By SHAWN STREET
Some members of the Russell County Board of Supervisors are continuing to push for a forensic audit while allegations were made that information on various issues is being kept from the full board.
During a heated, six-hour long meeting in May 2025, a motion was made by At-Large member Nate Kiser to set the real estate tax rate at $0.579 cents per $100 of assessed value. Kiser’s motion also required that a forensic audit be conducted.
More than a year later, the audit has yet to be conducted.
Kiser brought up the issue again during the June 1 meeting of the board when Chairman David Eaton asked for a motion to pay the monthly bills.
Kiser said he could not vote for such a motion “with good conscience” until the forensic audit is conducted. “The tax rate was contingent on a forensic audit and we’ve still not done that,” he said. “We’ve collected taxes but we’ve not conducted the forensic audit.”
Board attorney Tyler Starnes stated that the tax rate was not contingent on a forensic audit. “Just to clarify the water there,” he said.
District 3’s Tara Dye questioned Starnes. “Last month you said it was a contingency and now it’s not?”
During last month’s meeting of the board, when speaking about Kiser’s 2025 motion, Starnes said, “There should not have been a contingency in the first place.” He said the condition violated the Roberts Rules of Order the board goes by.
“If it was not a legal motion, why didn’t you step up and say that?” Dye asked last month.
Starnes replied that it was his first meeting representing the board and he wasn’t aware of the problem at the time. He suggested the board not overturn the May 20025 motion because; “…that leaves you in a state of limbo.”
During the June meeting, Starnes said he should have used another word in the previous meeting other than “contingency.”
Kiser asked if the forensic audit was considered to be “just hot air?”
Dye asked if it was considered a line item that never made it into budget.
“That’s a fair way of putting it,” Starnes answered.
The last item on the agenda for each meeting is “Board Discussions and Reminders” in which board members usually mention something on their minds that was not on the agenda.
Kiser used his time to bring up the forensic audit once again.
“Last meeting, Mrs. Wallace mentioned that we had stuff in our packet that I was not aware of and she said it was in an email,” he said. “You may have got that email but several us of did not. There was no information about the APA in the email.”
Kiser was referring to information presented to the board last month by Russell County Administrator Lonzo Lester. The information was addressing the possibility of having the state auditor of public accounts conduct an audit.
Lester said the information was not in an email to board members.
“I know it was done to embarrass me but it was not correct,” Kiser replied.
District 2 Supervisor Lou Wallace attempted to get Kiser’s attention. “It is my time to speak,” Kiser said.
“Your last comment was uncalled for,” Wallace said.
“Well, that’s fine,” Kiser replied. “You can say whatever you want.”
Turning his attention to Starnes, Kiser continued, “In my motion in May of last year for the forensic audit, I repeat, it required a forensic audit. The tax rate required a forensic audit to be done. I don’t know how much more contingent that can be.”
Kiser added, “I’m afraid that that guidance is leading us into a place where we’re going to be financially exposed if we do not do a forensic audit for the tax rate that we have set.”
Kiser was not the only board member making allegations that information is not being shared with the full board.
Following the meeting, District 1 member Andrew Hensley issued a statement regarding his attempts to gain information about debt owed by the school board and public service authority.
“On March 2nd, I called the county attorney to ask what the board of supervisors’ legal obligation was to pay PSA and school debt,” Hensley said. “I wanted to know the when, where, and why of this debt, along with who voted for all this debt.”
Hensley continued, “Over the past the months, I’ve asked multiple times, with no answer. I asked tonight after the meeting, and did not get an answer. Since it’s been three months, I thought I’d let the public know that I’ve tried to gain this information. The reason this is important is because the debt makes up approximately 14 percent of the Russell County real estate tax rate.”
