STOCKBRIDGE CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES
HENRY COUNTY, GEORGIA
April 12, 2010
April 12 , 2010 Meeting Minutes as a PDF file
April 12 , 2010 AGENDA Summary of the Meeting Minutes as a PDF file
April 26, 2010 Special Meeting Summary Minutes as a PDF file
April 26, 2010 Special Meeting Minutes as a PDF file
Videos of the April 2010 meeting are available here
The Regular Meeting of the Stockbridge City Council was held on April 12, 2010 at 6:00 P.M. Mayor Lee Stuart presided and members present were Mark Alarcon, Harold Cochran, Shirley Dabney, Fred Evans and Kathy Gilbert.
Harold Cochran made a motion to convene; Fred Evans seconded, and passed unanimously.
Kathryn Gilbert made a motion to approve minutes of the March 8, 2010 regular Council Meeting with amendments; Mark Alarcon seconded, and passed unanimously.
Mark Alarcon gave the invocation.
Mayor Stuart led the congregation in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America.
Mayor Stuart welcomed guests.
Mayor Stuart discussed the upcoming Census
Mayor Stuart: I’ve got a few community service announcements. One, we want to remind everyone about the Census. The Census is out there. Please fill it out. We have a lady who is also downstairs during the week and we need everyone to fill it out. We had a group went out this weekend to turn around and try and make the people aware of it here. The Census is how we turn around and get the headcount here, is how we get our taxes and the allotments of our resources and stuff here, so please, please encourage everyone to please fill out their Census forms.
We have a cemetery cleanup project this Saturday, the 17th from 11:00 til 5:00 o’clock over here at the Dabney Hunter Memorial Park, is what I’m calling it, over here. We have a Boy Scouts, Eagle Scouts, I’ve got three church groups; we’ve got a cemetery research group and some other folks we’re going to go over there and work on cleaning up the cemetery and so we appreciate everybody coming out, if they would, and help us out on that. Then, if you’ll check on the website, we have the City’s Week. City’s Week is week after next, the 20th through the 22nd. We have activities going each day and Kathy’s in charge of that there with the Community Relations Committee and you can come down and see the equipment, also get a class on how the government is run, and also get a tour of the building and shown everything, how it works in here. So we appreciate your participation in that. With that being said, we will move on into the agenda here.
OLD BUSINESS
Mayor Stuart announced that there was no old business.
NEW BUSINESS
Proclamations
Janet Turner – Founder of Hands of Hope Clinic
Mayor Stuart presented a proclamation to Janet Turner, Founder of Hands of Hope Clinic.
Proclamation
WHEREAS, the Mayor and City Council will take pride and opportunity in acknowledging one of Henry County’s outstanding citizens; and
WHEREAS, Ms. Janet Turner, founder of the Hands of Hope Clinic, a nonprofit organization that provides free medical, dental and medications to the low-income and uninsured residents of Henry County; and
WHEREAS, Janet Turner, through her passion, commitment, and hard work has impacted Henry County social service efforts, touched the lives of thousands of people; and
WHEREAS, Janet Turner, who began with a personal door-to-door food ministry and quickly realized the desperate needs for those who were less fortunate; and
WHEREAS, Janet Turner first opened the Hands of Hope Clinic with a vision to keep a free Christian medical clinic open in Henry County to include various medical services; and
WHEREAS, Janet Turner, a resident of Stockbridge, Henry County, is, and always has been, motivated by the needs in her community; and
WHEREAS, Janet Turner, an inspiration for us all, was honored by the Henry County Chamber of Commerce as the 2009 Citizen of the Year; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT KOWN that the Mayor and City Council of the City of Stockbridge proclaim March 8, 2010 as Janet Turner Day in the City of Stockbridge for all to celebrate and enjoy.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF I have caused the Seal of the City of Stockbridge to here be affixed down at the City of Stockbridge on the 8th day of March of our Lord 2010."
We did this and then she went on vacation, so we had to back up and do it. It was done. She’s just back from vacation. Thank you.
Industry Appreciation Week
Mayor Stuart presented a proclamation to Dave for Industry Appreciation Week.
Proclamation
WHEREAS, In Stockbridge and Henry County played an integral part in the foundation of our strong, diversified economic base; and
WHEREAS, Our industries continue to contribute to the local quality of life through the creation of quality jobs, the innovation of new products and technology as well as the community service our corporations and our employees; and
WHEREAS, In recognition of the pioneering industry, resilient spirit, sustained economic impact to manufacturing and industry in our community, the City of Stockbridge would like to join the Henry County Chamber of Commerce in proclaiming Industry Appreciation Week.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT PROCLAIMED by the City of Stockbridge that the week of April 12 shall be known as Henry County Industry Appreciation Week to coincide with the Governor’s statewide proclamation of a Georgia Manufacturing Appreciation Week.
SIGNED AND SEALED this 12th day of April, 2010, having been duly adopted by the City of Stockbridge.
Cities Week in Georgia
Mayor Stuart presented a proclamation about "Cities Week", which coincides with some of the activities the City is doing.
Proclamation
WHEREAS, The City of Stockbridge wants to support Georgia Municipal Association’s "Cities Week" campaign with the theme of "Energy to Transform"; and
WHEREAS, The City of Stockbridge wants the opportunity to share with its citizens about the valuable services the city provides to its residents; and
WHEREAS, The City of Stockbridge wants the opportunity to display equipment used in providing services on Tuesday, April 20th, 2010; and
WHEREAS, The City of Stockbridge wants the opportunity to give guided tours of City Hall to schools and day care centers on Wednesday, April 21st, 2010; and
WHEREAS, The City of Stockbridge wants the opportunity to open the doors to City Hall and Merle Manders Conference Center for an open house on Thursday, April 22nd, 2010 for citizens to tour and ask questions;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT PROCLAIMED by the City of Stockbridge that the week of April 18, 2010 shall be known as Cities Week in the City of Stockbridge.
SIGNED AND SEALED this 12th day of April 2010, having been duly adopted by the city of Stockbridge.
Pastor Terrance Jerome Gaddis
Mayor Stuart presented a proclamation to Pastor Terrance Jerome Gaddis honoring him for Pastor Day for Sunday, April 11, 2010.
Proclamation
WHEREAS, It has been the custom of every civilized community to bestow upon its members and such others that deserve it awards, honors, and proclamations presented by the Mayor and City Council; and
WHEREAS, Pastor Terrance Jerome Gaddis holds a Bachelor of Science Degree in Computer Science from Livingstone College and a Masters of Divinity Degree from the Emory University Candler School of Theology; and
WHEREAS, Pastor Terrance Jerome Gaddis was licensed as a Minister of the Gospel on March 24, 2004, and ordained on March 26, 2006; and
WHEREAS, Pastor Terrance Jerome Gaddis brings strong, innovative and dynamic pastoral skills, spiritual values and religious preaching and teachings of the Word of God; and
WHEREAS, The Mayor and City Council congratulates Pastor Terrance Jerome Gaddis of Mount Olive Baptist Church in Stockbridge, Georgia for his steadfast commitment for the Word of God; and
THEREFORE, the Mayor and City Council proclaim April 18 as Pastor Terrance Jerome Gaddis Day for all to enjoy and celebrate his success.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF I have caused this seal of the City of Stockbridge hereunto be affixed, done in the City of Stockbridge on the 12th day of April in the year of our Lord, 2010.
Reid Bowman: Thank you Council and Mayor for giving me an opportunity to come up and speak with you about an issue on the Rock Quarry Road Bridge Project that has been in the play since I moved here back in 1978. The one that I want you to really pay close attention to will be this one. It’s going to give you a lot of information. I have actually spent time with DOT and our two interim Fire Chiefs and I think it’s going to be pretty self-explanatory when we get into it. I’m going to wait a second or two while you get an opportunity to get it in your hands. I just wanted to tell you how much I appreciate the opportunity to talk with the Mayor and the Council and that I’m in my fourth year as my elected term and that I’ve done everything I could to make sure that I included Stockbridge on everything to build a relationship with the City of Stockbridge. We’ve had a good relationship.
If we go to the first page, the first page actually shows the Fire Station #8, Fire Station #3 and Fire Station #9 and their relationship with the project site, which is the bridge site. If you go to page two, it actually shows how we’re going to bring Railroad Street down and tie back in to Rock Quarry Road. That will be done first, at the very beginning of the project. And the reasoning for that is if we do have an emergency, somebody to get to the hospital, we’ve got that route that we can bring them out and bring them around and get them there. If you go to the next page, this kind of gives you an overview. What I’m asking is if the City would consider closing Rock Quarry Road in order to get this project done. And here are the reasons why:
1) Closing the road saves from three to four months in construction time. That’s first. It’ll get us in and out quicker. It’ll mean that we’ll be closed…. Here nine to 10 months—that’s a pretty aggressive schedule for that bridge. So I’ll tell you, it’s probably more like a twelve-month project, but, if we do it in phases, it’s more likely an 18-month project. So, we’re going to save approximately three to four months on this bridge.
2) It also saves--and this is from our Engineering Department--it saves us anywhere from $150,000 to $200,000. Now, we won’t know that until bid time; but what we’re doing is, we’re taking the effect of being able to close the road, and to build the project and open it back up, as opposed to doing it in two phases.
