Mayor slams council members King and Holland, accuses them of breaching dead residents’ data


Two weeks after Mayor Kim Learnard upbraided Councilman Clint Holland about being a team player on the council, the mayor has added Councilman Mike King to her list of people needing improvement.

She says in her personal Facebook page — “Mayor Kim Learnard” — that the two participated in what she termed a “breach” of personal data from a list given to them by the Fayette County Probate Clerk’s office.

Peachtree City Mayor Kim Learnard. Photo/Cal Beverly.
Peachtree City Mayor Kim Learnard. Photo/Cal Beverly.

That list contained Social Security numbers of people who have died, information that Holland said they did not ask for but was part of the data handed over in response to an Open Records request.

King, Holland and four other citizens — including Post 2 council candidate Suzanne Brown — were seeking to determine if current active voter lists contained names of people who had died and by law should be removed from the list.

“Per [the Probate Court clerk], the Probate Court does not redact the 9-digit Social Security Number because after your death it is public information and no longer protected. Now that the Social Security system is linked to the administration when the death certificate is registered the Social Security number is automatically cancelled and cannot be used again.

Councilman Phil Prebor.
Councilman Phil Prebor.

“If you recall, Councilman Prebor was focused on the Social Security Number and implied that our possession of the lists somehow compromised the identity of his deceased son-in-law. Again, these lists are available to anyone who requests a copy from the Probate Court.

“Should Councilman Prebor want to restrict access to the public at large, he should take that up with the state legislature,” Holland said.

The mayor and Councilman Phil Prebor didn’t like that the data included Social Security numbers, and promised further actions.

The first was the mayor’s statement posted Nov. 1:

UPDATE: Deceased residents’ data breached

“Dear Peachtree City, I am reaching out as Mayor to share a recent development and a concern. I pride myself in transparency in government leadership, so I want the most updated and accurate information to be shared with our citizens. 

Peachtree City Council members Mike King (L) and Clint Holland at a June 2023 budget hearing.Photo/Cal Beverly
Peachtree City Council members Mike King (L) and Clint Holland at a June 2023 budget hearing.Photo/Cal Beverly.

“In our City Council meeting Oct. 19, City Council publicly discussed the fact that personal data of thousands of Peachtree City and Fayette County residents who passed away between 2020 and 2023 has been breached. The breached files contain personal information of the deceased, including unredacted birthdates and social security numbers. As many as 4,000 families may be impacted by this breach.

“City Council members Clint Holland and Mike King, together with City Council Post 2 candidate Suzanne Brown, and Margaret Ross, Elaine Kilgore, and Walt Handley, formed a committee intending to do a “Peachtree City registration list cleanup project.”

“They falsely claimed to be working on a City Council project when they requested the personal data files of the deceased from the Fayette County Probate Court office in May of this year.

“The group was forewarned by Fayette County Elections officials that the information they were trying to obtain was protected by State law, however they ultimately succeeded in obtaining this information under the pretext of conducting City business.  

“Neither their committee nor any of its members were conducting City business. Although Council members Holland and King used their city email addresses in some email communications, the data was shared to their personal email accounts as well as other committee members’ personal accounts. 

“City Council Member Clint Holland stated in a recent editorial that this information is a matter of public record. This is false. Personal information of this nature is considered “vital records” and access is restricted by state statute. Georgia OCGA 31-10-25, OCGA 50-18-70 and OCGA 50-18-72 detail security required under state law for vital records.

“If you are concerned that data of a loved one may have been compromised, contact us at city hall. 

“City Council will continue looking into this matter and will soon determine next steps.”

Next steps were expected to come at the council meeting Thursday night, Nov.2.


  1. At this point I agree with Mr Tucker’s comments. I’d guess a possible reprimand might be in order if King and Holland are determined to have exceeded their authority in forming the cleanup committee under the guise of a City Council committee. I’m sure we’ll hear more soon.

