May 12, 2025 City Council Work Session

[00:00:01]

GOOD EVENING AND WELCOME TO THE. MAY 12TH WORK SESSION OF EASTPOINTE CITY COUNCIL.

[I. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER]

PRESENT. COUNCIL MEMBER. FRIEDLI. COUNCIL MEMBER.

ATKINS PRESENT. COUNCIL MEMBER. ZIEGLER PRESENT.

COUNCIL MEMBER. CUMMINGS COUNCIL MEMBER. MITCHELL COUNCIL MEMBER.

BUTLER COUNCIL MEMBER MARTIN ROGERS. PRESENT.

MADAM MAYOR, YOU HAVE A QUORUM. THANK YOU. SO LET'S GO THROUGH THE AGENDA

[Additional Item]

ARE WE DISCUSSING THAT TONIGHT? YES. ALL RIGHT.

DEPARTMENTAL VACANCY DISCUSSIONS. I DON'T KNOW.

I SEE THEY GAVE US A SPREADSHEET, SO YEAH, THE OTHER BOARD OR COMMISSION ON AGING.

T-SPLOST SIDEWALK UPDATES. YES. YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY PAYING CLASSIFICATION STUDY. MADAM MAYOR, WE DON'T HAVE A PRESENTATION.

THAT WE'RE JUST CONTINUING WITH OUR ANALYSIS.

YOU'RE CONTINUING WITH THE ANALYSIS. SO YOU'RE NOT READY TO SHARE WITH US TONIGHT? NO, MA'AM. WE HAVE DEPARTMENT HEAD MEETINGS SCHEDULED AND ALSO MEETING SCHEDULE WITH THE TWO PUBLIC SAFETY ENTITIES. POLICE AND FIRE. WE HAVEN'T GONE OVER THEIR STEP PLAN WITH THEM YET.

SO I KNOW WE'RE THINKING OF THIS BY JULY 1ST.

SO WHAT'S THE IF WE'RE NOT DISCUSSING IT TONIGHT, WHEN WILL IT BE DISCUSSED? AS SOON AS WE'RE ABLE TO SCHEDULE THE MEETINGS, WE HAVE OUR PART DONE.

IN TERMS OF THE FINANCIAL IMPACT, WE'VE WORKED WITH FINANCE AND BUDGETING.

WE HAVE NOT MET WITH THE INDIVIDUALS, SO I WOULD SAY WE COULD DO IT THE FIRST MEETING IN JUNE.

ALL RIGHT. THAT'S JUNE 2ND. YES, MA'AM.

SIX, TWO. MADAM. DEPUTY CITY CLERK. SEE JUDGE OLIVER HERE.

SURPLUS OF VEHICLES. ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT CHANGE ORDER OF 180 TO COVER FUEL COST.

WE CAN HAVE THAT AS A PART OF THE FLEET DISCUSSION.

RATIFICATION OF PLATT. YES. WANT TO DISCUSS THAT? IS THE APPLICANT HERE FOR ITEM NUMBER 14? THE REZONING OF PROPERTY AT 3380 BACHELOR STREET.

OKAY. JUST A MOMENT. I'M JUST GOING THROUGH APPROVAL OF EMERGENCY LINE REPLACEMENT FROM WATER AND SEWER.

ITEM NUMBER 15. ANY OBJECTION TO CONSENT? ITEM NUMBER 16 IS ANOTHER EMERGENCY WATER MAIN REPAIR.

ANY OBJECTION TO CONSENT? 17. ANY OBJECTION TO CONSENT? 18. NO. ANY OBJECTION TO CONSENT? THIS IS FOR THE ON CALL CONTRACTORS FOR WATER AND SEWER. NO. GOOD. I SEE WE FINALLY DID AN RFQ.

ANOTHER RFQ ON 19 FOR ON CALL. ANY OBJECTION TO CONSENT? EMERGENCY PROCUREMENT FOR T-SPLOST IMPROVEMENTS.

ON JANICE DRIVE $207,000. WE EITHER NEED TO TALK ABOUT IT TONIGHT OR LATER, BUT THAT'S ALMOST A QUARTER OF $1 MILLION WE CAN DISCUSS TONIGHT. NEXT ONE IS 4 MILLION. ABSOLUTELY. DISCUSSED TONIGHT. AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ATLANTA.

AND WELCOME ALL DEFINITELY WANT TO INTEREST IT BECAUSE I KNOW WE HAD SOME CHALLENGES WITH THAT PREVIOUSLY.

FIREWORKS. THIS DOESN'T HAVE AN AMOUNT. SO. OH, $25,000 THAT JUST FOR FIREWORKS.

WE CAN HAVE A BRIEF DISCUSSION ON THAT. AND THEN YES, THE 2425 AND COUNCIL MEMBER MITCHELL ADDED SCHOOL ZONE

[00:05:08]

ALL RIGHT. I WANT TO GO BACK TO ONE, PLEASE. MADAM MAYOR, I'D LIKE TO GO BACK TO.

YOU MENTIONED THE AMOUNT FOR NUMBER 20 AND 21.

ONE IS 4.8 MILLION. THE OTHER IS 207,000. WITH THAT IN MIND, I'D LIKE TO GO BACK TO 15 AND HAVE A DISCUSSION BECAUSE THAT ONE IS 865,000. OKAY. THAT'S FINE.

EMERGENCY STORM LINE REPLACEMENTS I THINK ARE VIEWED.

I VIEW THEM DIFFERENTLY, BUT THE AMOUNT YOU MENTIONED IS 865, SO THAT'S FINE.

ANYTHING ELSE? ALL RIGHT. SO BASED ON THAT, WE HAVE SOMEBODY HERE ON 14. AND WHEN I SAY SOMEONE, SOMEONE OUTSIDE OF STAFF IS HERE ON ITEM NUMBER 14 FOR 3380 BACHELOR. AND I UNDERSTAND THE PERSON THAT'S ON ZOOM IS FOR NUMBER SEVEN.

SO WE WILL GO THROUGH. WE'LL DO THE PRESENTATION OF THE BUDGET.

WE WILL THEN GO TO 14 THEN SEVEN AND THEN WE WILL GO IN ORDER.

SO, MADAM DEPUTY CITY CLERK, I HAVE NUMBER NINE ON THE JUNE 2ND REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING, AGENDA ITEM 16, 17, 18 AND 19 ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. ALRIGHTY.

FY 26 BUDGET PRESENTATION, MR. JONES.

[II.1. FY26 Budget Presentation]

GREAT. THANK YOU. SO FIRST, LET ME START OFF WITH THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT THE BUDGET.

THIS DOCUMENT REPRESENTS NOT JUST NUMBERS, BUT REFLECTS PRIORITIES OUR COMMITMENT AND RESPONSIBLE RESPONSIBILITY TO STEWARDSHIP OF PUBLIC RESOURCES AND OUR VISION FOR A THRIVING COMMUNITY.

SO THE BUDGET BEFORE YOU IS A BALANCED BUDGET, A THOUGHTFUL ONE AND STRATEGIC IT MAINTAINS ESSENTIAL SERVICES, INVEST IN OUR INFRASTRUCTURE, SUPPORTS OUR WORKFORCE AND POSITIONS, POSITIONS US TO MEET BOTH THE CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES THAT THE YEAR HAS AHEAD OF US. I'M PROUD OF THE COLLECTIVE WORK THAT STAFF HAS COME TOGETHER TO PRESENT THIS TO YOU. AND I WANTED TO TAKE A MOMENT TO REPRESENT OR AT LEAST PRESENT SOME OF THE KEY HANDS THAT HAVE WORKED ON THIS PROCESS.

AND WE ALSO HAVE OUR DEPARTMENT HEADS HERE ALSO.

BUT I WILL WANT TO IDENTIFY OUR FINANCE INTERIM FINANCE DIRECTOR MR. GOLDEN OUR I THINK SHE IS OUR BUDGET MANAGER, OUR INTERIM BUDGET MANAGER. BUDGET MANAGER. MISS CARTWRIGHT, PLEASE IDENTIFY HANDS UP THERE.

BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW IF ANYONE EVERYONE KNOWS YOU. AND THEN IN MY STAFF TIFFANY GUFFEY.

GUFFEY. SHE'S PUT A YEOMAN'S WORK IN, AND SHE HAS BEEN DOING THAT FOR THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS.