Now the two questions that come to mind: 1) Do we have sufficient detours? and 2) What about our citizens’ safety, Fire and EMS? If you’ll turn to the next page, it gives our proposed detour sites. I worked very closely with our fire department to be sure that we wouldn’t have any problems. And what they came up with is this particular detour site, but we also have some others we can run Tye Road and some other places. But by utilizing fire stations that we have, Fire Station #3 on Hwy 42, #9 in Stockbridge, keeping it there until the bridge is opened, and #8 on Flippen Road, we can still work and move our citizens around. Excuse me, because I don’t know the number to the fire station over at Flat Rock and Old Conyers Road. I don’t know the number of that fire station. But we’ve met with those and we’ve set up perimeters where people can get, if we have an emergency situation, we can get the people to the hospital. And as all of you know, there’s times when you’re trying to get somebody to the hospital, if you’ve got the road open even, that we run into a train and we still end up sitting there for eight minutes, or 10 minutes, or whatever the case may be. We’ve spent a lot of time and effort to try and make sure that that would be put in place.
I don’t know why they gave you a copy of Temporary Slopes Stabilization. But basically that’s just the engineers’ part.
But what I’d like to say is any money that’s saved on Rock Quarry will stay on Rock Quarry. So, if I’m able to save $200,000 on Rock Quarry and I have some extra funds, and, you know, if the economy picks up somewhat, I may be able to actually get enough money to do my intersection improvement at Banks Road and Rock Quarry, which will put traffic breaks in the traffic so that the people in Winsong and other areas up and down through there will be able to get in and out. I will do whatever the Council wants me to do, but I believe in my heart that this is the best way to go. But you decide that it’s not, I won’t have any hard feelings, because you’re going to have to field some phone calls while we close it, just as well as I will. So, I’d like for you to—I don’t know if it’s proper for me to ask for you to make a decision tonight on that, or do you need some time?
Mayor Stuart: Could I ask you a question, if you would? You’re saying if you’re saving $150,000, or whatever, the Banks Road intersection would have a traffic light?
Reid Bowman: No, sir. I’m not saying that it would have one. I’m saying I’d put that money towards it. Its $1.2 million to do the intersection improvement at Banks Road, because…
Mayor Stuart: Why?
Reid Bowman: Because we’ll get left-hand/right-hand turns off of Banks Road and we’ll have left-hand/right-hand turns off of Rock Quarry Road, one into the apartment complex and one off of Rock Quarry each way. The intersection improvement will be a pretty large project on its own. Just to put a red light up there’s one thing, I don’t know. That’s something I’ve talked to the engineers about because when we do our widening, if we get enough money from.., And there ,again, David Scott has talked about giving somewhere in the neighborhood of $6 million, which will go a long ways toward widening Rock Quarry. If we get that money, and then we’re going to have to tear out part of that intersection improvement.
I’ve talked to our DOT about just the prospect of us putting up a red light. Now, it’s not what you would want to do as far as an intersection improvement, because now you’ve stopped all the traffic, you know, somebody turning left, you’ve stopped it all. But on the same token, if it provides a necessary safety factor, then that’s something that we want to look at. But I would really rather do the intersection improvement, which moves the traffic along. It gives you right/left turns going both way; it gives you right and left turns off of Banks Road. The issue we have there is we have right-of-way issues that that we have to purchase, and that’s why that price goes on up to $1.2 million, and that’s in the budget. We’ve been able to get them a little bit cheaper, but still I’m only going to save somewhere between $150,000 and $250,000. But that money will go on Banks Road. If I can’t do the red light, then I’ll take that money and we’ll use it to purchase some right-of-way. so that when I can get my "money" from Mr. Scott for his congressional funds, then I’ll take that money and we’ll already have the right-of-way purchased, hopefully, in an economic time when it would be good to purchase it. Now right-of-way is not quite as expensive as it was three years ago.
Mayor Stuart: Reid, if I may, and we discussed it earlier, on the detours. Banks Road would be a truck route, Red Oak would be a truck route, and the Railroad Road Bypass would be cars only, except for transfer trucks.
Reid Bowman: Because, you know, where we’re putting the bypass, basically, our access road from Railroad Street. I don’t think it would be a good idea, personally to put trucks on that road. The reasoning is when you get on up Banks Road, there’s nowhere for them to go. I think that would be a mistake. It would be our intentions from the County to make that cars-only, no trucks. And we’ll do that on a weight-basis to keep the dump trucks off of it.
Kathryn Gilbert: Mr. Mayor, I have a couple of concerns about the detour situation. I’m pretty certain that local traffic is going to figure out they can go down Tye Street or local vehicular passenger type vehicles can go down Railroad and come out; but they’re going to be coming out on non-controlled intersections on Highway 138, or North Henry Boulevard. Ideally, we would want them to go up to be a controlled intersection, which would be the Flippen Road intersection. I am concerned, about the amount of traffic, because locals know it and others will figure it out pretty quick. And they’re going to be trying to get on 138. We’re going to be having some serious issues with Tye Street. We’re going to be having some serious issues down and around Railroad and under the bridge and trying to get around that way. What are your thoughts on that?
Reid Bowman: Well, obviously, we would like, and we’ve got it in that pamphlet in the information you have. We would love to send everybody to Flippen Road, where they’ve got actual traffic signals where they need to go at Hudson Bridge and also at 138 or North Henry Boulevard. But you’re exactly right. You know, people that have lived here for an awfully long time, such as myself, I would know "Hey I can go run down Tye Street", but I also know how hard it is to get out of Tye Street, so I’d make a couple of rights and a couple of lefts, and I’d come out down there by the bridge at a red light. I’d turn right and I’d be on my way. You know, and I think they’ll find those other routes, simply because it’s next to impossible at high traffic times to get out at Tye Street, unless you’re turning right. You know, if you’re turning right you can get out but I mean I understand what you’re saying, but on the same token, this is the best plan that I could come up with, working with our DOT, the County DOT, not the state. And working with our Fire Department to be sure we had our citizens covered and safe, with adequate ambulance and fire patrol to get everybody in.
Mark Alarcon: You know, we all have to be concerned about the access and the ease ability of, you know, commuting around in our communities, but nobody’s mentioned that once this detours are place, nobody’s mentioned the 42 corridor. I know it’s still a little bit out-of-the-way access to come into Stockbridge, but, you know, the 42 corridor, along with Flippen. I think the big key here is good signage to where everybody has good visibility of what detour is going to…we could maybe depict on those signs what’s the best access. You know, what’s the best access to go east or west, because if you can go down Tye Street and take a right, that’s a feasible maneuver. Turn left, you know, you’re in trouble. So there’s a way, you know, maybe possibly with signage but nobody had mentioned 42 as being a potential assistance with what we’re trying to accomplish. What I’m hearing is…you know I think all of us are money-conscious more than ever nowadays, but if there’s anything we can do to save money, whether it’s a penny saved, or a penny earned, or $200,000 versus, you know…we’re still not allocating the full million two to do the Banks intersection, but it’s still a lot of money that if we can potentially shorten the time, is what I’m seeing here. We’re shortening that time of inconvenience to the citizens by two to three months, plus saving…
Reid Bowman: It’s a minimum of three months.
Mark Alarcon: Yeah, but we’re also saving money, so that, to me, is a two-fold win. So, just wanted to mention that I personally think it’s a good idea if we can do that.
Mayor Stuart: Any other Council member?
Fred Evans: Yes, sir. Mr. Bowman.
Reid Bowman: Yes, sir?
Fred Evans: The way we had the land for the right-of-way’s already acquired. You got a tentative starting date on this?
Reid Bowman: It’s our intentions to let this out for bid in July. We are ninety percent on our engineered drawings and it’s my intention to have a contract on it before November. Just in case somebody sends me home. But, that’s my intention. I want this set in stone and have a contract on it and if a train runs over me sometime in the next six months, or something else happens, this project gets done, because it’s been far too long waiting on this particular bridge over Rock Quarry. And it’s something that I’ve asked many times before I ever thought about being involved in politics, why it wasn’t done. Well it wasn’t done because there wasn’t any money in a lot of cases, and it takes money to do it. But we’ve got the funding in place to do the bridge and the bridge is going to be built. I want to get that thing left for contract, like I said, in July. Then we’ve a few things to do, because we’ve got to buy property, or whatever we’ve got to do, we’ve got to get this piece secured where Railroad Street comes down. And there’s been a few. I think, Fred, you and I talked about that a couple of times. As a matter of fact, what have we got to do to get, we’ve got to get this piece, because that’s the key to the puzzle, is getting Railroad Street so we can take it down and tie it in. And now we’ve got everybody on that end and that corridor can make that one little loop there at the hospital or Eagles Landing Parkway or whichever they need to go.
Fred Evans: Let me ask you this to see if you know. Down here on North Henry, I think it’s across from the First Assembly of God Church, where they’re showing those signs, you know, Road Construction. Is that where the Rock Quarry’s planning to bring out their new entrance?
Reid Bowman: Yes, sir. You can see their cut-through’s. Yes, sir.
Fred Evans: Okay. Well, they should be finished far before us.
Reid Bowman: They’ll be finished far before we will. Yes, sir.
Fred Evans: That’ll alleviate some of your traffic congestion at the railroad crossing.
Reid Bowman: Then we spoke with the Rock Quarry and they had absolutely no problems with it. They felt like they’re going to go out that way sooner or later anyway, but this getting the construction time reduced so that the inconvenienced time for the citizens and for everybody is reduced, like I say, by a minimum of three months, so it’s three to four months. If we’re in good weather, everything goes. If we don’t have an El Niño season like we just came through, then this thing will go a lot quicker. And the detour signs. I understand what you’re talking about. We’ll do everything in our power to make sure that these signs are pretty-much self-explanatory and we will have our police officers early on making, being involved, being in the process, so they kind of help people move around early on. Once they get kind of an established route, we’ll be fine. I just feel like we’ll be fine.
