A relatively routine Putnam County Commission meeting turned unexpectedly contentious Nov. 18 when District 3 Commissioner Stephen Hersey sharply criticized county leadership over transparency related to a significant financing action involving the county’s development authority.
According to a U.S. Department of Energy website, C-PACE (Commercial Property Assessed Clean Energy) provides a financing structure for building or project owners to borrow money for energy efficiency, renewable energy, or other projects and repay the loan through an assessment on their property tax bill.
The financing arrangement then remains with the property even if it is later sold. The site stated that C-PACE may be funded by government or private investors, but only in states that have enacted enabling legislation, of which Georgia qualifies.
The C-PACE funding in question here would be destined for the Len Resort currently under construction in the Ward’s Chapel area of Lake Oconee on Putnam County’s east side.
Hersey had submitted the issue to the meeting agenda the night before, and it was approved for discussion early Tuesday evening. He told the commission he was frustrated to have learned about the project “out in the community” rather than through official channels.
He told County Manager Paul Van Haute that he believes the commission and the public “deserve to know” when significant economic development or financing moves occur, arguing that elected officials should not have to “find out like everyone else.” Hersey also insisted that providing timely updates was “the right thing to do.” He framed his concern not as a procedural complaint, but as an ethical obligation, saying, “We work for the people of this county. They should not be the last to know.”
Van Haute reacted forcefully, pushing back against the implication that he intentionally withheld information. He called that claim, “highly unfair” and “completely wrong,” stating he had acted well within his responsibilities. Van Haute also emphasized he was not legally required to notify the commission before the Putnam Development Authority (PDA) took action on C-PACE financing.
“There is no obligation for me to report every single step before it happens,” Van Haute stated. He also defended the timing, pointing out that the issue developed rapidly and that county staff were still gathering details.
“I have never hidden anything,” Van Haute declared. “To suggest otherwise is offensive.”
District 2 Commissioner Richard Garrett entered the discussion in defense of the process, apparently attempting to provide context and reduce tension. He noted that communication could always be improved, but acknowledged that not every development item can be relayed instantly.
“Things happen fast,” he said, adding that expecting immediate updates on every procedural move was “not realistic.”
Hersey remained unsatisfied, however, restating that transparency should not depend on legal minimums.
“If it’s public record, if it affects taxpayers, then we should know,” he said. He also expressed concern that the commission had repeatedly “been caught off guard” on development-related matters, which he believes undermines public trust.
Commission Chairman Bill Sharp eventually intervened in an effort to calm the escalating argument. Sharp acknowledged Hersey’s concerns, but suggested the exchange was becoming counterproductive. He encouraged the commission to address communication expectations constructively rather than through accusations at public meetings.
The tense exchange ultimately highlighted deeper friction within the county’s leadership over transparency, communication, and oversight of economic development financing mechanisms, such as C-PACE. While Van Haute and Garrett emphasized legal compliance and practical realities, Hersey pushed for a higher standard of openness, arguing that public perceptions of secrecy were damaging.
The meeting closed without a formal resolution.