When four commissioners in late April made a strategic move to try to force Barrow County commission chairman Danny Yearwood to loosen his grip on the government’s day-to-day operations, he came out swinging – but not at anyone still in the ring.
In making his case that the county doesn’t need a “professional” administrator, Yearwood read a list of alleged missteps by two previous administrators who resigned shortly after he took office in early 2009.
Most of the alleged mistakes were related to large county projects funded in recent years with SPLOST and bond proceeds.
But former chief administrator Keith Lee, Yearwood’s main target, defended his record by agreeing to his first interview since leaving his position 15 months ago.
“I have tried to leave him alone,” Lee said of the county chairman. “He has a job to do, but instead of doing it, he’s pointing fingers at someone else.”
Keith Lee
Lee responds to Yearwood’s comments
Monday, May 17. 2010
TITLE GRAB?
Yearwood launched into his April 27 criticism of Lee by implying that he had given himself the title of chief administrator six years ago. He said that while the previous board of commissioners on April 1, 2004 named him “chief of operations,” only six weeks later Lee “referenced himself” as chief administrator.
Yearwood pinpointed the date of that reference to May 14, 2004, which he noted was prior to the controversial Archer pay study that more than a year later recommended the title of chief administrator for the top post.
Yearwood also noted that while the county commissioners at the time were discussing going to a county-manager form of government that would reduce the power of the elected chairman, they had dropped the matter, opting instead to wait until the election of a new chairman to complete the term of Eddie Elder, who had died unexpectedly that February.
At the time of Elder’s death, Lee was the assistant chief of operations. But when the county’s top administrator, Larry Price, resigned, Lee applied for and received the chief’s position.
Lee said the board at the time was embroiled in a political and legal battle.
“There’s quite a history there of investigations on the state level,” he said. “We had the GBI in the building. We had GDOT moving money between projects…”
He said the “chief administrator” reference mentioned by Yearwood was on an organizational chart prepared in response to the commissioners’ concerns about the reporting structure under Elder.
The late chairman, like Yearwood, took a very active role in daily operations and some commissioners felt they hadn’t had access to information they wanted and needed, Lee said.
“We took the organizational chart to the commission as a mechanism for them to have direct communication with the offices of the county without interference from the chairman,” he said. “It was what they felt they needed to serve the citizens of Barrow County.
“The title didn’t change anything other than to serve as a reporting mechanism – that the chief administrator or chief of operations had direct communication with the board of commissioners,” he said. “That was what they wanted. They didn’t want to be left in the dark.”
Lee said the commissioners also wanted an organizational structure so that “an overly powerful chairman could not control the dissemination of materials, facts, activities, or approvals of the county.”
And they wanted a “method by which the commissioners had someone with whom they could discuss county conditions without the chairman’s spin on activities,” he said.
Lee added that he personally was not aware of the late chairman withholding information from the rest of the board.
“I just know there was a feeling or contention of that and they wanted to try to ease that for when a new chairman did come in.”
While the board did not proceed with a charter change at that time, the new reporting structure did go into effect, and those changes “still exist today,” Lee said.
He pointed out that the chief administrator position established officially through the Archer Study in 2005 was not removed in last year’s restructuring of the county government. He also noted that there are county ordinances tied to some of the government’s top, but vacant, positions.
“I’m not sure how they can enforce ordinances or have responses to people who file things because of those ordinances,” Lee said. “In the Unified Development Code, the majority of it, the construction portion is interpreted by the public works director and they haven’t had a public works director for almost two years. The ethics ordinance is tied to the chief administrator.
“These are practical things. They have not modified the ordinances to reflect how they say they are operating.”
If Yearwood feels the county does not need a chief administrator or public works director, Lee said, “how come we haven’t moved forward with those changes? That’s being technical, but it’s also true.”
YEARWOOD RAISES QUESTIONS
The primary complaint Yearwood voiced about the performances of Lee and former assistant administrator Michael Fischer was about their management of county projects. He said they had spent SPLOST and bond proceeds for those projects “out of trust.”
That term isn’t used in government finance, but is commonly used in the Yearwood’s former industry, used-car sales. When a used-car dealer uses money “out of trust,” it means he has violated a financial agreement with the lender that provided the capital to purchase the car inventory on his lot.
So the chairman is alleging that Lee and Fischer violated the spending rules related to SPLOST and bond proceeds.