Kathryn Gilbert: Mr. Welch, would we need to adopt a resolution or an ordinance for this?
Buddy Welch: You can adopt a resolution authorizing closure of the street for a certain period of time, but you would need to identify beginning of construction and the end of the construction plan. So my recommendation to you is if you wish to go forward with it so he’ll know what to do is that you adopt a resolution tonight saying that you will close that part of Rock Quarry Road for the construction of the bridge, upon being presented the out-of-bounds of the construction plans. Then you can adopt another resolution, adopting that plan and it’s done. And it will give you the period of time that it will be closed, which will be based upon the contract. That’s the way to do it.
Kathryn Gilbert: Thank you.
Mayor Stuart: Thank you. Yep.
Mark Alarcon: I just wanted to say I want to make sure everybody that I understand that from the past Council you were not allowed to do what you were asked to do it in two phases. And so what we’re voting on is actually do a full closure with no phases, just one contracting period of time with that closure specified in a resolution.
Buddy Welch: I don’t know of any previous Council saying it had to be done in phases. And I don’t know of any resolutions to that effect. But this is the way to do it based upon what recommendations have been made tonight.
Reid Bowman: What we did is prior to having all our plans in place, we had a meeting with just a few, and it was not a Council meeting like we’re in tonight. And because we, the County, did not have enough information to give, then it was stated that everybody said we want to do this in two phases, as opposed to a single. And I felt like that now was probably reasonable in that I didn’t have all the information that I needed. Now that we’ve got 90 percent of the drawings done and now that we’ve got a good idea of the savings, and now that we know where Railroad Street’s going to tie in, it just makes a lot more sense. But it was not a Council meeting. It was a "meeting" with several members and some key people within the City. But I didn’t take that as a negative, whatsoever, because we didn’t have the proper information. What I’ve given you is what I’ve been working on for about the past six weeks. And going back, like I said, with our fire department to make sure we cover the citizens’ safety to make sure we do everything possible to get the detours in play and to make sure that we don’t have any issues that puts anybody at risk. And that was my main concern. If it would put somebody at risk, then I wouldn’t even bring it to you. I just wouldn’t do it.
Mark Alarcon: Mr. Mayor, under those premises, I’d like to make a motion to move forward as Buddy has instructed on the lane closures, once we are presented with that information.
Mayor Stuart: Okay.
Fred Evans: I second the motion.
(Motion passed unanimously.)
Mayor Stuart: If I may suggest, too. Just like you were saying you didn’t have the information that would we do Town Hall meetings or something, it goes down better if the people, if we can get the facts out here. And if they don’t come, then they don’t get it. But you can put the information out a couple of these, like you said. Get the maps out, because I can see the look in the eyes of some of the people out here. They’re going "yeah", but they’re not quite following along. But if we hosted a couple of Town Hall meetings so they can follow, they have it in their head and kind of got a grasp around it, I think it would, we’re not going to satisfy them all, but at least get the information out to them and coordination with that I think would help.
Reid Bowman: Yes, sir. I appreciate it and I want to personally thank the Council for allowing me to bring it to you.
Fred Evans: Thank you.
Mayor Stuart: Thank you.
Buddy Welch: Mr. Mayor, I’m going to get a draft of the resolution and send it to him. Once he says grace over it, I’ll get it to you.
Mayor Stuart: Thank you. And for y’all’s concern after the Council meeting, if you want to see it, it’ll be available up here. We’ll let you take a look at it. I apologize we didn’t have it up on the screens.
Brecca Johnson: Good evening, Council. Thank you for the opportunity to do a brief overview of the Livable Centers Initiative study for the Hudson Bridge-Jonesboro Roads Activity Center. We have had a number of meetings since June 2009 to get citizen-involved and we’ve also sent invitations out to you all for the most recent meetings in February and in March for the draft plan recommendations to be presented to the Board of Commissioners as well as the final plan recommendations that were submitted to the Board and presented at the March 16 meeting. Tonight really is a meeting to receive any final comments you have on the plan. I’m requesting a resolution in support of the plan. We will come to you at a later date for adoption.
The plan, itself, entails about…Well, the location of the LCI contains 380 acres within the City of Stockbridge and we are very delighted to have Ms. Gilbert, who has been very vocal and a part of the core team. I saw a lot of your faces at some of the meetings. So I appreciate you all being involved. Since that time we’ve received a lot of support from the Board of Commissioners, our Zoning Board, the Atlanta Regional Commission, who is happy with our plan, staff. We’re also happy with the plan. And the Henry County Council for Quality Growth has also submitted a resolution in support of the plan going forward.
The plan entails six parts:
1) The Plan Overview, which gets into a little bit of information about the LCI program, which was begun with the Atlanta Regional Commission in 2000 to offer some grant funding for communities to create more livable, walk able communities that incorporate and make a connection between transportation and land use. And then infrastructure is part of that as well.
2) Another part of it is the Inventory and Analysis, which is just a basic overview of the existing conditions of the property, how much we have zoned a certain zoning district, what types of natural features we have on the property.
3) Then Public Outreach, which was a series of meetings that we have with the public in different areas around the county, mostly within the LCI area, which stems from Hudson Bridge on the south side all the way south to Jonesboro Road.
4) There are also recommendations for land use. We came up with three different concepts:
One on the north side of Jodeco,
One on the south, and
Another location that is near Meadowbrook off of Jodeco Road, which is the transit village, where our GRTA bus lot will be located in the next few years.
5) Also, we’ve come up with some urban design features and
6) Implementation is one of the main goals of this plan.
We have been charged with the request to have the plan adopted and to also incorporate a zoning code for an overlay of this property. Not asking for a resolution or adoption of the plan or the code. We do want to give you all plenty of time to review it. I’ve submitted it to Ray Gibson, your Assistant City Manager, as well as Ms. Gilbert has had an opportunity. And I hope each of you have had an opportunity to review it. So, in the six months that we have to adopt the plan and the code, it’ll give us the opportunity to apply for funding for transportation improvements, which as part of this plan we’re proposing, a west-side parkway, which will be located on the western side of Interstate I-75, stemming from Hudson Bridge, south to Jonesboro Road to provide some less congestion on I-75 without having to get on the interstate.
So at this time I would just like to thank you all for your time tonight and thank you for being involved throughout the process. And if you have questions for me, please let me know.
Mayor Stuart: Council members? Ms. Gilbert?
Kathryn Gilbert: I’d just like to say, Brecca, it’s been a pleasure working with you and the Tunnel- Spangler-Walsh organization on this process and I think it’s an amazing opportunity for, not only the City of Stockbridge, but Henry County to have a really well-planned county center and I would strongly encourage this Council to adopt the resolution.
Fred Evans: I totally agree with Ms. Gilbert. I’m one of the property owners on the northern part. My property adjoins the lady that’s got the 73 acres, Ms. Justice, and though it’s set aside as green space and we’ll probably never be able to use it, donate it to the City one day as a park, I’m all for it. I may not live long enough to see us reap the rewards from all of this, but I think it’s a great idea. I truly do.
Brecca Johnson: Thank you, Councilman Evans and thank you Councilman Gilbert. We do hope you live long enough. It’ll be another 25-30 years, so we hope that we’ll still be around to see this plan come to fruition.
Mayor Stuart: Anyone else? Do I sustain a motion here for this resolution in support of the Hudson Bridge-Jonesboro Road Connector Activity Center Livable Centers Initiative study document and commitment to implement the study?
Kathryn Gilbert: Mr. Mayor, I will make that motion.
Mayor Stuart: I have a motion by Ms. Gilbert. Do I have a second?
Fred Evans: Second.
Mayor Stuart: Mr. Evans seconds. Any discussion?
(The motion to accept the resolution passed unanimously)
Cheri Matthews: Good evening Mayor and Council. I’m Cheri Matthews with Henry County Planning and Zoning Department. Stacey was unable to attend the meeting tonight as he is attending the American Planning Association Conference. I think he’s learning a lot and he kind of passed this on to me. So, I’m going to try to take care of it for him.
This request came before you all during a work session, I believe last month, and I think there was a lot of dialog during that meeting. So I won’t rehash everything, just hit some key points. As the Mayor has mentioned, DRA Development is requesting a rezoning, and what they’re seeking to do is to remove all of the residential units that were originally a part of the request when it was rezoned back in March 2003. Originally, the request was 171.6 plus-or-minus acres. And the only thing The Appleton is requesting to do is remove the multi-family components which were townhomes and condominiums and then a C-2 component. And they’re seeking to rezone their property to C-3 for heavy commercial. After the C-3 use, they’re proposing restaurants, hotels, and a self-storage facility and, it is my understanding, some type of office retail and possibly a technical school. The only acreage that will be rezoned is 83.26 plus-or-minus acres. Again, this property did have a development agreement that was approved by the Council at that time in 2003, which will need to be amended should it be the desire of the Council to approve the request. Staff has reviewed the request and found that it is consistent with the Future Land Use Map and the request also went before our zoning advisory board where they did approve the request with 10 conditions. Again, because it went through the workshop, it is my understanding that the Council wanted to remove Condition #2 and #8 and staff has no objection to removing those conditions. Should you have any questions, please feel free to ask.
