Dawson approves $68K excavator purchase after months of contradictory public statements

DAWSON — After months of debate over a damaged mini excavator, the Dawson City Council voted Thursday to purchase a replacement using transportation special-purpose local-option sales tax, or T-SPLOST funds, ending months of discussion over whether the existing machine should be repaired.

The unanimous vote came after City Manager Roxie Powell told council members that replacing the excavator would ultimately be more practical than installing a replacement engine.

“Even if we replaced the engine, there are several additional parts that would also need to be replaced,” Powell said. “(The) estimate was that replacing the engine, along with the additional components, would cost approximately $30,000.” She said the equipment dealer recommended purchasing a new machine with a warranty instead.

Powell said comparable machines ranged from approximately $54,700 to $68,000, depending on size, with city officials recommending replacement of the smaller model currently owned by the city.

The council subsequently approved purchasing the excavator with available T-SPLOST funds.

The decision concludes one portion of a controversy that has generated months of public scrutiny but leaves several unanswered questions regarding how the city’s original machine was damaged, whether employees were held accountable and what documentation supports the decision to replace rather than repair it.

Before discussion began Thursday, Mayor Robert Aaron addressed previous reporting concerning the excavator.

“We’ve gone back and forth on this issue,” Aaron said. “I want to make it clear that there was never an engine purchase for this excavator. Whatever may have been reported elsewhere, the city has not purchased an engine for it.”

However, the existence of a replacement engine was not originally reported based on anonymous sources or speculation.

As previously reported by The Dawson News, the information originated from statements made during public meetings and records produced by the city itself.

During an April council meeting, officials publicly stated that a replacement engine had been purchased at a cost of $10,000 after the excavator was reportedly damaged. 

Subsequent investigation determined related invoices were actually for a replacement starter rather than an engine. City officials later acknowledged no replacement engine had been purchased.

That reversal became the focus of multiple follow-up stories after the city was unable to produce records documenting an engine purchase or even reports accurately outlining the damage preventing the excavator from being operational, despite repeated Open Records Act requests.

Although Thursday’s discussion centered on replacing the excavator, council members again received no written mechanical assessment of the damaged machine, no formal repair estimate and no competing repair bids before voting to spend T-SPLOST funds on a replacement.

Instead, Powell summarized information she said had been provided verbally by Southern Sales.

“Mr. (Michael) Sinquefield (the city’s Public Works superintendent) contacted Southern Sales, where we originally purchased the excavator, and requested additional documentation,” Powell said. “We have not yet received that documentation.”

She said the dealer nevertheless recommended replacement because of the additional repairs that would be required beyond an engine replacement. The council did not receive a written engineering evaluation, inspection report or detailed repair estimate during the meeting before authorizing the purchase.

Several council members indicated their concerns extended beyond purchasing another machine.

“My concern isn’t with what’s being proposed today,” one council member said. “My concern is how the first mini excavator was damaged and the fact that there didn’t appear to be any accountability.”

The council member added that the issue affected more than a single piece of equipment.

“This isn’t just about the mini excavator,” the council member continued.” We have numerous pieces of city equipment. I’d like an inventory of all city equipment presented to the council. It seems like we’re constantly spending money repairing equipment that’s being damaged, and I’d like to see greater accountability.”

Powell responded that the city’s newly adopted employee safety manual allows employees to be disciplined when negligence results in damage to city property.

“Employees may be disciplined if there is negligence on their part, and they may be held financially responsible when negligence results in damage to city equipment,” she said.

The discussion also turned to operator training. Powell said three Public Works employees are expected to complete heavy equipment operator training through the Golden Triangle Regional Commission’s equipment simulator program before operating the new excavator.

Mayor Aaron agreed.

“I think it’s important that everyone operating the equipment complete that training,” he said. “That has been our recommendation from the beginning.”

Council members also requested a sign-out system documenting which employee is responsible for each piece of equipment during the workday. Powell said the city does not currently maintain such a system but “can certainly create that.”

City officials said the damaged excavator could be declared surplus and sold.

Powell said Southern Sales estimated the machine could bring approximately $15,000 through the surplus process, with those proceeds returning to the city’s T-SPLOST account.

The newly purchased excavator will include a three-year warranty, according to the discussion. The purchase comes as Dawson continues addressing broader financial challenges and confusion.

During the same meeting, Powell informed council members that previous city budgets overstated recurring revenues and that the city is projecting operating deficits over the coming months. She requested authorization to pursue a short-term loan or use certificates of deposit as collateral to maintain operations while implementing a financial recovery plan.