SO GOING ON FROM THAT SO FIRST SLIDE, I JUST WANTED TO KIND OF LET YOU KNOW THAT THIS HAS BEEN A A CULMINATION OF 20 DEPARTMENT MEETINGS NINE MEETINGS WITH MAYOR AND COUNCIL FOUR CITIZEN AND COMMUNITY MEETINGS, THREE COMMUNITY MEETINGS AND, AND ONE MEETING WITH CITIZENS.

THIS PRESENTATION. AND WE'LL STILL HAVE TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS.

SO A LOT OF TIME AND EFFORT GOES INTO THIS DOCUMENT.

SO WITH THE STRATEGIC PLAN, WE ALL KNOW THAT WE HAVEN'T DONE ONE IN A WHILE.

BUT I AM INSPIRED BY SOME OF THE PAST STRATEGIC PLANS.

AND WE KIND OF COBBLED TOGETHER A NUMBER OF, OF, OF THINGS THAT I THINK IS STILL PERTINENT AND STILL IMPORTANT.

OBVIOUSLY WE'VE TALKED A GREAT DEAL ABOUT LOOKING AT PRIORITY BASED BUDGETING MODELS MOVING FORWARD, WHERE CERTAINLY THE STRATEGIC PLAN WOULD BE THE KEY PIECE OF THAT, AS STAFF WOULD THEN GO TO BUILD BUILD AROUND THOSE, THOSE PRIORITIES. BUT WITH THIS BUDGET OBVIOUSLY I'M COMING IN IN THE MIDDLE OF IT.

[00:10:05]

SO PUBLIC SAFETY AND COMMUNITY WELL-BEING IS ONE OF THOSE INFRASTRUCTURE MAINTENANCE IS ANOTHER.

EMPLOYEE COMPENSATION. THE COUNCIL HAS TAKEN A LOT OF LEADERSHIP IN, IN IN DIRECTING THAT.

WE'RE MOVING INTO A PHASE TWO OF, OF WORK THAT HAS BEEN DONE IN THE PREVIOUS YEAR.

NEIGHBORHOOD REVITALIZATION CONTINUES TO BE IMPORTANT.

SUSTAINABLE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GROWTH IS IMPORTANT.

OUR PARKS IS ONE OF THE BEST IN THE STATE. AND THAT CONTINUES TO BE IMPORTANT.

AND I THINK IT'S ALSO IMPORTANT TO SAY THAT WE'RE PUTTING EFFORTS INTO TRANSPARENCY, EQUITY AND PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT.

SO ONE OF THE THINGS I WANTED TO GET RIGHT, RIGHT OFF THE BAT, AND THIS SLIDE IS A BIT INSPIRED BY MY MEETING WITH COUNCILWOMAN.

SHROPSHIRE. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S REALLY CLEAR.

WE ARE NOT REPRESENTING ANY KIND OF RATE INCREASES IN OUR BUDGET.

WE'RE NOT ADVOCATING FOR ANY TAX OR MILLAGE INCREASES.

THIS IS A BALANCED BUDGET THAT DOES NOT GO INTO OUR RESERVES TO BALANCE.

AND THERE'S NO LAYOFFS OR FURLOUGHS IN THIS BUDGET.

IT IS, HOWEVER, FOCUSED ON SOME HIGHLIGHTS THAT REALLY DOUBLE DOWN ON SOME ENHANCEMENTS THAT WE THINK ARE REALLY EXTRAORDINARY IN SOME PLACES AND VERY NEEDED IN OTHERS. ONE OF THE THINGS IN PUBLIC SAFETY, I THINK OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT HAS BEEN DOING A GREAT JOB AND IN FIGHTING SOME OF THE CHALLENGES OF BEING NEXT DOOR TO A MAJOR METROPOLITAN AREA LIKE ATLANTA AND ALL THE THE BENEFITS AND ALSO CHALLENGES THAT COME WITH THAT. ONE OF THE THINGS WE WANTED TO DO AND INVEST IN CONTINUING TO KNOCK DOWN OUR CRIME NUMBERS IS MAKING SURE THAT WE HAVE A PRESENCE OUT IN THE COMMUNITY. AND WE FINALLY HAVE GOTTEN NEAR, IF NOT FULL EMPLOYMENT IN OUR, IN OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT. AND WE NEED VEHICLES TO HAVE THOSE, THOSE EMPLOYEES WORKING AND DOING THEIR JOBS.

SO POLICE VEHICLES WE HAVE 13 IN THE, IN, IN THIS BUDGET FINANCED OVER FIVE YEARS AT 1.5 MILLION.

OUR FIRE SERVICE CONTINUES TO BE ALSO ONE OF THE BEST FIRE DEPARTMENTS IN THE STATE AND TO INVEST IN THAT.

WE'RE LOOKING AT AN AMBULANCE LADDER TRUCK AND OTHER FIRE APPARATUS.

AND WE'RE BEEN USING SOME CREATIVE FINANCING THROUGH FINANCE, LEASE PURCHASE APPROACH TO KEEP THAT DOWN TO $820,000. AND AS YOU KNOW THAT, THAT THOSE PIECES OF EQUIPMENT AND APPARATUS ARE VERY EXPENSIVE.

SO THAT'S GOING TO BE OVER A MULTIPLE YEAR. THE 820 IS REPRESENTED IN THIS YEAR.

PUBLIC SAFETY DRONE PROGRAM IS SOMETHING ALSO WE'RE VERY EXCITED ABOUT THIS REPRESENTS $250,000 INVESTMENT OVER A FIVE YEAR PERIOD BEING EACH YEAR.

THIS BEING THE FIRST YEAR THIS DRONE PROGRAM.

AND I'LL CERTAINLY BE SPEAKING MORE ABOUT IT.

BUT THE EXCITING PART ABOUT THAT IS UTILIZING OUR E911 SYSTEM, AND THIS PROGRAM WILL BE ABLE TO PUT EYES ON TROUBLED AREAS IN IN 90S. THAT IS A TIME THAT THAT OUR PATROLS WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO GET THERE.

WE'LL BE ABLE TO GET EYES ON THAT SITE. AND THEN ONCE OUR PATROLS DO GET THERE, THEY'LL BE ABLE TO DOWNLOAD THAT INTEL AND BE ABLE TO LOOK AT THAT SITE THROUGH BOTH THEIR VEHICLES AND THEIR CELL PHONES.

AND SO NOT ONLY IS IS THAT GOING TO HELP OUR RESPONSE TIMES, BUT IT'S ALSO A BIG STEP IN OFFICER SAFETY.

AND, AND ALSO HELPING US GET TO PERPETRATORS AND GET THE INVESTIGATIONS AND ALL THOSE KIND OF THINGS.

SO WE'RE REALLY SUPER EXCITED. I THINK THE CHIEF WOULD CALL IT A GAME CHANGER.

I TEND TO AGREE. AND AND WE'RE GOING TO BE FOLLOWING SOME OTHER COMMUNITIES THAT HAVE ALREADY DEPLOYED THIS DUNWOODY, BROOKHAVEN AND SOME OTHERS. AND SO WE'LL WE'RE REALLY EXCITED TO BRING THAT THAT TECHNOLOGY TO THE TABLE GOING ON WITH SOME BUDGET ENHANCEMENTS IN INFRASTRUCTURE MAINTENANCE.

OUR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN WILL SHOW IMPROVEMENTS IN SIDEWALK, SIDEWALKS AND STREET IMPROVEMENTS.

THAT'S AROUND 15.5 MILLION. OBVIOUSLY, USING UTILIZING OUR TIF PLUS AND LCI AND MIG PROJECTS.

[00:15:12]

OUR ELECTRIC INFRASTRUCTURE CONTINUING OUR EFFORTS IN MAKING OUR OUR SYSTEM RESILIENT.

THAT'S AT 10.4 MILLION. STORMWATER WATER INFRASTRUCTURE IS AT 2.3 MILLION.

AND OUR SOLID WASTE TRULY REPRESENTING A GARBAGE TRUCK REPLACEMENT AT 379,000.

CONTINUING WITH THE INFRASTRUCTURE MAINTENANCE, WE'RE LOOKING AT MUNICIPAL BUILDING IMPROVEMENTS.

CONTINUING WITH THAT WITH OUR CITY ANNEX, CUSTOMER CARE, GROVE AVENUE JEFFERSON PARK RECREATION CENTER, THE LAW ENFORCEMENT CENTER IN COURT. THAT'S AT 3 MILLION PARKS AND RECREATION.

