Habersham Ethics Panel Reappointments Left Unresolved After One Nominee Declines

Habersham County commissioners considered reappointing Virginia Webb and Reggie Coley to the county Ethics Panel on April 19, 2021, but the discussion ended without a documented final outcome after the county clerk reported that Coley did not want another term. Commissioner Tench made the reappointment motion, with Commissioner Stamey seconding it; the minutes show the board then turned to whether it could fill only one of the two expiring seats.

The unresolved appointments matter because the Ethics Panel is part of the county’s framework for handling ethics-related public business, and vacancies or uncertain terms can affect how that work is staffed. The commission was not simply deciding whether to renew two incumbents: it was weighing an appointment proposal after receiving conflicting information about Webb’s willingness to continue and a clear statement that Coley was not seeking reappointment.

Tench’s original motion sought to reappoint both Webb and Coley as their terms expired. During the April 19 meeting, County Clerk Lindsay Underwood said she could not confirm that Webb still wanted the appointment and said Coley had told her he was not interested in returning. Commissioner Harkness then said he had spoken with Webb and confirmed that she was interested, changing the immediate question from a two-person reappointment to what the board should do with the remaining seat.

Tench and Stamey initially backed reappointing both people. Underwood relayed the uncertainty surrounding Webb and Coley’s stated lack of interest. Harkness offered a different account on Webb, saying he had personally confirmed her interest. Chairman Mealor asked whether the county could appoint one individual while tabling the other seat until the next meeting, so Tench could determine whom he wanted to appoint for it.

The April 19 minutes establish that commissioners discussed a reappointment motion and considered separating the two seats; they do not establish that either Webb was reappointed or that a replacement for Coley was chosen. The record also does not show what action followed the chairman’s suggestion to table one seat. There is no documented outcome here on later amendments, implementation, costs or measurable effects of the discussion.

The next public step would be a later commission agenda, vote or meeting minutes showing whether Webb’s seat was filled and who, if anyone, was selected for Coley’s seat. Until such a record appears, the county’s final action on the two Ethics Panel terms remains undecided in the documented proceeding.