Mayor Stuart: Ray, do you have any comments, suggestions?
Ray Gibson: I just want to make clear that Conditions #2 and 8 were removed from the request, as per the workshop discussion.
Mark Alarcon: And I just wanted to add, since we had the privilege of having Brecca with us that this is in no way going to impede on what’s already been put in to the LCI. It’s going to meld in without any future needs for changing in zoning?
(Cheri Matthew’s response inaudible)
Kathryn Gilbert: Mr. Mayor?
Mayor Stuart: Ms. Gilbert
Kathryn Gilbert: Since I was not at the Work Session, I’m a little bit concerned about #8 being removed, Condition #8, which is ‘Driveway location shall be shared or joint use. Location shall be determined according to the immediate opening plan and spacing shall meet the minimum separations required by the Henry County Unified Land Development Code.’ I understand #2, the 200-foot setback. That could be a significant impediment to development, but I’m a little bit concerned about #8, because I think that that, not including that could, in fact degrade the quality of the development with a lot of curb cuts.
Mayor Stuart: Any other questions, comments?
Mark Alarcon: I’d like to talk about that because I was at the Work Session and I know we did talk a lot about that being, you know, an issue, or something that might need to be maybe overridden or maybe allowed to be a make a smaller easement there, but we never did really get that resolved.
Kathryn Gilbert: Are you talking about #2 or #8?
Mark Alarcon: #8
Buddy Welch: This is a rezoning request. You have to open a public hearing concerning the rezoning request after she has made her presentation. Then you have to request comments from the owner of the property first, anyone in objections to the property, second. And the property owner has the right to speak at the end. That’s the minimum requirements that you have to go through for a zoning hearing. So you have to open it up for the zoning hearing first.
Mayor Stuart: Okay. Do we want to open it up for the zoning hearing? Is the property
Buddy Welch: It takes a motion to open up the zoning hearing itself.
Kathryn Gilbert: Mr. Mayor, I make a motion to open the zoning hearing.
Mayor Stuart: We have a motion. Do we have a second?
Kathryn Gilbert: Shirley.
Mayor Stuart: Ms. Dabney’s a second. All in favor
(Motion to open zoning hearing passed unanimously.)
Buddy Welch: Now you can adopt what she’s already told you where it doesn’t have to be repeated. If you wish.
Mark Alarcon: I make a motion to accept what she’s said and proceed with zoning issues as Mr. Welch has put forth.
Mayor Stuart: Do I have a second?
Fred Evans: Second.
Mayor Stuart: Mr. Evans second. All in favor? Unanimous.
(Motion to accept information from Cheri Matthews passed unanimously)
Buddy Welch: Now, Mr. Mayor, you can call on the property owner to make any comments they wish.
Mayor Stuart: Any property owners? If you would, state your name and who you are.
Adam Price: My name is Adam Price. I’m with Falcon Engineering. I represent the property owner, DRA Development. My only comment is in relation to #8. Councilman Gilbert, I would like to say that, and maybe Mr. Welch, I would like to comment on this. Because I know we had comments in the workshop about that. The way the first two sentences are worded, I mean you can throw those out. Just go by the ULDC Code for street design. That’s pretty much in the ULDC Code for street spacing. So for median opening spacing , so I don’t think the landowner is really concerned about that, just concerned by those. We’re going to go by the standards set forth.
Ray Gibson: I guess my concern would be can we put something in there that we haven’t adopted, the ULDC? That’s my problem.
Buddy Welch: You cannot incorporate in a zoning ordinance an ordinance that you have not adopted. It will have to be adopted based upon the existing zoning ordinance, existing building ordinance in the City. Construction ordinances. So we cannot go and take what the County has already done to because you have not adopted that as your zoning ordinance. Any statement contained in the recommendations that reference the County’s ordinance would need to be stricken from the recommendations. And to answer your questions, Kathy, there was a discussion concerning the 200-foot setback that was recommended. Staff is recommending that you do not approve that. That is too encumbering on the property. It takes up too much of the property and we would be concerned that that may be a taking of property, so we recommend that part be stricken.
Mayor Stuart: Go ahead, Ray.
Ray Gibson: I just wanted to add that we might want to make condition if you want to keep Condition #8, put ‘Driveway location shall be shared use or joint use, where feasible, as determined by City staff as well as the Henry County Department of Transportation.’ To coordinate with them.
Kathryn Gilbert: We would be striking the reference to the ULDC? And leaving the first couple of …
Ray Gibson: I was just saying that where feasible, because once it starts getting engineered, there may be locations that aren’t feasible to be shared access.
Kathryn Gilbert: So insert in #8 ‘where feasible’.
Ray Gibson: ‘Where feasible’. And ‘where feasible’ according to the City staff as well as the Henry County Department of Transportation.
Mayor Stuart: Anyone else? (no response). Is there anyone in the crowd in opposition? (no response) We have no one to speak to opposition? Any further comments? Okay.
Buddy Welch: Mr. Mayor, since this zoning request also has a development agreement that is of record in Henry County, if the Council elects to approve the rezoning with the conditions that have been announced and agreed to by the property owner, then I assume that you do agree to all of them once the provisions have been made as announced? That the zoning would become effective on the date of execution of the amended development agreement. If you have any questions, staff, now is the time to ask it and then it would be up to you to vote on the zoning request.
Mayor Stuart: Any questions?
Fred Evans: Ms. Cheri, do you possibly have a copy of the development agreement with you?
Cheri Matthews: I do have a copy of the Development Agreement that was approved in 2003, but I do not have a copy of the revised Development Agreement, because it’s pending the decision that you all make tonight. But I do have that copy. Would you like to see?
Fred Evans: Personally, I’d like to see the Development Agreement.
Buddy Welch: If you approve it tonight, we will do the Development Agreement. You’re approving it conditioned upon the Agreement being signed. Then it would just simply come back to you at your next meeting with the Development Agreement in hand. You could again vote to authorize the Mayor to sign the Development Agreement.
Cheri Matthews: And the only change to the Development Agreement would be just to remove the 616 residential units to reflect commercial zoning, correct?
Buddy Welch: There are plans that are attached to it. We’ve got to change the plans and we’ve got to attach the additions as agreed to tonight. That’s all it amounts to.
Fred Evans: Mayor and Council, I make a motion that we postpone this decision until all of us have had an opportunity to look over this Development Agreement and see the plans on this thing.
Mayor Stuart: I have a motion. Do we have a second?
Harold Cochran: I second.
Mayor Stuart: Mr. Cochran second. All in favor? Two. Any opposed? Three opposed.
Mark Alarcon: I’d like to make a motion that we go ahead and proceed with this. We’ve already clarified that it’s not in jeopardy of the LCI. It’s under provision under the changes. If we don’t like the revisions, if there is an owner issue, if there’s a conflict between City and County issue, we can then strike it at that time. Is that correct, Mr. Welch?
Buddy Welch: Your motion should be "to approve the zoning as requested with the conditions announced subject to the signature of the property owner and the Mayor to the zoning." That would be the appropriate motion.
Mark Alarcon: I’d like to make a motion under those parameters to move forward on this.
Kathryn Gilbert: Second.
Mayor Stuart: Second, Ms. Gilbert. Discussion? All in favor? Ms. Dabney, Ms. Gilbert, Mr. Alarcon, and it passes. All opposed? Opposed: Mr. Evans, Mr. Cochran, no vote. Okay. So it passes. Thank you very much.
(Motion passed)
Buddy Welch: Mr. Mayor, I was not provided a copy of the resolution that was recommended by Planning and Zoning Department prior to the meeting, but I would strongly recommend to you that you amend the resolution adopted to strike the words "and commits to future implementation of the plan". Accordingly, my concern is that someone may claim that you are zoning or attempting to zone or committing to zoning prior to actually going through the zoning process.
Kathryn Gilbert: You’re talking about the motion that we just…
Buddy Welch: On the planning and zoning, yes ma’am. If you’ll look down. Do you have a copy of it?
Kathryn Gilbert: Yes, I do.
Buddy Welch: Look down at the very bottom of it. If you put a period where we are supporting the plan. It says ‘The City Council supports the Living Center’s initiative planned study period.
Kathryn Gilbert: This is the LCI. I’m sorry.
Buddy Welch: I wanted to go over this while the ladies were still here.
Kathryn Gilbert: I understand. Okay, back to the LCI resolution. Okay, got it.
Buddy Welch: Look down at the very bottom, Kathy, where it says ‘now being resolved.’
Kathryn Gilbert: Okay. Yes.
Buddy Welch: My concern is it’s starting with the word ‘and commits to future implementation of the plan, accordingly.’ That that may be considered to be contract zoning or making a commitment to zoning prior to the actual zoning hearing on it.
Kathryn Gilbert: So you would strike that?
Buddy Welch: I would recommend that you strike that language. I’ve discussed this with the representatives and they understand and agree.
Mayor Stuart: You’re just striking ‘and commits?’
Kathryn Gilbert: Correct.
Buddy Welch: So you would need an amendment to your motion, Kathy to correct that.
Kathryn Gilbert: Mr. Mayor, I will make a motion to amend my motion regarding the LCI to strike the words in the last paragraph where it starts ‘Now, therefore, be it resolved’ to strike ‘and commits to future implementation of the plan accordingly’. Strike that very last phrase.
Mayor Stuart: Okay, I have a motion to amend those words there. Do I have a second? We need a second.