SO THIS NUMBER HAS CHANGED A LITTLE BIT FROM OUR, WELL, A LOT ACTUALLY, FROM OUR PREVIOUS PRESENTATIONS.

AND I CAN EXPLAIN WHY. SO INITIALLY, WE WERE USING PLANNING NUMBERS OF 16 MILLION, AND PART OF THAT WAS 1.3 MILLION FOR PARK IMPROVEMENTS. BUT IT ALSO WAS WAS PLANNING NUMBER THAT WE WERE UTILIZING FOR OUR MULTIPLEX DESIGN.

AND ULTIMATELY BOND PROCEEDS JUST AS A PLACEHOLDER.

NOW THAT WE'VE BROUGHT ON OUR OUR, OUR DESIGN STAFF WE ALREADY KNOW THAT'S GOING TO BE AROUND 33 MILLION. AS THEY ARE GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS OF GETTING FEEDBACK FROM THE COMMUNITY WE WE ANTICIPATE THAT'S GOING TO BE AROUND THAT 33 MILLION. WE DON'T KNOW EXACTLY ALL THE THINGS THAT'S GOING TO BE ATTRIBUTED TO THAT JUST YET.

BUT FOR PLANNING PURPOSES, IT MADE MORE SENSE FOR US TO REFLECT THAT NUMBER THAN THE 15 MILLION, WHICH WE KNOW IS GOING TO BE DESIGNED MORE THAN THAT.

SO OVER OVERALL PARKS AND REC RECREATION WOULD BE SOMEWHERE IN AND WE'RE PLANNING FOR AN INVESTMENT OF 34,000,000.3 GOING ON WITH OUR COMPENSATION AND CLASSIFICATION STUDY, AS I KIND OF ALLUDED EARLIER.

THIS IS PHASE TWO OF WORK THAT HAD BEEN DONE EVEN THE PREVIOUS YEAR.

WE'RE ESTIMATING THAT CONTINUED AT $3.3 MILLION.

AND WE'RE MOVING FORWARD, AS WAS SHARED EARLIER.

MISS JESSIE TO PUT TOGETHER ALL THE DETAILS ON THAT HYBRID PARODY PLAN.

WE ALSO WANTED TO TAKE TIME BECAUSE IT HAS COME TO OUR ATTENTION ON TALKING A LITTLE BIT ABOUT SOME OF THE THINGS AND PARTNERSHIPS WE'VE MADE WITH COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES, AND WE CONTINUE TO DO THAT.

AND CERTAINLY HAVE TALKED ABOUT OUR APPRENTICESHIP AND INTERN PROGRAMS, AND WE'RE MOVING FORWARD WITH THAT ROBUSTLY.

NEXT SLIDE. SO BUDGET ENHANCEMENTS CONTINUE IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND REVITALIZATION AND HOUSING STABILITY.

STABILITY. STABILITY. AREA. OUR BUDGET SUPPORT TO ENHANCE RENTAL ASSISTANCE, MORTGAGE ASSISTANCE, UTILITY BILL ASSISTANCE, AND RAPID REHOUSING FOR UNHOUSED FAMILIES CONTINUE TO BE IMPORTANT TO US.

WE KNOW THAT THOSE THINGS STARTED WITH ARPA FUNDS.

AND AS THOSE FUNDS ARE BEGINNING TO DRY UP AND BE EXPENDED WE WE FOUND WAYS TO STILL MAKE IT AVAILABLE IN, IN OUR OUR CURRENT BUDGET IN OUR RECOMMENDED BUDGET.

EXCUSE ME TO NOT ONLY COVER WHERE THE ARPA DOLLARS HAVE BEEN EXPENDED, BUT TO EVEN ENHANCE THAT.

SO WE'VE MOVED FROM $287,000 TO $350,000 AS A RECOMMENDATION.

AND A LOT OF THAT WAS ABLE TO BE DONE THROUGH TAKING ADVANTAGES OF OUR FUND BALANCES, WHICH WERE ESTABLISHED FROM VACANCIES AND PROGRAMS UNUSED AND UNEXPENDED.

SO USING THE SAME TECHNIQUE, WE WERE ABLE TO ALSO BUILD UP OUR EFFORTS IN THE HOUSING STABILITY ENHANCEMENTS IN THE FORM OF INVESTMENTS IN HOME REPAIR PROGRAMS TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND HOUSING POLICIES AND INITIATIVES IN THAT AREA.

TO CONTINUE THAT. ALSO THE DREAM HOME PROGRAM TO $250,000.

[00:20:07]

ALSO PROGRAMS THAT WE'VE DONE UNDER THE WITH ARPA FUNDING, PARTICULARLY THE FACADE GRANTS, OR WERE REALLY WELL RECEIVED, AS YOU KNOW. WE'RE WORKING THROUGH THE NUMBER OF APPLICANTS IN THAT.

IT WAS ALSO SOUGHT THAT WE SHOULD CONTINUE THAT EFFORT.

AND SO THAT'S REINVESTED IN WITH $600,000. BUDGET ENHANCEMENTS IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP AND PARKS ENHANCEMENTS.

OBVIOUSLY SPENT A GOOD TIME TALKING ABOUT PARKS.

BUT THAT WANTED TO STATE THAT 1.3 IS IS HANDLING INVESTMENTS IN SUMNER CENTRAL PARK AND COLONIAL HILLS PARK. AND IN SOME OF THE WONDERFUL PROGRAMING THAT THE PARKS AND REC DEPARTMENT HAS BEEN DOING BUDGET ENHANCEMENT AND TRANSPARENCY AND EQUITY.

WE REALLY HAVE FOUND A LOT OF USE WITH THE SEECLICKFIX APP.

THOSE COSTS HAD INCREASED A BIT, BUT WE WANTED TO CONTINUE THOSE.

CONTINUE THAT PROGRAM. AND JUST SO YOU KNOW, THAT THAT THAT PROGRAM IS ACTUALLY A PART OF A PARTNERSHIP THAT WE HAVE WITH THE ATLANTA COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT WHERE THE CITY PAYS 80% OF THAT, WHERE THE DISTRICT COMES IN WITH 20%.

AGAIN, I WANTED TO ALSO TALK ABOUT THE EYE IN THE SKY PROGRAM.

THIS IS A CONNECTION, AND I'LL SPEND A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME, EVEN ON SOME OF IT, BECAUSE I'LL HIGHLIGHT SOME OF THE EXCITING THINGS GOING ON WITH THE CITY. BUT THE EYE IN THE SKY PROGRAM IS IS CONNECTED TO OUR REAL CRIME CENTER WHICH, WHICH IS A RESOURCE TO 250 CAMERAS AROUND THE CITY. AND THAT'S MADE UP OF PUBLIC CAMERAS AS WELL AS PRIVATE SECTOR OPERATED CAMERAS AND THE NETWORK CONNECTING THROUGH ALL OF THOSE CONNECTS INTO OUR REAL TIME CRIME CENTER, WHERE OUR DEPARTMENT WILL BE ABLE TO PULL UP AND ANALYZE DOUBLE TRACK ON INVESTIGATIONS AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE TO ENHANCE OUR ABILITY TO SOLVE CRIMES AND, AND PREVENT CRIMES.

SO SOME OF THE OPERATIONAL BRIGHT SPOTS THAT ARE REALLY EXCITING AND WE SHOULDN'T LOSE TRACK OF.

I THINK EAST POINT'S ABILITY TO INTRODUCE THE FIRST EVER MIRACLE LEAGUE PROGRAM.

CREATING A PLACE WHERE EVERY CHILD, REGARDLESS OF THEIR ABILITY, CAN EXPERIENCE THE JOY OF BASEBALL AND COMMUNITY HAS BEEN OUTSTANDING AND HAVE GOTTEN A LOT OF ATTENTION. EAGAN PARK HAS BEEN PROUDLY RECOGNIZED BY PLAY CORPS AS A NATIONAL DEMONSTRATION SITE, SETTING THE STANDARD FOR INCLUSIVE, INNOVATIVE AND IMPACTFUL PLAY SPACES IN EASTPOINTE AREA.

