IDA Begins Process Of Setting Covenants For New Industrial Park
By LYDIA BERGLAR
News Editor
The Industrial Development Authority’s June 17 meeting featured guests from the Georgia Department of Economic Development; the board appointed a committee to begin working on covenants for the new industrial park; and the board approved the FY25 budget.
Evan Stone (IDA executive director) also noted that the average hourly wage in Trenton’s industrial park is close to $18, so the IDA is uninterested in bringing jobs to the county that pay less than that.
Stone reported that Lori Dowdy (Region One senior project manager, Georgia Department of Economic Development) joined him on several visits to local industries. Dowdy introduced herself, explaining that she works with 15 counties in the region. She informs industries about tax credits available to them and also helps recruit companies.
Harry Pierce then introduced himself. He was sworn in by Governor Brian Kemp to the state department’s board this month, and he’s currently making the rounds to each of the 11 counties under his care. He acts as a connection to the state’s governor and attorney general.
Pierce recapped his career, which included serving in the United States Air Force; joining Home Depot in the company’s early years and eventually retiring as the Home Depot West Coast Division president; and founding Hard Time Products, the company that the Dade County Jail purchases supplies from.
He explained that it frustrates him when tax credits apply to companies coming into a county but not to companies already in a county, noting that he’s been on both sides.
He reflected, “Some people will say they want economic development, but then they don’t want to do the work or [put in] the money to get ready for the economic development…I’ve built a lot of business, so hopefully I can help a lot of other people…I’m here for you.”
Stone then explained that the IDA needs to develop blanket covenants for the new industrial park that can be tweaked once specific companies are selected.
James Cantrell (chairman) recommended that a committee of IDA members begin this work by researching previous covenants in the existing park and researching other counties’ covenants. George Williams, Leisa Cagle, and Adam Austing volunteered for the committee, and they will report back to the board at the July meeting.
Echoing Stone’s words, Cantrell said, “I want it written where we could alter or change as needed…Let’s make some good, solid covenants that’s going to protect our citizens and the county.”
The authority then approved the fiscal year 2025 budget. Stone and Seth Houts explained a potential purchase that is accounted for in the budget: Placer.ai. A data gathering company, Placer.ai uses cell phone data (and sometimes credit and debit cards) to track people’s shopping, working, and traveling habits.
Purchasing Placer.ai was not voted on, but Stone explained that he budgeted $7,500 preemptively for the program.
Houts and Stone said they were impressed by the company, particularly with Placer.ai’s large amounts of detailed data. They explained that identities are completely private, with data presented as numbers and percentages rather than names of individuals.
The IDA is especially interested in seeing where people travel to work. Houts said, “It’s something we could use to target, if a lot of people are going to Volkswagen, are there jobs in the industrial park currently that could be filled with workers from Volkswagen? Try to entice them to stay closer to home.”
Stone later said, “We do know 60% leave the county [to work], but we definitely don’t know where all they go.”
Cagle asked who will be analyzing the data. There was no clear answer of which IDA members would be in charge of using the data, but Houts said that Placer.ai has an easy-to-use report system and that the entire IDA can access the data.
Placer.ai is subscription based, with one year starting at $20,000, but the IDA is trying to negotiate a lower price. They explained that this expense would be split with the Alliance for Dade and county government, hence why the IDA only budgeted $7,500 for the program.
On the tourism side, the program could show (for example) where else in the county visitors to Cloudland Canyon go or where people spend money before heading to tourist attractions.
During Public Input, Susie Talbott explained her continued frustrations with the inability to contact IDA members and with responses to open records requests.
Regarding contacting members, she suggested that email addresses for each member be added to the IDA’s website, thereby allowing members to respond at times convenient to them (rather than receiving late night phone calls/texts) and automatically providing documentation of communication “so there’s never any kind of disagreement about what was communicated between the two parties.” Cantrell noted her suggestion.
She then explained the process she’s gone through with open records requests. For fact-checking purposes, the Sentinel asked Talbott for screenshots of two recent open records requests and the ensuing communications, and Talbott obliged. Her first request asked for copies of recent financial statements, the IDA’s 2024 budget, and records of the IDA’s revenue from the last six months. These last two items were supplied, but Talbott had to reiterate her request for the financials.
Each month, the board approves a financial report. At the April and May meetings, Cantrell asked for a motion to approve “the financial statements.” This month, he asked for a motion to approve “the financial reports.” William Back (recording secretary) responded to Talbott’s request, saying that the IDA does not have a document titled financial statement.
At the meeting, Talbott asked what wording to use to request the financial statements they approve each month, and Back replied that financial statement is used as a general term covering the general ledger and bank reconciliation.
Talbott explained that the document he sent her is a synopsis, so the dates of sales were not included (which is what she wanted to know). She said, “It feels like pushback…I’m trying to speak the language that you’re using in your meetings, but I’m not making any headway.”
Stone and Back said she had received the documents she requested, but Talbott again said that the synopsis does not include dates.
She submitted a second open records request asking for a copy of the appraisal of the Clark property on Highway 11 (which the IDA recently purchased in order to expand the sewer to the new industrial park). After several back-and-forth communications, Talbott was told by Robin Rogers (IDA attorney) that there was no appraisal of the property in question.
She explained at the meeting that this record request was not so much about the contents of the appraisal but a test of the ease of the open record request process and level of transparency of the IDA.
Talbott expressed appreciation for the board’s work on the website, but reiterated her desire for additional clarity in communication.
Cantrell said they’re working on improving transparency, but he questioned what purpose having the individual board members’ contact information would serve, noting that if they did not have the information she was looking for, they would not be able to help her.
Talbott said, “I feel like there’s a communication disconnect between the executive director and some of the board members here because I’ve been listening to meetings, and I’m like, ‘Wow, I didn’t know that happened in the meeting,’ because it didn’t…This whole ‘you can only talk to one person but you can ask anybody anything,’ it kind of contradicts.”
Stone responded, “Transparency is a big word…This board has been nothing but transparent on everything that has been done.” As he has previously explained, he said that real estate discussions must take place in executive session, later adding, “We have an attorney sitting in every meeting.”
He said that Talbott’s first open records request was responded to with all reports the board had approved; Back responded to the second request with everything related to finances; and for a third reworded request, Stone said they asked Rogers to give the information out. He concluded, “We have done nothing that hasn’t been voted on in public.”
The authority entered executive session, and no vote was taken afterward.