Shirley Dabney: Second.
Mayor Stuart: I have a second from Ms. Dabney. Discussion on it? (no response) All in favor? We have unanimous on it. Okay. Thank you.
(Amendment passes unanimously)
Kathryn Gilbert: Thank you, Mr. Welch.
Mayor Stuart: Okay, Item #5. We’re going to have an open discussion on the City Manager’s position. I have a couple of questions, though, that I would like to ask Mr. Welch, if you would. Would you describe the City Manager’s position and its classification. Is he ahead of the Administrative Department?
Buddy Welch: The City Manager’s position was created by an ordinance of the Council, granting the City Manager certain powers, duties and responsibilities.
Mayor Stuart: But, is he a City officer? You can stay there. I’ve got a couple of questions for you, if you don’t mind.
Buddy Welch: I don’t know what you mean by the word ‘city officer’, if you will
Mayor Stuart: Okay, let me rephrase it. The City Manager’s position. Is he the head of the Administrative Department?
Buddy Welch: By the powers that were given to him under the existing ordinance, he is granted certain powers to serve the City on a day-to-day basis. Those are spelled out in the ordinance itself.
Mayor Stuart: Mr. Welch, what charter and sections, or code authorize the creation of the City Manager position and with the associated powers and duties?
Buddy Welch: Under the general powers of the Mayor and Council.
Mayor Stuart: We have all the departments established in the Code, Section 2.12.050 is in Chapter 2.12 Administration. And as a point of clarification, would you agree that all the departments in that section are to be supervised and directed by the Mayor?
Buddy Welch: The power to supervise them was granted to the City Manager by way of ordinance.
Mayor Stuart: I’m not asking about the City Manager. I’m asking you about the Mayor.
Buddy Welch: I think that the Mayor has certain powers that are granted to it under the Charter and under the Code and that those are spelled out. Also note that the Mayor and Council created the City Manager’s position and some of those same powers that may be delegated to the Mayor by way of the Charter, or by Code are also delegated to the City Manager by way of ordinance.
Mayor Stuart: In Ordinance 2.12.050 and other charters or Code Section authorize the City Council to appoint any Department Heads, employees, or other City personnel other than the City Clerk, Treasurer and City Attorney.
Buddy Welch: What is your question?
Mayor Stuart: What in that Ordinance, 2.12.050, other than code, the charter sections, authorizes the City Council to appoint any Department Heads, employees, or other city personnel other than the City Clerk, the Treasurer, and the City Attorney?
Buddy Welch: I don’t know. I would have to research what you’re talking about. What section is that? I’ll be glad to look at it for you. What section?
Mayor Stuart: 2.12.050.
Buddy Welch: 050? Okay.
Is it your advice to the Council and the Mayor that the City Manager is under the direction and supervision of the Mayor?
Buddy Welch: I have not been asked to give that legal opinion.
Mayor Stuart: I’m asking you now.
Buddy Welch: Well, I will be glad to research that issue and give you an opinion.
Mayor Stuart: What Charter or Code Section authorizes the City of Stockbridge to have two Chief Administrative Officers?
Buddy Welch: Are you asking for me to give you an opinion concerning that?
Mayor Stuart: Yes. What Charter or Code would authorize
Buddy Welch: What was the question again?
Mayor Stuart: What Charter or Code Section authorizes the City of Stockbridge to have two Chief Administrative Officers?
Buddy Welch: Okay. What was the second one you wanted an opinion on? The one just before that?
Mayor Stuart: What Ordinance 2.12.050, other than Charter or Code sections, authorizes the City Council to appoint any Department Heads, employees, or other City personnel, other than the City Clerk, Treasurer, and City Attorney? Mr. Welch, the question is that is the City Council authorized in any Charter or Code Section to exercise supervision over the administrative fares of the City?
Buddy Welch: Can you give me an example of that, Mr. Mayor?
Mayor Stuart: Section 3.21 is the Chief Executive Officer’s delegation of powers under the Charter. It says ‘The Mayor shall be the Chief Executive of the City. The Mayor shall possess all of Executive and Administrative powers granted to the City under the Constitutional laws of the State of Georgia and all executive and administrative powers contained in this Charter, except as otherwise specifically provided in this task. The Mayor shall have the authority to delegate any one or more executive or administrative powers to a person or persons employed by the City and qualified in management administration.
And my other question for you, Mr. Welch, is the City Council authorized in any charter or code section to delegate any mayoral powers to any City employee, officer, or other personnel? Those are my questions right there.
Buddy Welch: You’ve got a list of those? Could I get a copy of that where I can make sure that I’ve got all these issues covered, because I’ll be glad to give you opinion on each one of them.
Mayor Stuart: I’ll give you the questions. Okay. Any Council members have any comments they want to discuss? Mr. Evans.
Fred Evans: I’m just curious. Have you given any thought to the City Manager’s position?
Mayor Stuart: Well, I think that’s premature until we get it ironed out what the powers and duties of it are. You can’t hire somebody and at the point that we would need one, then we’ll have to go into an Executive Session and talk about the hiring step. But right now, the powers and duties don’t seem to be spelled out. We have conflict here. Until we can have conflict in the powers and duties, it would be wrong to bring someone in.
Fred Evans: Alright, now I have a question for Mr. Welch. If the Charter for the last 90 years has said that the City Council is the one who appoints Clerks, City Manager, and City Attorney, Chief Financial Officer and all that, why has all that changed since Lee Stuart got elected?
Buddy Welch: That’s not asking for legal opinion. I only give legal opinion. I don’t give personal opinions.
Mayor Stuart: Any other Council members? I think until these are resolved, that’s going to about resolve some of these others until we can get clarification on it.
Shirley Dabney: Mayor, I have a question. So, you’re saying that #5 we’re going to postpone it? Is that what you’re saying?
Mayor Stuart: We’re going to have to get some clarifications. We can’t get the answers here. There’s conflict of Charter and Ordinances.
Shirley Dabney: Okay. So we’re postponing? Okay.
Buddy Welch: I’m sorry?
Shirley Dabney: Is that what we’re doing? We’re going to postpone.
Buddy Welch: Do you want to make a motion to postpone it?
Shirley Dabney: Okay, we will postpone Item #5 to discuss the question that was asked of the attorney.
Buddy Welch: Okay. I have a motion to postpone it. Do we have a second?
Kathryn Gilbert: Is it entirely necessary to postpone a discussion? We aren’t acting. There’s no item to be acted on. We can just leave this as an open item to be brought back at any time.
Buddy Welch: Correct. It’s not…
Shirley Dabney: By any time…you don’t just leave it hanging. You have to postpone it, or something. Am I correct?
Buddy Welch: Alright, do we want to make a motion to postpone it? So you’ve made the motion to postpone it. Do we have a second to postpone it until clarifications?
Mark Alarcon: I’ll second.
Buddy Welch: We have a second. Discussion on it? All in favor? It’s unanimous? Okay.
(Motion unanimously passed to postpone Item #5)
Mayor Stuart: Basically, what the Ordinance here says is that this Ordinance authorizes the City of Stockbridge to amend Resolution 943 to ratify the acts of this City Council, authorizing the Mayor to sign all documents necessary to effect this Resolution, authorizing City Clerk or Deputy City Clerk to attest the signatures and affix the official seal of the City, as necessary, to repeal inconsistent resolutions, providing for an effective date and for other purposes. Basically, what the Ordinance here is the budget was passed as a resolution, which was illegal to pass, or improperly passed, back in December. As the Charter says, it must be passed as an ordinance, and so we have an ordinance here asking that we pass the budget as an ordinance.
Kathryn Gilbert: Mr. Mayor, I make a motion that we pass this ordinance, adopting the 2010 budget and amending and correcting the improper resolution passed in December.
Mayor Stuart: Okay. Do I have a second?
Mark Alarcon: I have a second.
Mayor Stuart: We have a second. Any discussion? We have a second. Mr. Alarcon was second? I’m sorry. You said discussion?
Mark Alarcon: I thought you had a second. Yeah, I’m for it.
Mayor Stuart: All in favor passing this ordinance? Unanimous? Okay
(Motion passed unanimously)
Mayor Stuart: Thank you much. The budget is so passed.
Mayor Stuart: Ms. Gilbert, I think you were the one that was heading this one up. Would you like to explain it, please.
Kathryn Gilbert: Yes, I spoke with County Commission Chairman BJ Mathis regarding this issue and the County has requested local legislation from the delegation to allow them to raise their hotel/motel tax. Actually, I believe they’re raising theirs to seven percent. This is not a tax on citizens. This is a tax on visitors to the County that stay in our hotels and motels. Given the state of the economy and the budget constraints that everyone’s operating under, we’re looking for ways to help with beautification of our intersections with the interstate, interchanges with the interstate and other items. The hotel/motel tax must be used for tourist and related items. And so, in support of the County and their request to the local delegation, and asking that we also are included in raising our hotel/motel tax, which currently exists at five percent, to the eight percent. That’s the nature of the resolution.
Mayor Stuart: Okay, so I have a motion for the resolution for it?
Kathryn Gilbert: I will make a motion to adopt the resolution to raise the hotel/motel tax to eight percent.
Fred Cochran: Second.
Mayor Stuart: Mr. Cochran seconds it. Any discussion? (no response) All in favor? Unanimous.
(The motion passes unanimously)
Mayor Stuart: Thank you.
Mayor Stuart: And who was sponsoring this one?