VIBES IS IS A ANALYTIC FIRM THAT RANKS LIVABILITY STANDARDS IN COMMUNITIES AND AREA BY VIBES, A ANALYTICAL FIRM OUT OF TORONTO WIDELY WELL USED, HAS RECOGNIZED OUR EASTPOINTE PARKS AS A+, WHICH IS THE HIGHEST RATING THAT IT ESTABLISHES.

ALL OF THESE CITY PARKS NOW FEATURE ADA ACCESSIBLE PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT, ENSURING THAT CHILDREN WITH ALL ABILITIES CAN PLAY AND EXPLORE AND THRIVE TOGETHER. ALL VERY OUTSTANDING.

OTHER OPERATIONAL BRIGHT SPOTS IN OUR OUR WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT HAVE BEEN DOING OUTSTANDING WORK IN SOLIDIFYING FEDERAL GRANTS, AND THESE THINGS HAVE HELPED US MEET SOME OF OUR, OUR NEEDS AND UPGRADING OUR INFRASTRUCTURE AND REPLACING DEGRADED WATER OR RAW WATER LINES, WATER TREATMENT, PLANT RENOVATIONS WATER LINE REPLACEMENT AND UPGRADES STORMWATER SYSTEM ENHANCEMENTS ALSO TO THE TUNE OF AROUND 2.1 MILLION.

AND MOST OF THOSE ARE FOCUSED ON STORMWATER SYSTEMS TO IMPROVE AND CONVEYANCE AND REDUCE THE RISK OF FLOODING OUR WATER INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS. OF OF 2.5 MILLION GEORGIA ENVIRONMENTAL FINANCE AUTHORITY LOCATION, LOCATION PRODUCTS AND SYLVAN ROAD PLANT, PLANT STREET DUNLAP AVENUE, JUST TO NAME A FEW.

[00:25:02]

BEARS AND SWEETWATER DAM AND A PUMPING STATION UPGRADES AROUND THE CITY.

THE OTHER OPERATIONAL BRIGHT SPOT, WHICH I THINK IS REALLY SOMETIMES GETS OVERLOOKED IS OUR AMAZING FIRE DEPARTMENT.

I WILL SAY THIS IS THE FIRST COMMUNITY THAT I'VE HAD THE HONOR TO WORK FOR THAT HAS AN ISO OF OF ONE.

FRANKLY, THREE AND TWO ARE OUTSTANDING. BEING IN ONE IS EXTREMELY RARE, AND OUR FIRE DEPARTMENT PROVIDES THAT LEVEL OF SERVICE.

NOT ONLY DOES THAT SERVICE CREATE A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF, OF CITIZEN SAFETY WHEN IT COMES TO FIRE, FIRE PREVENTION BUT IT ALSO AFFECTS HOMEOWNERS WALLET AND A POSITIVE WAY.

AND OUR INSURANCE COSTS ARE, ARE AT AT AT BEST LEVELS THAT THEY CAN BE BECAUSE OF THOSE ATTRIBUTES.

AND I JUST GAVE A LITTLE STATISTIC ON WHAT EXACTLY THAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE.

AND I FOUND SOME, SOME DATA TO SUPPORT THAT ROUGHLY OVER A TEN YEAR PERIOD THAT CITIZENS WOULD, WOULD SEE THE BENEFITS OF LIKE 10% IN THEIR INSURANCE COSTS ON AVERAGE, RANGING AROUND $1,500.

ANOTHER OPERATIONAL BRIGHT SPOT IS THE WORK THAT OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT IS DOING.

AND OBVIOUSLY, I TALKED A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE CHALLENGES OF BEING NEXT TO A METROPOLITAN AREA LIKE ATLANTA.

THE CHALLENGES OF CRIME ARE, ARE CHALLENGES THAT A LOT OF CITIES HAVE TO EXPERIENCE BEING AROUND METROPOLITAN AREAS LIKE THAT. BUT DESPITE THAT TYPE OF HEADWIND WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO SHOW A 30% REDUCTION IN CRIME IN FISCAL FISCAL YEAR 2425. WE CONTINUE TO EXHIBIT INNOVATIONS WITH THE EYE IN THE SKY AND CONNECTING BOTH PUBLIC AND PRIVATE. HAVING SHARING THE ABILITY TO HAVE ACCESS TO THOSE NETWORKS TO BE ABLE TO CHASE DOWN AND PREVENT CRIME.

OUR E-911 CENTER RENOVATIONS ARE ALSO KEEPING US UP TO SPEED AND UP TO DATE.

AND OUR CRIME CENTER, WHICH I TALKED A LITTLE BIT ABOUT NOW, CONNECTING THAT NETWORK INTO THE CITY'S ABILITY TO TO GET FOCUS ON THOSE, THOSE SCENES AS THEY HAPPEN. I THINK WITH THE ON THE HORIZON IF WE ARE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH INVESTMENTS IN OUR, OUR DRONE PROGRAM I THINK WE'LL BE ABLE TO MARRY A MULTIPLE TECHNOLOGIES THAT WE HAVE ACCESS TO NOW.

SO ENVISIONING AN ON OPPORTUNITIES WHERE WE'LL HAVE 911.

MAYBE THERE'S A GUNSHOT HEARD THAT WOULD BE PICKED UP BY OUR TRIANGULATION SYSTEM AND THEN CONNECT TO OUR DRONES.

BE ABLE TO GET EYES TO THAT SITE. BE ABLE TO THEN GET OUR SQUADS TO THAT SITE, UNDERSTAND WHAT'S HAPPENING ON THAT SITE BEFORE THEY GET THERE, OR WHEN THEY GET THERE, AND BE ABLE TO TRACK WHAT HAD TRANSPIRED ON THAT SITE IN WAYS THAT DEPARTMENTS HAVE RARE OPPORTUNITIES TO DO. AND I THINK WE'LL BE RIGHT IN A LEADER, A LEADER IN THOSE IN THAT SPACE.

SO ALL FUNDS, I THINK I'M GOING TO LET ELIZABETH OR SHANNON TAKE THAT.

LOOKS LIKE ELIZABETH. YEAH, YEAH. GOOD EVENING, ESTEEMED MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

OKAY, WE'RE GOING TO BEGIN WITH ALL FUNDS. SUMMARY. LIKE, REALLY LOUD.

OUR TOTAL IS 247,101,451. THE SUMMARY ABOUT OF THAT IS THE GENERAL FUND IS 70 MILLION CONDEMNED FUNDS IS 255,000. E-911 IS 1.7 MILLION.

SCHOOL ZONE SPEED CAMERAS IS 15,000, RESTRICTED GRANTS IS 8.8 MILLION.

GRANTS IS 212,000. HOTEL MOTEL IS 5.6 MILLION, TAD CORRIDORS IS 1.5.

CAPITAL PROJECTS IS 41 MILLION. THAT'S WITH AN INCREASE OF 18 MILLION.

JUST RECENTLY, DUE TO PARKS AND RECS. T-SPLOST IS 13 MILLION.

50 WORSE PROPERTIES IS 372,000. CITY HALL IS 933,000.

WATER AND SEWER 37 MILLION. ELECTRIC IS 56 MILLION.

STORMWATER UTILITY IS 3.7 MILLION SOLID WASTE, 5.2 MILLION, AND AGAIN A TOTAL OF 247 MILLION GENERAL FUND

[00:30:10]

LOCAL OPTION SALES TAX OF 14 MILLION. LICENSES AND PERMITS IS 4.6 MILLION.

FINES AND FORFEITURES IS 1.1 MILLION. FRANCHISE TAXES IS 853,000.

OTHER TAXES 5.4 MILLION. NOW OTHER TAXES INCLUDES INSURANCE PREMIUMS, BEVERAGE TAXES, MOTOR VEHICLES, MOBILE HOMES, EXCISE, CAR INTANGIBLES, AND FIFA COLLECTIONS.

ALL ALSO CHARGES FOR SERVICES IS 1.2 MILLION.

AND ALL OTHER REVENUE IS 16 MILLION. ALL OTHER REVENUE INCLUDES INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUE CONTRIBUTIONS, INVESTMENT INCOME, MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE AND TRANSFER FUNDS.

GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES. SO WE'RE GOING TO DISCUSS THIS BY CATEGORY.

CITY COUNCIL AND CITY CLERK IS 2.3 MILLION. EXECUTIVE IS 6.6 MILLION.

I'M SORRY. LET ME BACK UP A LITTLE BIT. CITY COUNCIL AND CITY CLERK.