For example, Yearwood said, instead of finishing out the final housing pod to complete the new jail, they used $1.5 million in bond proceeds – actually the interest on the deposited bond proceeds – to build the new animal control facility, which was one of the projects to be funded with SPLOST proceeds, not the bond.
To stay within the law, the board voted to apply any “excess” bond proceeds for other SPLOST projects, which includes the animal control facility.
In his statement, Yearwood said the $1.5 million in misdirected bond proceeds would have to be replaced in the bond account. According to the finance department, the bonds generated $56.4 million and interest earned on the proceeds has brought in $5.1 million. A little more than $5 million remains to be spent, but there are planned uses of all but $112,000 of that.
Lee said the decisions to build an animal shelter, but not to finish out the final housing pod for 64 beds in the new jail, were totally unrelated.
He provided an October 2006 email from Turner Construction Company that indicates that some cost-saving measures were being employed after the criminal justice center and jail were designed larger than originally planned and budgeted.
One of the cost-saving measures was to not finish the final housing pod.
Lee said a jail study prior to construction had forecast a need for 384 beds and even without the additional pod, the county built one with 392 beds.
“We were following the study the commission paid to conduct,” he said.
The empty shell may be used for future expansion when the additional 64 or so beds are needed, he added.
To Yearwood’s reference about the new jail floor being “dirt and unfinished,” Lee said only the floor of the unfinished pod was not built.
“The floor was not finished as we did not want to have plumbing and electrical installed (under the slab) without knowing what the future layout of the area would be – as the layout and design of future pods may differ for the ones we purchased,” he said. “If that were the case, then the slab would need to be removed to adjust conduit, footings, concrete density, drainage and plumbing.”
Yearwood also pointed out that one parking area at the justice center was never paved. Lee acknowledged that there is a grassy overflow parking lot on the site. But he said if Yearwood had believed that was an error, “then the Code provided him 45 days after the Certificate of Occupancy (was issued) to pave the area.”
Lee added: “The Certificate of Occupancy was issued after he took office and around the time I left.”
‘JAIL FUND’ MONEY RESTRICTED
Yearwood said because the final pod was not finished, the sheriff has been unable to access “jail fund” proceeds collected from fine surcharges. The use of that money is restricted until the jail is finished, he said.
Yearwood noted that that fund has an untapped balance of $300,000; the correct amount is about half that – less than $158,000 – according to county staff.
Lee said he doesn’t know anything about that particular jail fund. The issue didn’t come up until Sheriff Jud Smith raised it during last year’s budget talks following Lee’s resignation.
Yearwood also said the former administrators didn’t follow the county’s own development code, noting that curbs and gutters were not installed at either the new 911 center or at the animal shelter.
Lee said curb and gutters exist at both the new animal control facility and at the new courthouse, which were built while he worked for the county.
But he said there are “areas where the system designed to manage storm water is intended to ‘sheet flow’ from the asphalt paving instead of in ‘directed flows’ which would have required curb and gutter for drainage.”
Finally, Yearwood claimed that Fischer, the project manager for the justice center, had planned to pay a $140,000 invoice from Turner Construction Company for non-reimbursable expenses during the construction of the justice center.
But an internal audit of the project showed the company actually owed the county $313,000, he said.
“This is just some of the stuff this board dealt with when I went into office,” Yearwood said.
However, Lee said the internal audit was a provision in the original contract with Turner.
“The purpose was to evaluate their billing, salaries and materials on site,” Lee said. “The expectation from the start was that the county would evaluate their billing and probably find something as the project was $50-some million.”
Lee added: “While $313,000 is a lot of money, it is around (one-sixth of one percent) of the total project, so I think the process worked.
“We were not significantly over billed and we developed and negotiated a contract which allowed the county the opportunity to audit the contractor, which by the way was being discussed prior to Danny being elected.”
POLITICAL V PROFESSIONAL LEADERSHIP
Yearwood completed his April 27 statement by saying that he has used his best judgment in everything he has done as chairman.
“I will continue to perform the job I was elected to do,” he said.
Lee said, however, that he has no doubt that Yearwood needs help running the county.
“There are just too many demands there,” he said.
“We need our elected officials to work with other elected officials and with GDOT and the Atlanta Regional Commission to make sure we are getting our fair shake. He can’t be focusing all his effort on micromanaging departments.”
Lee said he would prefer to see a professional, other than himself, running the government.
