When the ballots were counted Tuesday night, Chappell has received the most votes, but the split was close to a three-way tie, a situation not usually found in incumbency races, one local political analyst observed.
The unofficial totals were Chappell with 4,594 votes, 34.9 percent; Smith with 4,356 votes, 33.1 percent; and third-place finisher Walt Hollingsworth, 4,217 votes, 32.0 percent.
Dr. Robert Sanders, a University of West Georgia political science professor, said he found the results “rather surprising” and was amazed at the closeness of the vote split and how no candidate was close to a majority.
“It goes to show that the Carroll County electorate is not thrilled with how things are going in county government,” Sanders said Wednesday. “There seems to be a number of issues, such as spending and services, but it may be reflective of general disappointment in government around the nation.”
Sanders said the vote seemed to be a question of, “Do you want the incumbency or not?” and it appears the Tuesday results showed nearly a two-to-one vote of dissatisfaction.
But, he added, while Tuesday’s 27 percent turnout was surprisingly good for a local election, it’s much more difficult to get voters out for a runoff.
Smith said Wednesday he knows it’s hard to get voters back out a second time, but he’s hoping that local schools being back in session and voters home from vacation will help.
He’s also banking on the similarities of his and Hollingsworth’s primary campaigns.
“We talked with each other throughout the entire campaign,” Smith said. “Our campaigns had a lot of similarities. It was just a matter of who won and we both agreed to support the other one.”
Chappell said his campaign team would be meeting later Wednesday to discuss its strategy.
Runoff elections present a few unique challenges, according to county Elections Supervisor Becky Deese. For one thing, voters must follow the party selected in the general primary when they vote in the runoff.
“For example, if a Republican ballot was selected for the July 31 election, that voter is eligible to vote in the Aug. 21 Republican runoff,” Deese said. “Since there will be no Democratic runoff, voters who chose a Democratic ballot on July 31 are not eligible to vote in the Republican runoff on Aug. 21.”
Voters who chose non-partisan ballots or did not vote in the July 31 primary will be allowed to vote in the Aug. 21 runoff.
There’s no special registration breaks given potential runoff voters.
“All voters casting ballots in the runoff must have been registered prior to the July 2 deadline for registering for the general primary,” Deese said.
Chappell’s first bid for commission chairman came in a Sept. 18, 2007, special election after then-commission Chairman Robert Barr resigned. In the four-candidate race, Chappell got 43.6 percent of the vote, with the next highest candidate being John Denney with 30.7 percent.
Chappell won the Oct. 16, 2007, runoff, taking 54.5 percent of the vote, with a 17 percent voter turnout.
Chappell won an easy victory for a full four-year term in the Nov. 4, 2008, general election, taking 56.7 percent of the vote, against Democrat Herman Ayers, with 43.2 percent.
Chappell drew public criticism in 2009 after firing two popular county department heads. A recall petition was circulated but failed to gain enough signatures to force a recall election.
In this year’s campaign, Chappell has emphasized paying off debt, balancing the county budget and maintaining a good financial position. He has also claimed to run a transparent government, putting all the county checkbooks and budgets online.
Smith has countered that Chappell inherited a 2-mill tax increase which allowed him to pay off debts and build up a surplus. He has claimed Chappell is not working with the district commissioners and is running county government in a “dictatorial” fashion, which rewards friends and punishes enemies.
Hollingsworth said Tuesday night, after the election results were in, that he would support to Smith.
“I’m going to stick by my campaign slogan of ‘Anybody but Chappell,’” he said.
ENOUGH about Chappell. Lock the hubs and tell us more about Smith - give us SPECIFICS on his plans...ie - what policies and changes would he SPECIFICALLY implement?, etc??.
One positive with Chappell is he is a "known". His policies and leadership have put Carroll County in very good shape - fiscally and otherwise.
It is easy to Monday morning quarterback folks and make vague statements about how Smith will "get along with people" and "let people do their jobs", etc. But without specifics, these are shallow promises that have NO value.
Change for the sake of change is not necessarily good. The people voted in Obama and look what happened...now the people realize that things were really not so bad before!!...and it will take years to dig out of the mess he has created. All because the people jumped on board vague statements and meaningless promises for change!!! Don't repeat this on the local level.
It is probably not fair to compare Smith to Obama, but until we hear specific plans, policies, changes, etc. there is nothing better to compare to...
Finally, we could debate all day the power of the Chairman and the charter, etc. If it needs changing, then let the people decide and put the facts out there for people to decipher. For now, it is what it is. Perhaps the Commission Chair has too much power, perhaps not?? One could also argue that it is impossible to rule by committee! Can you imagine what little would have gotten done with the dissension on the board if there was not someone at the helm who can make the tough calls? I guess the assessment depends a lot on which side you fall on... Here's the good news, if you don't like what the Chairman does, then you can vote him out!
I would take certainty and Bill's track record of success - even in light of all the issues you have brought forward - over ANOTHER chance for "HOPE AND CHANGE" without substance to back it up.