Buddy Welch: Mayor, this is one that you asked for to setting the order of business and this has been brought up in several meetings. At the last study session, there was no request for changes to be made.
Mayor Stuart: So, I have a motion?
Kathryn Gilbert: Mr. Mayor, I make a motion to adopt the ordinance regarding, this is an ordinance, regarding the establishment of committees as written.
Mayor Stuart: Do I have a second?
Fred Evans: Second.
Mayor Stuart: Any discussion? (no response) All in favor. Mr. Alarcon opposed. Okay. Four and one. Okay.
Kathryn Gilbert: I’m sorry? Mr. Alarcon?
Mayor Stuart: Mr. Alarcon opposed. Okay.
(Motion passed 4-1)
Buddy Welch: The next one is the committee ordinance. I advised you at the last study session that there is a charter and code section areas in it. The ordinance has been drawn to comply with the charter, which says the charter that the mayor can select the committee members and the chairman and that is the way the ordinance is set up.
Kathryn Gilbert: We just adopted the committee ordinance, if I’m correct.
Buddy Welch: Okay. The first one was Order of Business.
Kathryn Gilbert: Committees-Committees.
Buddy Welch: No. Order of Business is the very first one.
Mayor Stuart: No.
Kathryn Gilbert: No, sir.
Mayor Stuart: #8 is Order of Business Committees. Right. It passed the committees.
Buddy Welch: Which one have you voted on then?
Mayor Stuart: The committees. #8 Order of Business Committees was passed four to one.
Buddy Welch: Okay. The next one is the Order of Business. There was no change requested at the previous study session.
Mayor Stuart: You have versions one through four. When I was tabulating during the week, trying to get y’all to come to a consensus, I had two
Buddy Welch: I only have one ordinance under that.
Mayor Stuart: We have four here. Is that correct?
Buddy Welch: Shouldn’t be but one, because there was no changes made at the last meeting.
Mayor Stuart: I can only go by what’s been provided us and what’s been in the agenda for a week.
Buddy Welch: Well, I haven’t been provided any documentation that you have. Only thing I can tell you the one that was sent after the workshop is the correct one.
Mayor Stuart: Well, we have four of them here.
Buddy Welch: Well, can someone say which is the last one sent up here?
Mayor Stuart: What I have right here is what was sent from your office. They’re all dated, Version 1, 2, 3 and 4.
Buddy Welch: Could I see somebody’s book? And I’ll be glad to help y’all get through it.
Mark Alarcon: Order of Business #8.
Mayor Stuart: You’re still on 8. We’re on 9. Eight was the committees. We resolved that. It passed 4 to 1.
Buddy Welch: The next one, nine, is submitting of agenda items. Submitting of agenda items, there is four of them. One is
Mayor Stuart: The Agenda Item #1 sets Wednesdays prior to the meeting. #2, Agenda Item set Monday prior to the meeting and packets ready on Wednesday. Item #3, version 3 is Agenda Items set on Friday prior to the meeting and agenda ready on Monday and ordinances on Wednesday. And then Version #4 was Agenda Items set Friday-week prior to meeting and packets ready on Monday.
Buddy Welch: That’s the ones y’all referenced in the workshop.
Mayor Stuart: And could not, during the week, did not have any resolutions from anyone on it? Other than, I think, #2 led with two people.
Kathryn Gilbert: Mr. Mayor, I’ll make a motion that we adopt Version #2, Agenda items set on Monday prior to the meeting and the packet ready no later than Wednesday.
Mayor Stuart: Okay. I have a motion. Do I have a second for Version 2. (no response) No second. Okay.
Mark Alarcon: Mr. Mayor, I would like to make a motion to look at Version 9-4, with the Item Agendas being set on Friday to be ready on Monday.
Mayor Stuart: Item 4 is the Agenda set Friday the week prior to the meeting and packets ready on Monday.
Kathryn Gilbert: I’ll second that motion.
Mayor Stuart: Okay. I have a second.
Buddy Welch: You understand, that doesn’t give us any time to draw the ordinances. That version gives us no time…
Ray Gibson: We’re talking about 10 days prior to. The Friday two weeks before the public hearing.
Mark Alarcon: It’s my understanding that’s the premise which we’ve practiced for this meeting.
Mayor Stuart: Correct. Tried to.
Buddy Welch: The only thing I’m point out to you is that if you want to put an item on the agenda, and it requires an ordinance or a resolution, we don’t get that information til the weekend and the earliest we would get it would be Monday. And the way y’all talked about an ordinance being written, you would have to prepare it and have it here by Monday Noon. I don’t think that’s practical to do the legal research, and prepare ordinances and prepare resolutions within a four-hour period.
Kathryn Gilbert: Mr. Mayor
Mayor Stuart: Yes, Ms. Gilbert?
Kathryn Gilbert: I believe we’ve had discussion that items coming out of the work session would be the agenda items moving forward, that there really would be nothing going on to the agenda that had not been discussed in the work session which would be, as a general rule, two weeks prior to the regular Council meeting.
Buddy Welch: You don’t have any resolution to that effect now. You don’t have any resolution or ordinance to the effect.
Kathryn Gilbert: That is something we would need to address?
Buddy Welch: If you are saying that nothing can go on the agenda unless it’s gone through the study session, then I‘d have to research that, but I would have reservations as to whether that would be legal. ‘Cause I think the Council persons have the right to put on the agenda items that they want to put on there that they want to discuss. The problem is if you’re asking for a resolution or ordinance to be prepared, for example, if you call up and say I want the LCI on the agenda and I want an ordinance or a resolution to approve the LCI, then there’s no time in which to prepare it the way that one is listed. 9.2, the one you just made a motion to first, gives us the ability to do that. Because we get it on Monday, then we have until Wednesday to prepare the documents, get them to the Clerk, and then she gets them back in time to y’all. And that gives you five full days to review the documents.
Fred Evans: Mayor, Mayor.
Mayor Stuart: Mr. Mr. Evans?
Fred Evans: I make the motion that we approve the first version where the agenda items are set the Wednesday prior to the meeting, which would give legal counsel and staff a full 10 days to do what they’ve got to do.
Mayor Stuart: That’s not what it reads that way.
Kathryn Gilbert: That’s not, no.
Mayor Stuart: That’s not the way it reads. It says the Wednesday prior to the meeting and packet on Friday. That’s not 10 days.
Fred Evans: That would be the Wednesday beforehand instead of the Friday before.
Buddy Welch: 9.2 is one that gives everybody some room to put documents together to get them out to y’all. You have to request by Monday, no later than Noon on Monday prior to the next meeting if you want something on the agenda. We have until Wednesday to prepare the documents and get them back to you. Then the Clerk has until Wednesday to give those out to you. Then you have the package Thursday and you can have that time to review it.
Mark Alarcon: Mr. Mayor, I wanted to mention on 9.4, which is how we put this meeting together, whether the ordinances are in place or the paperwork’s in place or not. This particular meeting was put together under the parameters of 9.4, which is from Committee to Work Session to Agenda to this meeting. So, I mean, it seems like there, you know, we’ve all had ample time to review what we have in front of us. That’s why I was saying I wanted to make a motion for 9.4, because I don’t feel like anybody was impeded or rushed to review what we have in front of us tonight.
Buddy Welch: So you have a motion for 9.4, that the Agenda’s are set Friday, the week prior to the meeting and the packet ready on Monday. Do I have a second for 9.4, version 4? (No response) Don’t have a second.
Kathryn Gilbert: Mr. Mayor?
Mayor Stuart: Ms. Gilbert.
Kathryn Gilbert: May I bring back my motion to accept Version 2? I’m making a motion that we accept Version 2 of the ordinance, regarding setting of agendas.
Mayor Stuart: Do we have a discussion? (No response) No discussion. So, all in favor of 9.2 Version? We have two. Okay. All opposed? It’s sustained. So we don’t have anything. We’re not passing anywhere. This is why I wanted everyone to try and come in during the week and try and work it out. Maybe we ought to just postpone this one until we can get some resolve on it.
Mark Alarcon: I make a motion to postpone.
Mayor Stuart: Do I have a second?
Fred Evans: Second.
Mayor Stuart: I have a second from Mr. Evans. All in favor. (Motion passed unanimously) Okay, it’s so postponed. Y’all are working me.
Buddy Welch: This ordinance was not amended or changed in any way from what you discussed on the last workshop.
Fred Evans: I make a motion to approve.
Mayor Stuart: We have a motion to approve it by Mr. Evans. Do we have a second?
Shirley Dabney: Second.
Mayor Stuart: Ms. Dabney seconds. Discussion. (No response) All in favor? Unanimous. (Motion passed unanimously)
Buddy Welch: Version 2 is the only one that would be appropriate at this time.
Mayor Stuart: Question though, what this resolution that required you to amend the ordinance 3.04.03 about check signing. It says ‘Checks shall be signed by the City Clerk, by the Mayor, or
Buddy Welch: Excuse me. Give me the citation again.
Mayor Stuart: Ordinance #3.040.30, which has to do with check signing procedures that says the checks shall be signed by the City Clerk and by the Mayor or a designated Council Member. But before you could implement that resolution, you would have to amend the city ordinance.
Buddy Welch: I just have to look at that and see. What this was, this came about as a result of what the bank was requesting.
Mayor Stuart: I’m just reading.
Buddy Welch: If y’all want to hold that until the next meeting, that’ll be fine.
