In his full-page letter (The Eatonton Messenger, A8, Apr. 9, 2026), Hans Dawson of Putnam County Stone, LLC, wrote that “opponents (of the quarry) are transplants.”
Is Mr. Dawson a lifelong resident of Putnam County? Hundreds of Putnam residents, many of whom were turned away due to a lack of space, showed up for a meeting of the Planning and Zoning (P&Z) Commission, expecting to exercise their First Amendment right to speak. Were these residents all transplants?
To add insult to injury, P&Z voted to delay the hearing to July 2nd, with Chairman Charles Gray casting a tie-breaking vote. Is Mr. Gray a transplant?
He is from California.
The 3-2 vote against the staff recommendation to deny the rezoning application was taken without any discussion and deprived the residents of their right to speak.
Why didn’t Mr. Gray allow discussion so that the residents could know why the vote was to delay the hearing? Is Mr. Gray in favor of the quarry and hopes that fewer residents will show up on the Fourth of July weekend?
He has claimed that he must remain neutral, but the vote clearly favored the quarry.
Mr. Gray has said that the vote would prevent a lawsuit. He knew, or should have known, that P&Z, as a recommending body, would not be sued. Only the county commission, as the final decision maker, can be sued by appealing to the Superior Court. Are these just excuses for the tie-breaking vote?
Thanks to members Jones and Atkinson for voting to allow some transplants to speak.
Kimberly Wall, Putnam County