THAT INCLUDES THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE CITY CLERK.

AND THEN EXECUTIVE IS GOING TO INCLUDE MAYOR, CITY MANAGER, COMMUNICATIONS, THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT, EQUITY AND INCLUSION AND EMPOWERMENT. SO THAT'S WHERE WE GOT THOSE.

THAT TOTAL FROM 6.6 MILLION. ADMINISTRATION IS 14.7 MILLION.

THE ADMINISTRATION INCLUDES FINANCE, ACCOUNTING, PURCHASING, TAX, HR BUILDINGS AND GROUNDS, FACILITIES AND OPERATIONS TO INCLUDE TRANSFERS IN FROM CAPITAL PROJECTS AND 50 WORST PROPERTIES AND THE E-911 COMMUNICATION FUNDS.

ALL RIGHT. JUDICIAL IS 1.4 MILLION. POLICE 22 MILLION.

FIRE IS 13 MILLION. PUBLIC WORKS CONSISTS OF 2.9 MILLION.

PARKS AND RECREATION IS 3.4 MILLION. PLANNING AND COMMUNITY.

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT IS 2 MILLION AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IS 1.5 MILLION.

1.1 MILLION. EXCUSE ME. WITH A TOTAL OF 70 MILLION.

CAPITAL PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS. PUBLIC SERVICES 21 MILLION.

PUBLIC UTILITIES 28 MILLION. PUBLIC SAFETY IS 1.6 MILLION, AND CULTURE AND RECREATION IS 34 MILLION, WITH A TOTAL OF 85 MILLION. AND THIS WILL GO BACK TO CITY MANAGER.

OKAY. SO THE RESERVES SO THERE WAS SOME SOME QUESTIONS THAT CAME UP ABOUT RESERVES.

AND SO WE THOUGHT THAT WE WOULD DO A DEEPER DIVE INTO OUR RESERVES.

AND WE'LL START OFF WITH OUR, OUR POLICY. SO RESERVE LEVEL REQUIREMENTS BY POLICY REQUIRE OUR GENERAL FUND TO BE EQUIVALENT TO THREE MONTHS OR A MINIMUM OF $12 MILLION.

WE HAVE RESERVE REQUIREMENTS FOR ELECTRIC FUND AS WELL AS WATER SEWER FUND AND THE SOLID WASTE FUND FOR THE ELECTRIC FUND.

THE EQUIVALENT IS FOUR MONTHS OR A MINIMUM OF 15 MILLION.

THE WATER AND SEWER FUND EQUIVALENT IS ALSO FOUR MONTHS FOR A MINIMUM OF 8.5 MILLION.

SOLID WASTE IS THE EQUIVALENT OF FOUR MONTHS OR A MINIMUM OF 1.6.

AND WE'LL TALK ABOUT SOLID WASTE IS NOT REPRESENTED ON HERE BECAUSE SOLID WASTE IS IN DEFICIT.

SO BUT WE WILL PICK THAT UP. SO PUT A PIN IN THAT.

NOW TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT IT. THERE'S A LOT GOING ON IN THIS SLIDE.

SO I WANTED TO TAKE TIME TO TALK ABOUT WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT HERE.

SO THE YEARS ARE COLOR CODED. FISCAL YEAR 22 IS IN BLUE.

23 IS IN ORANGE. WE HAVE GREEN AND 20 FISCAL YEAR, 24 LIGHT BLUE, 2025.

AND THE I DON'T KNOW WHAT COLOR WE CALL THAT PURPLISH LAVENDER.

2025 2026. AND SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE UNASSIGNED BALANCES IF WE JUST LOOK AT THE, AT THE FY 22 NUMBER, YOU SEE THE 2020 3.9, THAT'S 23 MILLION POINT 900,000, OBVIOUSLY. BUT THE RESERVE REQUIREMENT OUT OF THAT 23 IS 12.8.

SO THAT THAT THAT NUMBER DOES NOT MEAN THAT THE 12.8 IS IN ADDITION TO THE 2329.

IT JUST MEANS THAT OUT OF THAT NUMBER, 12.8 IS REQUIRED BASED ON OUR POLICY.

AND SO GOING ON INTO THE YEARS THAT WE JUST STICK WITH THE GENERAL FUND, YOU CAN SEE IN 2023 THAT NUMBER WAS

[00:35:09]

THAT NUMBER GOING ON 35.5. 18.4 MILLION. OF THAT, 35.5 IS IN RESERVES. AND THOSE ARE CONSIDERED TO BE RESTRICTED.

UNLESS THE COUNCIL MAKES APPROVAL FOR THOSE FUNDS TO BE USED.

MOVING ON IN GENERAL FUND, YOU SEE THAT NUMBER AT 17.6 OF THAT 42 MILLION IS IN RESERVES. SO UTILIZING THAT THAT SAME APPROACH WE DID FOR WATER, WATER AND SEWER RESERVES YOU CAN SEE IN 2022 WE WERE, YOU KNOW, IN, IN GOOD IN THE GREEN, IF YOU WILL.

WE HAD ENOUGH FOR RESERVES IN 2023. ALSO GOOD.

IN 2024, WE START RUNNING INTO SOME CHALLENGES.

AND A LOT OF THAT IS DRIVEN BY EMERGENCY REPAIRS.

AND THOSE CHALLENGES CONTINUE ON IN 2025. AND WE PROJECT THAT THEY WILL CONTINUE ON INTO 2026.

SO ONE OF THE THINGS I WANTED TO MAKE SURE BECAUSE WHEN YOU LOOK AT THAT, YOU MAY BE SURPRISED BUT I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THE POLICY THAT WE ESTABLISHED DIDN'T REQUIRE STAFF TO SAY, HEY, WE'RE GOING INTO RESERVES WHENEVER THESE EMERGENCIES COME UP.

OBVIOUSLY, RESERVES ARE FOR EMERGENCIES. SO MUCH SO THAT MOST OF THE TIME THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, MAYBE CALLED RAINY DAY FUNDS, BUT I WANTED TO LET YOU KNOW THAT I'VE INSTRUCTED STAFF THAT HENCEFORWARD THAT WE AT LEAST ACKNOWLEDGE THAT WHEN WE'RE DIPPING INTO RESERVES, THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT WHEN YOU SEE THOSE EMERGENCY REQUESTS COME BEFORE YOU MOVING ON TO ELECTRIC ELECTRICS AND A MUCH BETTER SITUATION.

AND YOU CAN SEE THE RESERVES AND WHAT THE, THE, THE BALANCES THAT WE HAVE THEY ARE, ARE MET.

SO AGAIN, THOUGH, WHEN YOU LOOK AT $19 MILLION IN RESERVES, IF YOU LOOK AT THE 2026 NUMBER OR THE 2025 NUMBER WHEN YOU SEE 19, THAT THAT THAT MEANS THAT 15 OF THAT 19 ARE IN RESERVES AND RESTRICTED ONLY GIVING THE ABILITY FOR 4 MILLION WITHOUT HAVING SOME KIND OF CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF USING THOSE RESERVES FOR ANY KIND OF PROJECT THAT MIGHT BE IN THAT, IN THAT ENTERPRISE.

WE WANTED TO TAKE A SEPARATE SLIDE FOR THE STORMWATER.

STORMWATER IS ALSO, PERCENTAGE WISE DOING VERY WELL.

SO THE GOING THROUGH THE MOST RECENT NUMBER THAT WE PROJECT IN 2026 THAT THAT FUND IS AT $3 MILLION AND 900,000 OF OF THAT 3 MILLION IS FOR RESERVES RESTRICTED FOR RESERVES.

SO IN THIS IN THIS VISUALIZATION THE TOP NUMBER IS THE RESERVE REQUIREMENT.

AND THE BOTTOM NUMBER IS THE BALANCE IN THE FUND.

NEXT SLIDE. SO A SOLID WASTE FUND. WE WANTED TO KIND OF SPEND SOME TIME THAT THAT HAD BEEN BROUGHT UP.

AND WE WANTED TO KIND OF DO A DEEPER DIVE ON.

WHAT ARE SOME OF THE FACTORS THAT ARE CONTRIBUTING TO THE ONGOING DEFICITS IN THAT DEPARTMENT.