“The services the government gives to the citizens shouldn’t be done in a political manner,” he said. “It should be done to provide services, and whatever politics need to be played need to be
Yearwood launched into his April 27 criticism of Lee by implying that he had given himself the title of chief administrator six years ago. He said that while the previous board of commissioners on April 1, 2004 named him “chief of operations,” only six weeks later Lee “referenced himself” as chief administrator.
Yearwood pinpointed the date of that reference to May 14, 2004, which he noted was prior to the controversial Archer pay study that more than a year later recommended the title of chief administrator for the top post.
Yearwood also noted that while the county commissioners at the time were discussing going to a county-manager form of government that would reduce the power of the elected chairman, they had dropped the matter, opting instead to wait until the election of a new chairman to complete the term of Eddie Elder, who had died unexpectedly that February.
At the time of Elder’s death, Lee was the assistant chief of operations. But when the county’s top administrator, Larry Price, resigned, Lee applied for and received the chief’s position.
Lee said the board at the time was embroiled in a political and legal battle.
“There’s quite a history there of investigations on the state level,” he said. “We had the GBI in the building. We had GDOT moving money between projects…”
He said the “chief administrator” reference mentioned by Yearwood was on an organizational chart prepared in response to the commissioners’ concerns about the reporting structure under Elder.
The late chairman, like Yearwood, took a very active role in daily operations and some commissioners felt they hadn’t had access to information they wanted and needed, Lee said.
“We took the organizational chart to the commission as a mechanism for them to have direct communication with the offices of the county without interference from the chairman,” he said. “It was what they felt they needed to serve the citizens of Barrow County.
“The title didn’t change anything other than to serve as a reporting mechanism – that the chief administrator or chief of operations had direct communication with the board of commissioners,” he said. “That was what they wanted. They didn’t want to be left in the dark.”
Lee said the commissioners also wanted an organizational structure so that “an overly powerful chairman could not control the dissemination of materials, facts, activities, or approvals of the county.”
And they wanted a “method by which the commissioners had someone with whom they could discuss county conditions without the chairman’s spin on activities,” he said.
Lee added that he personally was not aware of the late chairman withholding information from the rest of the board.
“I just know there was a feeling or contention of that and they wanted to try to ease that for when a new chairman did come in.”
While the board did not proceed with a charter change at that time, the new reporting structure did go into effect, and those changes “still exist today,” Lee said.
He pointed out that the chief administrator position established officially through the Archer Study in 2005 was not removed in last year’s restructuring of the county government. He also noted that there are county ordinances tied to some of the government’s top, but vacant, positions.
“I’m not sure how they can enforce ordinances or have responses to people who file things because of those ordinances,” Lee said. “In the Unified Development Code, the majority of it, the construction portion is interpreted by the public works director and they haven’t had a public works director for almost two years. The ethics ordinance is tied to the chief administrator.
“These are practical things. They have not modified the ordinances to reflect how they say they are operating.”
If Yearwood feels the county does not need a chief administrator or public works director, Lee said, “how come we haven’t moved forward with those changes? That’s being technical, but it’s also true.”
YEARWOOD RAISES QUESTIONS
The primary complaint Yearwood voiced about the performances of Lee and former assistant administrator Michael Fischer was about their management of county projects. He said they had spent SPLOST and bond proceeds for those projects “out of trust.”
That term isn’t used in government finance, but is commonly used in the Yearwood’s former industry, used-car sales. When a used-car dealer uses money “out of trust,” it means he has violated a financial agreement with the lender that provided the capital to purchase the car inventory on his lot.
So the chairman is alleging that Lee and Fischer violated the spending rules related to SPLOST and bond proceeds.
For example, Yearwood said, instead of finishing out the final housing pod to complete the new jail, they used $1.5 million in bond proceeds – actually the interest on the deposited bond proceeds – to build the new animal control facility, which was one of the projects to be funded with SPLOST proceeds, not the bond.
To stay within the law, the board voted to apply any “excess” bond proceeds for other SPLOST projects, which includes the animal control facility.
In his statement, Yearwood said the $1.5 million in misdirected bond proceeds would have to be replaced in the bond account. According to the finance department, the bonds generated $56.4 million and interest earned on the proceeds has brought in $5.1 million. A little more than $5 million remains to be spent, but there are planned uses of all but $112,000 of that.