  2. I saw the story on WSBTV .
    I feel they had no right doing what they did. If they wanted to prove there We will see what the D.A. views are on it , if criminal charges will come. What they did is the Secretary of State job ultimately and Fayette county voter registration office. I guess they are saying they are not doing their job?

    But if the 4000 gets a civil lawsuit going , there maybe a way to made “them” pay literally..
    my guess is this was going to be their ace up their sleeve if they lost?

  3. This strikes me as a childish “tit for tat” exchange with little or no value. On the contrary, pressing these meaningless issues may result in significant difficulties to conducting the City’s business While there maybe technical ethic violations involved, the violations are hardly worth more than a cautionary warning to pay attention to the ways we may officially represent the City.

    Having read Georgia OCGA 31-10-25, OCGA 50-18-70 and OCGA 50-18-72, I cannot determine that any privacy exemtions were illegally collected or breeched by “City Council members Clint Holland and Mike King, together with City Council Post 2 candidate Suzanne Brown, and Margaret Ross, Elaine Kilgore, and Walt Handley.” I do not believe City authorization existed for a committee to work a “Peachtree City registration list cleanup project.” I do think justification for the deceased voters’ list exists, if for no other reason than to obtain better understanding of our local voting precincts’ composition. This equates to me as a few people going down to the local Elections Board and Probate Court to find out what they can about our registered voters.

    I do believe City Council members Clint Holland and Mike King may have exceeded their authority to officially represent the City in the creation of a “committee.” However, I also believe our Honorable Mayor Kim Learnard exceeded her authority when signing a letter pressing for more gun controls.

    As stated in some of my other comments in “The Citizen,” I do not do “Facebook.” Why does our Honorable Mayor Kim Lenard not use City media to communicate sharing with “Peachtree City” a “recent development and a concern,” and promoting “transparency in government leadership” with a personal “Facebook” account? Maybe she does this in addition to other media platforms and I just don’t see it.

    • Doug, at the beginning of her term as mayor she invited citizens to attend a meeting to discuss the current state of communications in Peachtree city, and how they could be improved upon. I had hoped to see the official city website become more robust, but that doesn’t seem to have happened. Much like you, I stay off of Facebook. I am in agreement that Facebook is not the place to communicate official business.

    • If you go to the article where the Mayor dressed down Holland, she says it herself. Councilman Holland was scolded for sending a letter at all, and reminded than any communication should be communicated through official city channels The Mayor admonishes,” and if it isn’t legitimate enough for them to share through city channels, it doesn’t belong in print…”.

      So will she be censured also?

    • Did we read the same statutes?

      OCGA 50-18-72(a)(20)(A) clearly provides that records that reveal an individual Social Security Number ” shall be redacted prior to disclosure of any record requested pursuant to [the Georgia Open Records Act].” There are two potential exceptions, but neither seem applicable. First, there is an exception for “new gathering and reporting.” But nothing suggested that was the intent of these folks–cleaning up the voter registration list is not news gathering. Second, while there is an exception for the disclosure of certain information from deceased people, that is limited to the month/day of birth and mother’s birth name (see (20)(B)(vi) of the same statute).

      • blakeh95, thank you for clarifying the State’s requirement for redacting social security numbers. I believe it is very important for the truth to be known. I concede the unauthorized “Committee’s” list of deceased registered voters’ legally should not have contained social security numbers. I still read OCGA 50-18-72 differently, but a high ranking anf well respected City official agrees with you and convinced me of my error.

        We are represented by well meaning and devoted public officials. It is my privilege to reside in a municipality where we can sort out our differences and continue moving forward keeping Peachtree City a great place to call home.

      • Shouldn’t the focus be on the government official(s) who released the personal information if they shouldn’t have? Any of us can make a request for public records, but legal compliance is the responsibility of the holder of that data.

        • I think you’re right. If the SSN’s and any other information should have been redacted by the releasing agency that’s their error. I do however wonder why it wasn’t the Fayette County Elections board who should be cleaning up the voting roles if there’s a perceived problem.