AND WE, WE, WE FIND OUT THAT THERE'S A LOT OF SUBSIDY THAT THAT DEPARTMENT IS DOING AND IT, IT, IT APPEARS THAT IT'S BEEN PRIORITIES THAT HAVE BEEN ESTABLISHED, LONG LASTING PRIORITIES FROM PREVIOUS COUNCILS TO, TO BASICALLY OFFER THIS GREAT SERVICE TO OUR CITIZENS AND AND PROTECT THE RATES WHERE THEY WHERE THEY ARE.

EVEN THOUGH OUR COSTS AS YOU KNOW, THERE'S THERE'S NOT A COST THAT I KNOW OF THAT IS THE SAME THAT IT THAT 17 YEARS AGO THAT THAT YOU CAN STILL GET AND, AND SO ALL OF THE COSTS THAT OUR DEPARTMENT HAS TO PAY THOSE HARD COSTS TO TIPPING FEES AND

[00:40:11]

THEY DON'T GO ANYWHERE. EMPLOYEES AS MUCH AS THEY LOVE WORKING HERE THEY TEND TO TO WANT TO HAVE INCREASES TO KEEP UP WITH THE DEMANDS OF, OF, OF THE, OF THE MARKET, BUT THEN ALSO INFLATION, INFLATIONARY THINGS AND COST OF LIVING.

SO, SO WHEN WE MAKE A DECISION THAT WE'RE GOING TO LOCK DOWN A RATE FOR, SAY FOR EXAMPLE, 17 YEARS, THAT'S OKAY BECAUSE WE'RE SAYING THAT WE WANT OUR DEPARTMENT TO SUBSIDIZE THIS SERVICE, AND IT MEANS SO MUCH TO KEEP OUR SERVICE LOCKED IN FOR OUR CITIZENS AT THAT RATE THAT WE KNOW AND ANTICIPATE THAT WE'RE GOING TO GET OUT OF LINE. AND ESSENTIALLY THAT'S WHAT HAS HAPPENED.

THERE'S ALSO CONTRIBUTING FACTORS TO SOME OUTSTANDING PROGRAMING THAT WE DO THAT ARE DIRECT COSTS, LIKE THE TWO BULK AMNESTY PICKUPS THAT WE DO ANNUALLY.

WE PICK THOSE THINGS UP, NO QUESTIONS ASKED. AND THOSE THINGS HAVE TO BE PUT INTO LANDFILLS AND THOSE LANDFILLS.

WE DON'T OWN OUR OWN LANDFILL. THAT'S A HARD COST.

WE THERE'S NO WAY WE CAN BE EFFICIENT EFFICIENCY OUT OF OUT OF THOSE COSTS.

THOSE ARE JUST COSTS THAT ARE GOING TO BE THERE.

AND WE ASSUME THOSE. THERE'S THE SAME THING WITH THE RESIDENTIAL CHRISTMAS TREE PICKUP.

THOSE COSTS ARE ALSO HARD COSTS. AND AND WE ASSUME THOSE AND JUST, YOU KNOW, KIND OF THIS WAS AN EXAMPLE AT THE BOTTOM OF, OF, OF THE SLIDE HERE WHERE WE EXPERIENCED ADDITIONAL COSTS IN RECYCLING.

AGAIN THIRD PARTY VENDORS ARE INVOLVED IN THAT, AND THAT COSTS.

EXCUSE ME. SORRY. SORRY. AND THAT THAT COST IS IS IS A HARD COST THAT DOESN'T GO ANYWHERE.

WE WE ASSUME THAT COST. AND THAT WAS A COST OF OF $4.32.

AND I THINK WE, WE WE STILL KEPT PACE IN THE SERVICE THAT WE DELIVERED THERE.

SO OUR, OUR YEAR OVER YEAR DEFICIT. THIS IS JUST I JUST WANT TO KIND OF GIVE AN ILLUSTRATION OF WHAT THESE DEFICITS HAVE LOOKED LIKE.

AND YOU KNOW, FOR, FOR THE MOST PART, I THINK WE'RE, YOU KNOW, BEEN MANAGING THROUGH THOSE IN PRETTY DECENT, BUT THEY'RE PRETTY CONSISTENT. THERE'S A COUPLE OF LOW SPOTS, AND I THINK THE LOW SPOTS ARE ATTRIBUTED TO SOME OF THE EQUIPMENTS BEING EQUIPMENT TRUCKS PARTICULARLY BEING PAID OFF IN THOSE YEARS AND CREATING A LITTLE LESS OF A DEFICIT.

BUT THESE ARE ALL DEFICITS. NONE OF THIS SHOWS ANYTHING ON BEING ON THE POSITIVE SIDE OF OF THE LEDGER.

SO THIS IS ALL IN THE RED, IF YOU WILL. OKAY, SO I THINK WE'RE GOING TO HAVE DIRECTOR MOORE COME UP AND KIND OF TALK ABOUT SOME OF THESE IN MORE DETAIL.

GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. THE PHOTOS THAT YOU SEE UP THERE FOR BULK AMNESTY, THOSE ARE SOME OF THE COSTS THAT WE HAVE THAT'S NOT BEING COVERED IN THE 2150 THAT WE CHARGED FOR RESIDENTIAL GARBAGE COLLECTION.

AND THE ONE NUMBER FOR THAT ONE CAN GET PRETTY COSTLY.

AS YOU CAN SEE, TO SERVICE THAT ONE HOME THERE, IT COST US ABOUT $500 TO COLLECT AND DISPOSE OF THAT STUFF.

THEREFORE, WITH NUMBER TWO, THAT IS NOT AS MUCH.

AND NUMBER ONE IS NOT AS MUCH BECAUSE OF WEIGHT, BECAUSE THE TRANSFER STATION CHARGES ARE BY BY WEIGHT.

AND WE CAN GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE WHERE THE ILLEGAL DUMPING GOES.

OKAY. NOW THIS IS WHERE WE THIS IS WHERE WE REALLY GET BEAT UP AT THE ILLEGAL DUMPING.

THAT'S THAT BIG PILE YOU SEE UP THERE WITH THE OIL BOTTLES AND STUFF, ALL THAT LIQUID.

IT CARRIES OTHER IMPACTS TO OUR CITY, SUCH AS THE OIL GETTING INTO THE STORM DRAINS, CAUSING THE PROBLEM ON THE STORMWATER SIDE. AND THEN OF COURSE, THE CONTAMINANTS THERE THAT WE HAVE TO CLEAN UP AND DISPOSE OF.

IT GETS EXPENSIVE. AND THEN THIS ILLEGAL DUMPING AND ALL THIS STUFF THAT YOU SEE, WE GOT TIRES THERE.

[00:45:03]

AND THEN WE GOT OTHER TIRES THAT THAT COST US A LOT MORE MONEY AS WELL.

NOW THESE TIRES THEY CAUGHT, THEY START AT $5 FOR ORDINARY CAR TIRES.

AND WHEN YOU GO WITH A GARIN, WE GET TO THE ONES THAT HAS RIMS IN THEM.

THEY COST US A BIT MORE. THEY LIKE $8, 7 TO $8 DEPENDING ON THE SIZE OF THE TIRE.

TRUCK TIRES COST $35 WHEN WE RUN INTO THOSE. AND IF YOU CAN LOOK AT THE ONE IN THE MIDDLE BETWEEN NEXT TO THE TIRES. THAT ONE RIGHT THERE, YOU DON'T GET TO SEE EXACTLY WHAT'S GOING ON THERE.

BUT THERE'S A RAVINE OVER ON LAWRENCE. I MEAN, WEST WOODBURY OVER BY 166.

WE HAD TO HAVE THE CREWS GO DOWN INTO A RAVINE TO BRING ALL THAT MATERIAL UP THAT THEY DUMP IT IN OVER THERE.

AND THAT'S THAT CREATED A LOT OF MAN HOURS, TIME AND DISPOSAL.

THERE WAS TIRES. THERE WAS, YOU NAME IT, IT WAS IN THERE.

BATTERIES. ALL KIND OF JUNK CHEMICALS, I THINK YOU.

YEAH. WELL, ANYWAY, THAT THAT'S A LOT OF REVENUE THAT'S NOT BEING IDENTIFIED.