Lee said the decisions to build an animal shelter, but not to finish out the final housing pod for 64 beds in the new jail, were totally unrelated.
He provided an October 2006 email from Turner Construction Company that indicates that some cost-saving measures were being employed after the criminal justice center and jail were designed larger than originally planned and budgeted.
One of the cost-saving measures was to not finish the final housing pod.
Lee said a jail study prior to construction had forecast a need for 384 beds and even without the additional pod, the county built one with 392 beds.
“We were following the study the commission paid to conduct,” he said.
The empty shell may be used for future expansion when the additional 64 or so beds are needed, he added.
To Yearwood’s reference about the new jail floor being “dirt and unfinished,” Lee said only the floor of the unfinished pod was not built.
“The floor was not finished as we did not want to have plumbing and electrical installed (under the slab) without knowing what the future layout of the area would be – as the layout and design of future pods may differ for the ones we purchased,” he said. “If that were the case, then the slab would need to be removed to adjust conduit, footings, concrete density, drainage and plumbing.”
Yearwood also pointed out that one parking area at the justice center was never paved. Lee acknowledged that there is a grassy overflow parking lot on the site. But he said if Yearwood had believed that was an error, “then the Code provided him 45 days after the Certificate of Occupancy (was issued) to pave the area.”
Lee added: “The Certificate of Occupancy was issued after he took office and around the time I left.”
‘JAIL FUND’ MONEY RESTRICTED
Yearwood said because the final pod was not finished, the sheriff has been unable to access “jail fund” proceeds collected from fine surcharges. The use of that money is restricted until the jail is finished, he said.
Yearwood noted that that fund has an untapped balance of $300,000; the correct amount is about half that – less than $158,000 – according to county staff.
Lee said he doesn’t know anything about that particular jail fund. The issue didn’t come up until Sheriff Jud Smith raised it during last year’s budget talks following Lee’s resignation.
Yearwood also said the former administrators didn’t follow the county’s own development code, noting that curbs and gutters were not installed at either the new 911 center or at the animal shelter.
Lee said curb and gutters exist at both the new animal control facility and at the new courthouse, which were built while he worked for the county.
But he said there are “areas where the system designed to manage storm water is intended to ‘sheet flow’ from the asphalt paving instead of in ‘directed flows’ which would have required curb and gutter for drainage.”
Finally, Yearwood claimed that Fischer, the project manager for the justice center, had planned to pay a $140,000 invoice from Turner Construction Company for non-reimbursable expenses during the construction of the justice center.
But an internal audit of the project showed the company actually owed the county $313,000, he said.
“This is just some of the stuff this board dealt with when I went into office,” Yearwood said.
However, Lee said the internal audit was a provision in the original contract with Turner.
“The purpose was to evaluate their billing, salaries and materials on site,” Lee said. “The expectation from the start was that the county would evaluate their billing and probably find something as the project was $50-some million.”
Lee added: “While $313,000 is a lot of money, it is around (one-sixth of one percent) of the total project, so I think the process worked.
“We were not significantly over billed and we developed and negotiated a contract which allowed the county the opportunity to audit the contractor, which by the way was being discussed prior to Danny being elected.”
POLITICAL V PROFESSIONAL LEADERSHIP
Yearwood completed his April 27 statement by saying that he has used his best judgment in everything he has done as chairman.
“I will continue to perform the job I was elected to do,” he said.
Lee said, however, that he has no doubt that Yearwood needs help running the county.
“There are just too many demands there,” he said.
“We need our elected officials to work with other elected officials and with GDOT and the Atlanta Regional Commission to make sure we are getting our fair shake. He can’t be focusing all his effort on micromanaging departments.”
Lee said he would prefer to see a professional, other than himself, running the government.
“The services the government gives to the citizens shouldn’t be done in a political manner,” he said. “It should be done to provide services, and whatever politics need to be played need to be
Defined tags for this entry: News, Top Stories
Related entries by tags:
- Board removes 182 Winder voters
- Engineering firm seeks additional funds
- Spending issue raises more questions
- How to vote in the Nov. 8 elections
- WBHS celebrates Homecoming Week; parade set for Thursday
- Georgia House passes Barrow legislation
- BOC tries to hold down tax hike
- Governor paves way for November referendum on changing county's form of government
- Murder suspect has questionable past
- Barrow County elections supervisor resigns
Trackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry
No Trackbacks