ABC is a bad campaign strategy. If Smith has a plan, let's hear it. Instead of bashing Bill, why don't you tell us what Smith plans to bring to the table AND why you feel it will benefit Carroll County. We know from all your posts that you have some sort of vendetta...we get that. We see all things you have issue with. NOW tell us WHY you think Smith would do better. ENOUGH ABOUT ALL YOU FEEL BILL HAS DONE WRONG...we got that.
Have a great day.
Richard
The letter – from commissioners Kevin Jackson, Ashley Hendrix, George Chambers and Vicki Anderson – is dated Aug. 25, and in it, the commissioners request a legal opinion from Daley concerning expenditures to Heath & Lineback Engineers for design and engineering work on a proposed roundabout at the intersection of Newnan Road and Olympic Drive.
The controversy over the payments to Health & Lineback arose after the board voted down the addition of a roundabout on Newnan Road in the area near the sheriff’s office and West Georgia Technical College. The board said in the 4-2 vote that the project was not the best option to alleviate congestion near the Highway 166 Bypass.
Chappell had previously authorized approximately $72,000 for preliminary work on the project without prior consultation with the board.
According to the Carroll County charter, all contracts that exceed $12,500 must be approved by the board as a whole, with the exception being contracts that relate to employment.
The $72,000 for preliminary work on the roundabout was not paid out in a lump sum. Payments instead were staggered over several months, with at least one payment in excess of $12,500.
Board members and Chappell have previously clashed over the degree of power afforded to the chairman by the charter. Four months ago, David Mecklin, who drafted the charter in 1988 while he was the county attorney, tried to clarify some of the “gray areas” that had developed in the law. At that time, Mecklin said that in writing the charter he wanted to maintain the chairman’s power while also creating a board that had clout.
For that reason, he said, Section 17, titled “Limitations on Powers,” establishes that no power of the commission can in any way supersede the power of the chairman. He said that particular passage was meant to largely establish the chairman as the de facto head of personnel, whereas it would prevent individual commission members from getting entangled in the hiring and firing of personnel.
Chappell has previously pointed to this passage as proof that he does have the authority to pay outside engineers or consultants more than $12,500. If they’re working for the county, he said, they are county employees and fall under the authority of the chairman.
The letter to Daley explicitly asks whether “the Chairman’s action in approving payment to Heath & Lineback Engineers, Inc [was] proper in light of the requirements of O.C.G. A. §36-10-1 and Section 8(A)(22) of the Carroll County Charter.”
The portion of the Official Code of Georgia cited in the letter requires that all official contracts entered into by a county governing authority be entered into the minutes of the meeting that the contract was approved.
Section 8(A)(22) of the Carroll County Charter grants the commission the power to “authorize all contracts, except for contracts of employment, involving the expenditure of county funds in excess of $12,500.”
In the letter, the commissioners say they “reviewed the minutes of our County Commission meetings and have found no information which would show that a contract with Heath & Lineback Engineers, Inc was approved.”
The letter asks Daley for an opinion on whether the contract with Heath & Lineback is voidable because it was not in writing and entered on the minutes of the county governing authority. It also asks if the county has the right, under O.C.G.A. §36-10-1, to seek recovery of the funds paid to the engineering firm.
Hendrix said the letter was prompted by the belief that the chairman’s approval of expenditures to Heath & Lineback violates the county charter, and in turn, violates state law.
“I felt like that if I did not do anything, I was just as guilty, and I’m not one for complacency,” Hendrix said. “I felt like I had to move forward to see what was truly right by law.”
Jackson and Anderson said that while the letter makes no assertions about the legality of the process, it does request legal clarification.
“We have the issues with the chairman spending more than his $12,500, and we need to know how to proceed with it,” Anderson said. “We need to know what’s the right thing to do. It violates the county charter. That’s county law, so we need to know how to proceed.”
Jackson agreed, saying the letter is an attempt to gain a better understanding of the law as it applies to this situation and other situations moving forward.
“We want to be in conformist with the law. We don’t want to overstep or understep our bounds as district commissioners,” Jackson said. “The proper first route is to get a legal opinion from our attorney.”
Chappell would not comment on the contents of the letter, saying it was protected under attorney-client privilege. He said that any of the commissioners who did discuss it in public were in violation of this privilege.
“That letter is under attorney-client privilege. The client is the Board of Commissioners, and individual commissioners are not privy to disclose that,” Chappell said. “They would violate, on their own, the attorney-client privilege. None of us has the right to individually do that. As a board we can, but not individually.”
Read more: Times-Georgian - Commissioners want legal opinion on roundabout spending
He has the authority... DICTATORSHIP, Did I read this wrong!!!
Read more: Times-Georgian - News, Classifieds, Business, Sports - Carrollton, Georgia
WOW... Thats how I felt working for this County.....Geeees what do I have to say!!!
Read more: Times-Georgian - News, Classifieds, Business, Sports - Carrollton, Georgia