AND AS YOU CAN SEE, TO REMOVE THAT STUFF OVER THERE WAS $7,000 AND THERE'S NO REVENUE COMING IN TO OFFSET THOSE COSTS. AND AS HE AS THE CITY MANAGER MENTIONED EARLIER ABOUT RECYCLING, THAT'S 400 AND SOME THOUSAND DOLLARS A YEAR DEFICIT THAT WE OFFSET. AND IF THE CITY DOESN'T COLLECT WHEN WE HAVE TENANTS IN CERTAIN LOCATIONS THAT DON'T PAY THE UTILITY BILLS, THE REVENUE THAT WE WERE SUPPOSED TO COLLECT AT 2150, WE DON'T GET FOR THAT.

SO AND THEN THERE'S OTHER THINGS MISSING HERE, SUCH AS ALL THE DEPARTMENTS.

EVERY DEPARTMENT IN THE CITY RELIES ON SOLID WASTE FOR DISPOSAL.

SO WHEN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT GET RID OF A BUNCH OF FURNITURE, THEY CALL US.

WE DUMP IT. NO COST TO THEM. WHEN CITY HALL HAS THE DISPOSAL STUFF, WE TAKE IT.

NO COST TO THE CITY AT ALL. PARKS AND RECREATION.

ALL THE DEPARTMENTS AND AND PUBLIC WORKS USED TO BE ONE OF OUR HEAVIEST WEIGHT CARRIERS.

300,000 PLUS A YEAR FOR THEM. SO A LOT OF MONEY THAT'S HITTING THAT SOLID WASTE BUDGET THAT DOESN'T IMPACT THE GENERAL FUND, BUT IT SHOWS A NEGATIVE ON THE SOLID WASTE FUND.

WHEN YOU ALL ARE AT ALL THAT UP, SOLID WASTE IS DOING A GOOD JOB WITH WHAT WE HAVE.

ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS? WELL, THANK YOU SO MUCH, MR. MAYOR. WE'LL HOLD QUESTIONS TO THE END. WHEN THEY GET TO THE END OF THE PRESENTATION. THEN WE'LL BRING IT ALL UP AT THE SAME TIME.

OKAY. THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. ON BEHALF OF MR. MOORE, I'M GOING TO PRESENT THIS FOR HIM. THIS IS JUST AN IDEA OF WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT FROM CITY TO CITY, AROUND THE REGION. WE HAVE UNION CITY. THEY ONLY PROVIDE GARBAGE.

UNION CITY IS UNIVERSITIES AT A RATE OF $65.85 TO THEIR RESIDENTS AND THE CITY OF ATLANTA.

THEY PROVIDE GARBAGE AND RECYCLING. THEY CHARGE $51.33.

STOCKBRIDGE, WHICH IS KIND OF EQUIVALENT TO THE CITY OF EASTPOINTE.

STOCKBRIDGE ONLY PROVIDES GARBAGE AT $32, HATE BILLS, $28.50 IN SOUTH FULTON.

SOUTH FULTON DOES AN ANNUAL CHARGE, ACTUALLY, AND IT EQUATES TO $19.48 A MONTH, BUT IS AN ANNUAL CHARGE OF $233 AND COLLEGE PARK IS $18.50, AND THEY ONLY PROVIDE GARBAGE SERVICES.

ALL RIGHT. I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT THE URBAN REDEVELOPMENT FUND.

JUST BRIEFLY. IT WAS ESTABLISHED A FEW YEARS AGO UNDER UNDER A DIFFERENT MANAGEMENT.

AS YOU CAN SEE RIGHT HERE, THAT THE PRIMARY OBJECTIVES OF THAT REDEVELOPMENT FUND ALSO HAS A COMMISSION.

THERE WERE SOME QUESTIONS. I'M SORRY. LET ME GO BACK. THERE WERE SOME QUESTIONS IN REGARDS TO THE URBAN REDEVELOPMENT FUND.

REGARDING THE FUND BALANCE AND WHETHER OR NOT ACTIVITY SINCE THERE'S NO COMMISSION FOR FY 26, WE DID NOT BUDGET ANYTHING FOR THE URBAN REDEVELOPMENT FUND.

ALL RIGHT. SO THAT TAKES US TO OUR HOTEL MOTEL FUND.

THAT'S A SPECIAL REVENUE FUND FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROMOTING TOURISM.

[00:50:02]

GEORGIA LAW THE CITY IS ABLE TO LEVY A HOTEL MOTEL TAX AT A RATE NOT TO EXCEED 8%.

THE CITY MUST REMIT 43.75% OF THE TOTAL HOTEL MOTEL TAX COLLECTED.

THAT'S 3.5% OUT OF THE 8% TO THE TO THE DMO, WHICH IS THE EAST POINT DESTINATION ORGANIZATION.

AND THEN THERE ARE SEVERAL BUCKETS IN WHICH THE HOTEL MOTEL IS SPLIT UP INTO THE CITY SHALL SPEND PROCEEDS OF THE TAX IMPOSED AS FOLLOWS. GENERAL FUND GETS 3% TOURISM DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS.

THAT'S YOUR TPT. THAT'S 1.5. TCT IS 2% AS LONG AS WELL AS THE TOURISM AND YOUR TRADE CONTRACT PROJECTS. I'M SORRY.

THE DMO IS 2% AND THE TCT IS 1.5, GIVING YOU THE 3.5%.

AS THIS IS AN ILLUSTRATION OF THOSE BUCKETS. HERE AGAIN, THE NON RESTRICTED PORTION IS THE PORTION THAT GOES TO THE GENERAL FUND.

PROCEEDS CAN BE USED FOR ANY LEGAL GENERAL FUND PURPOSE IN THE CITY, COUNTY, OR CONSOLIDATED GOVERNMENT.

WELL, THE CITY IN OUR CASE FOR FUNDS IS RESTRICTED.

THAT'S USED BY OUR DMO AS WELL AS THE TPD FUNDS ARE RESTRICTED.

AND YOU CAN SEE THE PERCENTAGES AS IT RELATES TO EACH ONE OF THOSE BUCKETS.

AND THAT BRINGS US TO OUR END OF OUR PRESENTATION.

WE HAVE OUR CONTACTS OF OUR DEPARTMENT HEADS.

AND AT THIS TIME WE CAN TAKE Q&A. THANK YOU FOR YOUR PRESENTATION, COUNCILWOMAN BUTLER.

THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. I HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS.

THE FIRST QUESTION IS WHEN WE DID THE THE CITY HALL BUDGET, I THINK IT WAS AROUND $5 MILLION.

IS DEBT SERVICE INCLUDED IN THAT $5 MILLION? OR IS THAT JUST TO MAINTAIN THE PROPERTY? YOU SAID IT'S IN TOWARDS THE BEGINNING OF YOUR PRESENTATION.

CITY HALL IS 930. 933,000. THAT'S FOR DEBT PAYMENT.

OKAY. THAT'S. I'M SORRY, NOT 5 MILLION. LET ME PUT IT ON THE RECORD. NINE.

ALMOST $1 MILLION. AND THAT'S FOR DEBT SERVICE.

CORRECT? OKAY. I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE ILLEGAL DUMPING.

HAVE WE BEEN ABLE TO. I KNOW THE CHIEF OF POLICE.

AND THERE HAVE BEEN SOME INVESTIGATIONS. HAVE WE BEEN ABLE TO RECOUP ANY MONEY FROM ANY OF THAT? NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE. THE MOST. THE MOST I KNOW THAT WE COLLECTED WAS $100.

OKAY. ON THE $600 PILE THAT WAS ILLEGALLY DUMPED.

OKAY. I THINK THAT'S ALL OF MY QUESTIONS FOR NOW.

THANK YOU. OKAY. GOOD COUNCIL MEMBER FREELY. THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION.

I HAD A FEW QUESTIONS. ONE JUST FOR THE CITY MANAGER.

I THINK, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE AWARE THAT THERE IS A POTENTIAL RECESSION COMING IN THE COUNTRY.

AND SOME OF THE FEDERAL FUNDS THAT WE'VE RELIED ON IN THE PAST MAY OR MAY NOT BE COMING.

HOW DOES THIS BUDGET REFLECT ANY SORT OF AWARENESS OF THOSE POTENTIAL DOWNTURNS, OR DOES IT DO SO? OKAY, HOLD ON A MINUTE. LET ME WRITE EVERYBODY'S NAME DOWN.

THE CITY MANAGER IS TRYING TO COME COUNCIL MEMBER AND THEN COUNCILWOMAN EVERYBODY CAN DESELECT YOUR MICS AND THEN CITY MANAGER, YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO SPEAK. OKAY, GREAT. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU FOR THAT QUESTION. COUNCILMAN. FREELY.

