Skip to content
← All case files
Public record / Senior living

Thomas County denied a six-person personal-care-home use

Board of Commissioners denied conditional-use application 25-5-1 after an approval motion failed 3–5; planning staff had recommended approval. TC1

DeniedRecorded May 27, 2025
Editorial illustration · not a photograph of the property
01 / The recorded outcome

What happened

Thomas County’s adopted May 27, 2025 minutes identify Cambridge Assisted Living and Residential Care’s proposed family personal care home for two to six people at 464 Old Cassidy Road, parcel 055D-038, in R-2 zoning TC1. Planning staff recommended approval. After testimony for and against the use, Commissioner Jeremy Rich moved approval and Commissioner Moses Gross seconded; the motion failed 3–5, so the application was denied TC1. The minutes record concerns about possible later similar requests as public testimony, not as a formal legal finding by every commissioner TC1.

Decision on recordBoard of Commissioners denied conditional-use application 25-5-1 after an approval motion failed 3–5; planning staff had recommended approval. TC1
02 / People and public bodies

Who acted in the record

Thomas County Board of Commissionerscounty conditional-use decision body

Denied application 25-5-1 after approval motion failed 3–5. TC1:p2

Commissioners Jeremy Rich and Moses Grosspublic commissioners

Rich moved and Gross seconded the approval motion; both recorded as ayes. TC1:p2

Chair Mark NeSmith and Commissioners Kenneth Hickey, Donnie Baggett, Zippy Vonier and Wiley Gradypublic commissioners

Cast the five recorded nays on the approval motion. TC1:p2

03 / A retrospective walkthrough

How RealClear would approach this site

Historical reconstruction: RealClear was not involved in the proceeding. This illustrates a one-property review of public records, not a predicted vote or private motive.

Can this R-2 parcel operate a small family personal care home?

Record to read
Exact application, planning recommendation and adopted board minutes
Constraint to test
The requested conditional use failed despite the staff recommendation; state licensing would have been a separate requirement.
Next action
Treat this parcel’s 2025 CUP as denied and check new filings or appeal before a present-use conclusion.
TC1:pp1-2
04 / What this record does not establish

The boundary of the finding

  • Legacy page omits “Old” from the official 464 Old Cassidy Road address and should be corrected.
  • The minutes do not establish that a precedent concern was the legal basis for all five no votes; no motive inference.
  • Denial of county conditional use is distinct from state care-home licensing or disability-law adjudication.

Latest cited status: As of the May 27, 2025 adopted Board minutes; later appeal or refiling not checked.

One property. A dated record. A clearer next move.

Explore more case files →