Pinotti under investigation

JACKSONVILLE — Cherokee County Pct. 3 Commissioner Katherine Pinotti is under formal investigation by the Cherokee County Sheriff’s Department for misuse of county funds, Sheriff James Campbell said Thursday.

He said at issue is county funds being used for work on Patterson Lane, a possibly private road located near Mount Selman.

“We went out there and took some photographs and some statements,” Campbell said. “We were asked to do an investigation on this.”

Campbell said the investigation started last week and that he was asked to conduct it by County Attorney Craig Caldwell.

Caldwell said the matter was brought to his attention by Pct. 4 Commissioner Byron Underwood, who was not available for comment at press time.

District Attorney Elmer Beckworth said the investigation has been filed through his office but could not comment on the details of the case Thursday.

The road issue came up at a meeting of the Cherokee County Commissioners Court Monday when Pinotti submitted a request to update the county road map — she wished to delineate the location of CR 3403, which she said was inadvertently omitted during the formation of the mapping system.

She also submitted a request to assign the road number CR 3403A to a segment of CR 3403.

Pinotti said Patterson Lane, the road in question, should be named CR 3427 — a county road number formerly assigned to the road but now assigned to what was once known as CR 3403.

“Back in March I was trying to fix my road numbers to correlate with the map,” Pinotti said. “The people who lived on Patterson Lane called and asked about their road number.”

Pinotti said at the time it looked like the road didn’t belong to the county and so she didn’t research it until more complaints about the state of the road came in.

She said due to what she referred to as a map making error, Patterson Lane is now marked as a private road when she said it should be marked as a county road.

E-mails from both Pinotti and Cherokee County Appraisal District Chief Appraiser Lee Flowers submitted to the Daily Progress show that she was, in fact, in communication with Flowers in March about the matter.

In those e-mail transactions, Flowers confirmed for Pinotti that the current CR 3427 was numbered CR 3403 on a digital map dated 1991-1999, and that what is now known as Patterson Lane at the time appeared to be numbered CR 3427.

The county map approved by Cherokee County commissioners in 1989 reflects the same, Flowers stated in an e-mail to Pinotti dated March 23.

“... both maps appear to indicate that what is currently shown as Patterson was 3427 on those maps,” Flowers wrote. “Today, the digital map ... shows what you currently see: No 3403 appears, from the north working south, the roads are 3404, Patterson and then 3427. ... I spoke to a resident in the affected area who confirmed to me that 3427 used to be 3403 until the 911 addressing changed the road and confused everyone.”

Flowers explained in his e-mail to Pinotti that he cannot determine if the road number change in question was done by a previous commissioner or not, but said a database as recent as 2004 shows both road numbers in use and that six addresses located on CR 3403 in 2004 are currently shown addressed on CR 3427.

“For the commissioners court, it will basically boil down to leaving things as is and noting 3403 as a dead road segment, or deciding how many voters to upset by changing road names,” Flowers wrote. “We will do whatever the court directs.”

An e-mail from Flowers to Pinotti the following day states Flowers did not have an opinion on whether the road names should be changed, but if she opted to seek a name change, he would suggest changing the current CR 3427 back to CR 3403 and the current Patterson Lane back to CR 3427.

Former Pct. 3 Commissioner Moody Glass spoke to county commissioners at Monday’s meeting and told them the road was abandoned by the county and thus not in county possession before he even took office.

“I had gotten calls for help asking me to maintain the road, but by law I couldn’t do it,” Glass said. “It was private property.”

He added as far as he can remember, Patterson Lane has not been a county road. When asked about Flowers’ e-mail exchange, Glass said “That’s a differing of opinion.”

However, he said CR 3404 was known to his employees as Patterson Lane for some time, though its official name was CR 3404 and it was a county road.

Although Glass said he has not attended commissioner’s court meetings since he was a commissioner, he said he felt compelled to attend Monday’s meeting after seeing in the paper that an issue involving CR 3403 was on the agenda.

Flowers said the district can not determine if a road is a county road or a private road.

“We are not the authority,” he said.

He added when the county commissioners approved the most recent county map, the current map became the last word on which roads are county owned and which are privately owned.

“Whether it’s a county or private road is a decision of the governing body,” Flowers said.

Pinotti said her precinct has spent about eight working hours and 10-15 truck loads of materials working on this road.

“Between $300 and $400 of material,” she said.

Caldwell said the facts of the investigation will be gathered before a decision about whether to file a full case is made.

“We don’t know how much money was spent (on that road), but we believe it to be a substantial sum,” he said.

Pinotti said she is seeking legal advice on the matter.

Homepage

Search Results

Discussion

Site Map

Contact Us