Mayor Stuart: Do I have a motion to postpone that until
Buddy Welch: Just make sure that nobody else is signing checks except as authorized by that ordinance there.
Mayor Stuart: So, do I have a motion to postpone this one?
Mark Alarcon: I would like to make a motion to postpone.
Fred Evans: Second.
Mayor Stuart: Postpone #11.
Fred Evans: I make a motion that we approve Version 1 of On-call Public Works, Water and Sewer and Code Enforcement.
Mayor Stuart: I have a motion. Is there a second?
Harold Cochran: Second
Mayor Stuart: Discussion?
Kathryn Gilbert: Mr. Mayor, I’d like to ask if Mr. Evans would consider amending that to remove the code enforcement officer. There’s no city or county in the area…The County does not provide a 24-hour vehicle to Code Enforcement. Most of the local cities do not provide vehicles to Code Enforcement. I believe it’s necessary that Code Enforcement be on-call 24/7.
Mayor Stuart: So, you’re asking to amend?
Kathryn Gilbert: I’m asking Mr. Evans if he will amend his motion.
Fred Evans: Makes a motion to what?
Kathryn Gilbert: To remove Code Enforcement.
Mayor Stuart: To amend it to remove Code Enforcement.
Fred Evans: No, the motion remains the same. I have a second.
Mayor Stuart: Okay, the motion remains the same. Do we have a second? No second?
Shirley Dabney: He had a second.
Mayor Stuart: He has a second? Who seconded?
Shirley Dabney: That was Mr. Cochran seconded.
Mayor Stuart: I’m sorry. I didn’t hear that. Okay, we had a second. Discussion? All in favor? One, two, three. So that’s Ms. Dabney, Mr. Evans and Mr. Cochran.
Shirley Dabney: Any opposed? You have to ask that.
Mayor Stuart: Any opposed? Mr. Alarcon and Ms. Gilbert (motion passed 3-2)
Buddy Welch: On the procurement officer, since you’ve asked for legal opinions, it may affect this. I would ask you to postpone a decision on procurement officer.
Mayor Stuart: Roger that.
Kathryn Gilbert: I make a motion to postpone.
Fred Evans: Second.
Mayor Stuart: Any discussion? All in favor of postponing? Unanimous.
Mayor Stuart: I believe this was yours, Ms. Gilbert?
Kathryn Gilbert: Yes, it was. I spoke to it at the last meeting and, I think it sends a message to our businesses in the City and the County that we are looking to do business locally. And so, I would urge that we adopt this item. And I will make that motion.
Mayor Stuart: You’re making a motion to adopt?
Mark Alarcon: I would like to ask to amend that motion from two percent to five percent of the lowest bid.
Kathryn Gilbert: Thank you. I forgot about that. Thank you.
Mayor Stuart: Okay. Amended.
Kathryn Gilbert: I accept the amendment.
Mayor Stuart: You accept the amendment? And you second it?
Mark Alarcon: Second.
Mayor Stuart: Discussion?
Buddy Welch: The only thing I want the Mayor and Council to know. I think this is a questionable legal ordinance. And I’ve given you my reasons for that.
Kathryn Gilbert: Mr. Bowman, since you’re sitting here and I believe the County has an ordinance of this sort, could you enlighten us to what the County’s version of the Henry First Ordinance is?
Reid Bowman: I cannot give you the exact terminology. I know we did it eight months ago. There was a lot of conversation over it, because it does pose a problem when you’re trying to use county businesses, and that’s really a good thing, it takes others out of the bid process if they feel like they’re not going to get the bid anyway, because if somebody’s within five percent, they’ll get the project. You know, you get bids from all over. You get bids from everywhere, okay? From all over the different counties. So, if you put an opportunity in there, that gives the Henry County person a second bite of the apple. I have a few issues with it personally, but I don’t know exactly what ours is. I wish I could enlighten you, but I really don’t feel comfortable. What happens is, when you bid, if you bid out a project for whatever reason, and the Henry County contractor is five percent higher than the low bid, then I don’t know how many times you’re going to get that other participation to keep the prices in line. I hope that makes sense.
Buddy Welch: My understanding of the County ordinance was that it was two percent, and if it was within two percent, then they could take the County bidder. The way I drew this to, hopefully, give it some light that may be legal is to say that’s conditioned on the low bidder reducing his bid to that bid.
Kathryn Gilbert: Right. Correct.
Buddy Welch: That’s not the way the County reads.
Mayor Stuart: Mr. Bowman, You’re saying it was five percent?
Reid Bowman: My recollection, and Mr. Welch may be right, but my recollection was five. I’m not going to say that and set it in stone, because there again, I was not particularly . That almost comes. To me as being a business person, if I was bidding in Rockdale County and they had the same thing and I knew that they were going to take that, it puts a little different spin on what you’re able to do. That’s not something that I really should talk about in this forum.
Mayor Stuart: We collared you. Thank you, Reid.
Mark Alarcon: Mr. Mayor, I would like to speak about this issue, because I am a commercial contractor. I have run into this issue in South Carolina and Texas and we’ve seen it in Florida. It’s an issue that a lot of municipalities are going to. We have not seen this type of documentation in cities and counties adopting this type of thing until the last two or three years because of the issues with the economy the way it’s been. Now, I ran on the premise of I’m going to be small-business friendly. And local small businesses mean more to me than the guy in Rockdale County, in Atlanta, or any of those things. From my perspective, if we can generate a qualified bidder, that’s the number one priority for me. As evaluating what a contractor is capable of doing or not. I think this is an invitation to encourage local bid packages, so I may have a little bit of a reverse mindset. It’s frustrating as heck, because I’ve lost a bid in South Carolina. I’m doing a lot of business in Augusta, you go a hundred feet and you’re across the river and now I’ve got to play by a whole different set of rules. It’s kind of darned if you do and darned if you don’t, but it does protect your local contractor and here I am from Stockbridge trying to business in South Carolina. No, Mr. Alarcon, y’all go home. You know, we’ve got local folks that are going to do that, so it has its ups and its downs. So I have to agree with that. But I think in a small city and in what we’re trying to do here, I think if we can make sure that it is strong legally and not a weak ordinance…I think there are so many municipalities doing it, if it was that grotesquely illegal, it would have already been challenged partially by now. And it could be. But I’m just saying if we draft it craftily and carefully that I would like to see this move forward.
Mayor Stuart: The motion on the floor is to amend it five percent.
Mark Alarcon: You got a first and a second.
Mayor Stuart: You got a first and a second. We’ve finished discussion? Go ahead, Ms. Dabney.
Shirley Dabney: Mr. Welch, I have a question. Would you advise the two percent over the five percent?
Buddy Welch: I don’t think it makes any difference whether you have two percent or five percent, because the person will have to match the lowest bid if they want to get the work. If you had an ordinance that said that if you were within five percent of the lowest bid, we’re going to give it to the local people, I don’t that would stand the test of the courts. I have added the language that if they’re within two percent, if you want to put five percent, I don’t think that makes any difference. They still have to match the lowest bid, to get the bid. And that’s the best I could come up with to give this some hope of surviving a …
Fred Evans: And, if I’m correct, if there’s a state or federal grant involved, we are mandated to take the lowest bid, correct?
Buddy Welch: You are. You are and then that happens, the question then comes up when you have, and all of this stuff we do out here—LCI work-- is either all federal or state funded one way or another, and you have the local guy that does whatever, laying sidewalks, let’s say, pouring cement. He comes in and someone from Rockdale County has the lowest bid; he comes in, agrees to take it. Are we going to jeopardize those funds by that and then are we opening ourselves up for suit from the local person to sue us because we did not follow our own ordinance? So it gets to be a catch-22. It’s a problem, and I understand what Mark’s trying to do. He’s trying to help the local folks and everybody ought to try to help everybody they can locally, but the only thing I can tell you is this thing’s got a lot of legal questions that have not been answered and until they are answered, and they’re going to be answered by somebody that’s enough money involved to challenge it. Okay? That’s another reason for the logic of two percent versus five percent or 10 percent, or whatever it may be. Two percent may not be a big enough to fight over, if that helps any.
Mark Alarcon: Well, Mr. Welch and Fred let me say what I said about these qualifications of a contractor. If you’re talking about a handyman service or a small business owner, the capacity of most of those size companies. They’re not able to qualify from a bonding qualification, or for that matter, they’re not able to fund their own finances for 45-60 days. I understand. And we are mandated by federal and state to use the lowest bidder, but if they don’t qualify, if they’re just small companies that don’t have those resources, I think that’s going to limit some of that liability. And then you even said that we haven’t had those questions posed yet, because like I said, it’s going to have to be something of mass amounts to make somebody spend the money in the court of law to make that definitive line.
Buddy Welch: The only thing I’m doing is forewarning you. This is a lawyer’s dream, okay? It’s a litigation dream and all I’m trying to do to forewarn you that it may create a problem. I’m not trying to tell you not to pass it. If that’s what y’all want to do, it’s fine. The only thing I’m saying is you need to understand what the potential ramification is. That’s all it amounts to. You take someone like Reid Bowman. I expect he could bond $100 million with a blink of the eye. If he wanted to put in the sidewalks, he would have the ability to do it and he would qualify. Are you better off leaving it at two percent and saying they have to qualify. Are you better off putting it five percent? That’s a decision y’all have to call.
Mayor Stuart: Any more discussion? All in favor?
Fred Evans: What was the motion?
Mayor Stuart: You got a first and a second.
