THOMASVILLE, Ga. — Albany lawyers representing concerned residents and landowners who oppose — and will be adversely impacted by Thomasville City Council’s South Pinetree Boulevard decision — consider the May 14 action to be null, void and sanctionable.

The May 24 letter from Watson Spence LLP says clients, who are not named, reserve the right to file suit and have the Pinetree action set aside by a Superior Court.

By way of the letter, attorneys F. Faison Middleton IV and Joseph W. Dent “respectfully demand” that the council rescind invalid action to “accept plans for road improvements for South Pinetree Boulevard as designed by Falcon Engineering, Norcross, Georgia, from Thomas County and submitted to the Georgia Department of Transportation by Thomas County Board of Commissioners” as soon as possible.

“This is on its face illegal and legally actionable,” the letter says.

Tim Sanders, city attorney, acknowledged receipt of the letter, which requests a written response no later than Friday, June 1.

“I am reviewing the letter, will consult with my client, and plan to respond to Watson Spence LLP by Friday, June 1, 2018, if at all possible,” Sanders said. 

When asked if city council intends to rescind the Pinetree vote, Sanders said he did not know whether the council plans to take action to rescind the vote.

The letters says except where otherwise provided by law, “all meetings shall be be open to the public. All votes at any meeting shall be taken in public after due notice of the meeting and compliance with the posting and agenda requirements” of the Georgia Open Meetings Law.

The law also says that “prior to any meetings the agency or committee holding such meeting shall make available an agenda of all matters expected to come before the agency of committee at such meeting …”

The Pinetree matter was not on the May 14 council agenda. There was no vote to put it on the agenda before the 3-2 vote to approve.

The letter continues, “There was no emergency which occurred that would have necessitated this being addressed without prior notice. Rather, this action appears to have been orchestrated by a majority of the council members.”

According to the letter and clients’ knowledge, there has been no professional study showing a need for the three-lane proposal or a professional study/assesment demonstrating safety problems or insufficient capacity for current or projected traffic use.

The lawyers say they have written confirmation from the city that it does not possess a copy of the plan referred to by Mayor Greg Hobbs in his May 14 motion.

“How in the world can a majority of council members approve a multi-million dollar road widening project pursuant to a plan the city does not even have?” the lawyers ask.

Because the public had no prior notice about the matter, no public scrutiny could have occurred with respect to potential conflicts of interest that might exist among council members being called upon to vote, the letter says.

“This is extraordinarily concerning given that at least one board member owns property that will ultimately be purchased by the city in order to execute this project,” the letter says. “This raises significant issues relative to one’s fudiciary duties to the public and further heightens my clients’ and the public’s concerns relative to the motivations surrounding this unprecedented action.”

The letter was copied to the Georgia Attorney General Christopher M. Carr, who, the letter says, has “authority to bring enforcement actions, either civil or criminal, in his or her discretion as may be appropriate to enforce compliance” with Georgia law. 

Senior reporter Patti Dozier can be reached at (229) 226-2400, ext. 1820