The story
Habersham County commissioners were scheduled to consider awarding RFP 2026-12, covering fencing for the county’s new animal shelter, to A&T Fence at their May 18 meeting. The county agenda identifies A&T Fence as the proposed awardee, but it does not show whether the Board of Commissioners approved the proposal, changed it, rejected it or postponed it.
That distinction matters because fencing is a practical part of putting a new shelter into service, affecting how the property can be secured and used. An agenda item is a proposal for board consideration, however, not confirmation that a vendor received a contract or started work. Without a recorded decision, residents cannot tell whether the county selected A&T Fence, chose another path or left this part of the larger project unresolved.
The fencing proposal follows years of county action on the broader animal-control facility. In May 2024, commissioners considered using a construction manager at risk for the shelter and other public-safety buildings; staff said a shelter site had been identified and design work was about 90% complete, though that agenda does not document final action on the construction-manager proposal. In March 2025, commissioners approved PNC Bank financing for acquiring, constructing and installing the animal-control facility, with an earlier financing authorization of up to $6.85 million. The May 2026 fencing item appears as a later proposed procurement tied to that facility.
County commissioners are the public body scheduled to decide the proposed award, while A&T Fence is the company named on the agenda for RFP 2026-12. County staff previously described the shelter as part of a broader facility effort requiring design, financing and construction planning. The agenda itself attributes no statement to A&T Fence and records no competing bidder, recommendation rationale or objection; it simply presents the company as the proposed recipient of the fencing award.
The documented act is limited to placing the proposed award before commissioners on May 18. The record does not establish a vote, an executed agreement, a contract amount, a change order, the start of fencing construction or completion of a fence. That gap does not prove the proposal failed; it leaves the outcome and any subsequent implementation unconfirmed.
The next public step is a county record that resolves RFP 2026-12, such as Board of Commissioners minutes or a later contract document. It would need to show whether commissioners acted on the proposed A&T Fence award, whether the terms changed and whether the fencing entered construction. Until then, the county’s documented position remains a proposed agenda item rather than a confirmed contract decision.
Arguments in the record
Positions presented publicly
The May 18 agenda schedules consideration of awarding RFP 2026-12 for new animal-shelter fencing to A&T Fence, without recording a final board action.
Prior county proceedings document shelter planning and financing, but they do not establish the outcome of the later fencing proposal.