Kathryn Gilbert: The motion is to adopt the ordinance, amended to five percent.
Mayor Stuart: All in favor?
Buddy Welch: Procedurally, you would have to have a vote to change the proposal before you from two to five percent. So you need to get that done first, please.
Kathryn Gilbert: I make the motion that we change the proposal to five percent.
Mayor Stuart: Do we have a second?
Mark Alarcon: Second.
Mayor Stuart: All in favor? Okay. We do not amend it.
Buddy Welch: Now, you would have the ordinance, itself, before you, with the two percent.
Mayor Stuart: Do we have a motion with the ordinance as it is, with the two percent?
Kathryn Gilbert: I make the motion for the ordinance at two percent.
Mayor Stuart: Do we have a second?
Mark Alarcon: Second.
Mayor Stuart: Second by Mr. Alarcon. Discussion? (no response) All in favor? We only have two for it. All opposed? Dabney’s opposed. Cochran and Evans.
Buddy Welch: This ordinance was not changed from the study session.
Mayor Stuart: I personally don’t think this is necessary. This could be an executive administrative writ or policies and procedures on how to do it.
Buddy Welch: We had several Council members to ask that this be put together so that the employees would have a clear understanding that they could call for legal opinions and that it not be, that legal issues not be subject to evaluations by non-lawyers.
Mayor Stuart: This was the thing that I brought back from the Georgia Municipal Association that this is what they advised us. This is not restricting anybody from having any kind of legal advice or opinions. It’s that we can’t have everybody in the City calling up the law firms any time, any place, and it needs to all go through the Assistant City Manager or City Manager. They need to talk to him and if he deems it necessary, he’ll pass it on to the lawyer. What we’ve asked was that attorneys, when they get it, will turn around and cc copies, email to all the Council members to keep them abreast, because the City Attorney does not work for any one specific person in the City. He works for the City, itself, and all employees. Need to turn around. We don’t need private conversations. We need private opinions? We don’t need those. So that was the whole purpose of it there. It was to turn around. It’s done; I know, for example, the City of Toccoa and several other places. This, again, does not restrict getting legal advice, and it also helps us to hold down on our legal costs. Because we have it where everybody calls any time they want and unless the City Manager or Assistant City Manager is the ones that turns around and can consolidate them and send them over.
Kathryn Gilbert: Mr. Mayor?
Mayor Stuart: Yes, Ms. Gilbert?
Kathryn Gilbert: If I may. There’s an item in this ordinance that concerns me and, Mr. Welch I hope that you won’t take this personally, necessarily. But Item G says that ‘to the extent that the City Attorney holds the position of ethics officer in accordance with the City’s ethics and anti-fraud policy, any public servant employed, elected, or appointed within the City shall be authorized to contact the City Attorney to report a violation of the ethics and anti-fraud policy.’ I believe that anti-fraud policy was adopted in our December meeting. And I believe at the time I asked you a question and I asked you if this would, in fact, this anti-fraud or this ethics policy, would, in fact, qualify under the Georgia Municipal Association requirements to become a Certified City of Ethics and you responded in the affirmative that, yes, it would. I have looked online at the suggested ordinances and resolutions on the GMA website and in all instances, they require a panel of three citizens to be the Ethics Arbiter for the City. And so, I could not…First of all, we’re going to have to revisit that to make sure that we can, in fact, become a Certified City of Ethics under the Georgia Municipal Association and to that extent, I could not consider this unless Item G is stricken.
Mayor Stuart: Okay.
Buddy Welch: The Ethics Ordinance stands as it is. If you want to strike that, I have no objections to it, because the Ethics Ordinance stands as it is.
Mayor Stuart: Any other discussion? Mr. Evans.
Fred Evans: In order to protect the City, the citizens, and the City workers against potential litigation, I make a motion that we approve this resolution.
Mayor Stuart: I have a motion. Do we have a second?
I second.
Mayor Stuart: Mr. Cochran second. Discussion?
Shirley Dabney: I have a question for Fred. So are you including G as is?
Mayor Stuart: Paragraph G.
Shirley Dabney: Yeah. Are you making the motion as is?
Fred Evans: I’m making a motion to pass this resolution as it is written where City employees have the right to contact the City Attorney and issues that they are unfamiliar with
Mayor Stuart: That’s not what she’s asking you, Mr. Evans. She’s asking you about G. Mr. Evans, she’s asking you about G.
Fred Evans: Pardon?
Mayor Stuart: She’s asking you about paragraph G, about the ethics officers. Is that correct, Ms. Dabney?
Shirley Dabney: Yes. The one that Kathy was just talking about.
Mayor Stuart: The one that Ms. Gilbert was just talking about. Paragraph G. Tab 15. It’d be on the first page. Down there, paragraph G. Tab 15, paragraph G. Ms. Dabney’s question is does that include what you’re motion is.
Fred Evans: That definitely includes Paragraph G.
Shirley Dabney: Okay.
Mayor Stuart: Okay. Any other questions?
Mark Alarcon: I’d like to make an amendment to G to do whatever it takes to qualify us for the City of ethics certification to the GMA certification process.
Mayor Stuart: You can’t amend it at this point.
Buddy Welch: You can’t amend this ordinance. It would have to be done as a separate ordinance.
Mayor Stuart: Any other discussion? (no response) All in favor? Ms. Dabney, Mr. Cochran, Mr. Evans. Opposed? Ms. Gilbert, Mr. Alarcon. Motion passed 3-2
Mayor Stuart: And I think #16 is, I would entertain a motion to postpone until the City Manager’s powers and duties are clarified.
Buddy Welch: Yes, sir. I would recommend you do that.
Kathryn Gilbert: I’ll make the motion that we postpone Item #16.
Mark Alarcon: Second.
Mayor Stuart: Mr. Alarcon second. Discussion? All in favor? Ms. Gilbert…four. Ms. Dabney, are you?
Shirley Dabney: I’m sorry.
Mayor Stuart: #16 to postpone it, the motion to postpone it.
Shirley Dabney: Yes.
Motion to postpone passed unanimously.
Public Comments
Mayor Stuart: Sarah M. Billops of 238 Northwind Drive, Stockbridge, Georgia. Remind you have three minutes, Ms. Phillips.
Sarah M. Billops: Thank you. Good Evening, Mayor Stuart, City Council. I’m here this evening to address an article that appeared in The Henry Daily Herald. In this article I’m quoted from the last meeting as saying that the City Council does absolutely nothing. And I have a problem with that. When I read it, it came out on Wednesday, March 10. I saw it on that Sunday. That Monday I did call Mrs. Baldowsky and I spoke with her and I asked to see the tape. I wanted to hear it. And it’s important to me that the City Council members understand that I don’t feel that way. I don’t know you well enough to make that statement that you do absolutely nothing. I don’t feel that way. I think the City of Stockbridge is beautiful and it is well-maintained and I’m very proud to be a citizen of Stockbridge and I do take issue with the statement that I’m credited with saying, and I’m still hoping to see that tape. We had a couple of appointments and we missed it, but it is important that you understand. I mean, if I was sitting on this City Council, I would not like it if someone made that statement that said I do absolutely nothing. And I mean I just sat here this evening through all of these pages of stuff and very clearly you all do work, you do things. You do address this area and it’s important to me that you understand that I don’t feel that way. My position on redistricting has not changed. But that’s apples. The fact that I disagree with Ms. Dabney and Mr. Evans and Mr. Cochran, I mean I’m a citizen. Yeah, I have a right to disagree with your vote, but that does not mean that I don’t think that you all function. I don’t feel that way and this made me very uncomfortable and the first thing that I did was call the person who wrote the article to ask her if I could hear that tape. And I’m still hoping to do it. We had to cancel twice, but I still want to do it. But it’s important to me that I come here as a citizen, because I’m very proud of Stockbridge. Stockbridge is beautiful. And very clearly, somebody’s doing a beautiful job. I just sat through all this, but I was determined. I didn’t care how long it took. I was going to sit here, because you needed to hear from me that I do not feel that the City Council does absolutely nothing. I don’t feel that way. I have no intentions of attacking the Council. I disagree with you; I mean I disagree with you in a heartbeat if that’s how I feel, but I’m not here to attack. I don’t think it’s positive. I don’t think that it helps what we are trying to do and it does not help us build relationships. And that’s very important. We can disagree and we still should be able to go outside. How’s my time?
Mayor Stuart: You’re at three minutes. One second. Right on the money.
Sarah Billops: Okay. But anyway, thank you all. I think you do a beautiful job.
Mayor Stuart: Thank you. Next is Jamilia Johnson of 189 Due West Drive, Stockbridge. Jamillia Johnson? She left? Adam Price of 2010 Avalon Parkway. And Karen Charmaine. Don’t want to speak. Okay. Comments are done.
Announcement of Upcoming Meetings & Events
1. Finance Committee Meeting – Thursday, April 15, 2010 6:00pm City Hall
a. With the number of people we have to come to speak, I believe we’re going to have it up here.
2. Community Relations Meeting – Monday, April 19, 2010 6:00pm City Hall in Levi Stockbridge Room.
a. At this point we are planning on holding it in the Levi Stockbridge. If we have too many people, we can always move it up here.
3. Study Session – Monday, April 26, 2010 6:00pm City Hall
Motion to adjourn by Mr. Evans and second by Shirley Dabney and passed unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 8:10 PM.
Respectfully Submitted by:
______________________________ ______________________________
Vanessa Holiday, City Clerk Lee Stuart, Mayor