agenda; if approved, appointments would likely be made in January, with the committee’s first meeting projected after collections begin April 1 and the first check receipt expected in mid‑May.
No formal vote was taken; the Board agreed to continue refining the committee language with staff.