SO A COUPLE, A COUPLE OF WAYS. SO ONE OF THE AREAS WHERE WE, WE KIND OF HAVE SOME RESILIENCE ON SOME OF THE ARPA DOLLARS THAT WE'RE GOING TO GOING AWAY. WE UNDERSTOOD THAT, PARTICULARLY IN SOME OF THE EMPOWERMENT AND EQUITY ENHANCEMENTS THAT ARE HIGHLIGHTED THAT KIND OF WE THOUGHT THAT WOULD BE IMPORTANT IN PREPARING SOME OF OUR CITIZENS FOR SOME OF THOSE DOWNTURNS.

WE ALSO EXPERIENCED SOME OF THAT WITH OUR FIRE DEPARTMENT AND SOME OF THE ENHANCEMENTS THAT WE THOUGHT WE WERE GOING TO HAVE

[00:55:01]

INVESTMENTS IN, IN OUR LOBBYING AND THOSE KIND OF EFFORTS.

BUT THEN WE ALSO WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE STILL PUTTING SOMETHING TOWARDS IT'S NOT MAYBE NOT AS MUCH AS AS WE WOULD LIKE OR HAD HOPED.

BUT WE'RE STILL TRYING TO MAKE SOME INVESTMENTS IN THOSE AREAS, AND THAT'S WHY WE WE STILL HAVE AN AMBULANCE IN, IN THAT LINE ITEM WITH THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. SO, SO THINGS LIKE THAT, WE CONTINUE TO, TO LOOK LOOK AT I ALSO THINK INVESTING IN OUR EMPLOYEES IS ALSO SOME RESILIENCY PLANNING FOR THAT.

AS WE, WE UNDERSTAND, COST OF LIVING MAY BE AFFECTED.

AND WE'RE ALSO PREPARING FOR WHAT THE IMPACTS MIGHT BE IN INFLATION AND WITH THE TARIFFS WHAT THAT MIGHT LOOK LIKE IN OUR PROCUREMENT PROCESSES. SO WE'RE WE'RE AWARE IT'S VERY HARD TO KNOW EXACTLY WHAT INDUSTRY AT WHAT TIME WILL BE AFFECTED.

BUT AND WE AND WE HAVE ALSO DONE SOME THINGS TO PREPARE FOR SOME OF THE FUEL COST EXPENSES THAT WE THINK ARE GOING TO BE AFFECTED. SO WE'RE KIND OF JUST BRACING TO SEE EXACTLY HOW DOES THAT WAVE HIT US? THANKS. AND NEXT QUESTION, SORT OF, AT LEAST IN MY MIND RELATED.

BUT IT COULD BE WRONG. WHAT IS THE RATIONALE FOR HAVING A MUCH GREATER RESERVE THAN IS REALLY REQUIRED? WE HAVE CONSIDERABLY MORE IN THE RESERVE THAN IT SEEMS WE NEED TO HAVE.

SO WHAT IS THE RATIONALE FOR THAT? WELL, SOME OF THE THINGS THAT I WAS TRYING TO HIGHLIGHT.

CERTAINLY. GENERAL FUND. LOOKS LOOKS GOOD. BUT THERE WERE OTHER FUNDS THAT NOT SO NOT SO LOOK GOOD.

SO THERE MAY BE SOME, SOME POINTS WHERE GENERAL FUND MIGHT BE ASKED TO PROP UP THOSE THINGS LIKE IN WATER RESOURCES. I KNOW WE'RE, WE'RE, WE'RE GOING INTO LOOKING AT SOME STUDIES AS FAR AS OUR RATES.

BUT THOSE EMERGENCIES AREN'T GOING TO GO AWAY.

AND OBVIOUSLY WHAT IT'S SHOWING OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS, OUR INFRASTRUCTURE IS AGING.

AND THOSE THINGS ARE, ARE SHOWING UP AT RATES THAT IN PREVIOUS, JUST THE PREVIOUS TWO YEARS BEFORE THAT, WHEN WE WERE ABLE TO KEEP UP WITH THOSE, THEY'RE NOW OUTPACING OUR RESERVES.

AND SO IT MAY BE A POINT EVEN THOUGH IT LOOKS LIKE GENERAL FUND IS HEALTHY, GENERAL FUND MIGHT NEED TO BE COUNTED ON TO AT LEAST HELP GET ENTERPRISE FUNDS LIKE THE WATER RESERVE TO GET THEM PROPPED UP TO BE ABLE TO HANDLE THE CONTINUED DETERIORATION OF SOME OF OUR OUR VITAL INFRASTRUCTURE PIECES. I THINK THE OTHER THING IS THAT RESERVES AND THOSE BALANCES CAN PLAY A ROLE INTO HELPING SOME OF THE BIG CAPITAL PROJECTS THAT WE HAVE GOING ON.

SO ONE OF THE REASONS WHY I HAD TO CHANGE THE PARKS INVESTMENT BECAUSE WE, WE ALREADY HAVE, HAVE GOTTEN THE DESIGN STAFF ON BOYNTON THERE, AND THEY'RE, THEY'RE WORKING NOT TO EXCEED 33 MILLION.

SO I WAS LIKE, WELL, 15 MILLION DOESN'T MAKE SENSE ANYMORE.

WE REALLY GOT TO LOOK LOOK AT THAT NUMBER. SO THAT CAN CHANGE THE DYNAMIC OF HOW MUCH DOLLARS WE MIGHT NEED.

NEED FROM, FROM RESERVES TO, TO GET THAT UP. AS YOU KNOW, WE'RE GOING THROUGH SOME AUDITS.

AND WE SUSPECT THAT OUR, OUR BOND RATING SHOULD BE SECURE AT WHERE IT WAS BEFORE.

BUT THERE COULD BE FINDINGS OR THINGS THAT COME OUT OF THAT THAT COULD CHANGE OUR BOND RATING.

THAT WILL REQUIRE US TO BORROW AT A HIGHER, HIGHER RATE.

AND RESERVES MAY ALSO BE NEEDED TO HELP THOSE TYPE OF THINGS.

I'M STILL GOT A MEETING WITH OUR, OUR OUR OUR BOND OUR FINANCIAL ADVISOR.

NEXT WEEK I'LL GET A BETTER HANDLE ON WHAT OUR CAPACITY LIMITS ARE.

AND EVEN THOUGH WE MIGHT HAVE CERTAIN CAPACITY LEVELS WE DON'T WANT TO BE OVERLEVERAGED.

AND THERE COULD THEREFORE AFFECT OUR BOND RATING, WHICH WE WON'T KNOW EXACTLY.

THAT IS, UNTIL WE CAN WRAP UP OUR OUR REMAINING OUTSTANDING AUDITS.

[01:00:03]

UNDERSTOOD. I GUESS, YOU KNOW, A QUESTION THAT I THINK SOME PEOPLE MIGHT HAVE.

FOR EXAMPLE, WE'VE WE'VE TALKED ABOUT RENOVATING THE CITY AUDITORIUM FOR MANY, MANY YEARS.

NOTHING HAS HAPPENED. ORIGINALLY, THAT AMOUNT WAS BUDGETED AT, I THINK 7 MILLION.

I THINK NOW IT PROBABLY WOULD, WOULD BE MORE BUT I THINK IF WE'VE GOT SUCH A GENEROUS OVER FUND IN THIS RESERVE AMOUNT. WHY? I'LL JUST WAIT. FOR THAT NEXT MEETING AND NEXT WE TALKED ABOUT. I'M SORRY ABOUT THAT.

GO AHEAD. SURE. YEAH. SO, FOR EXAMPLE, WHY WOULDN'T WE USE SOME OF THAT ABUNDANT SORT OF RESERVE FOR A LONG STANDING PROJECT SUCH AS THAT WHICH WE COULD POTENTIALLY COVER WITH JUST THE EXTRA THAT THAT WE'VE PUT ASIDE? I THINK WE I THINK THAT WOULD BE A STRONG POSSIBILITY.

THOSE ARE THOSE ARE ONE OF THE REASONS. THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS WHY I WAS LIKE, WE SHOULD LIKE BE VERY CAUTIOUS WHEN WE USE THAT BECAUSE WE KNOW WE HAVE THOSE KIND OF PROJECTS OUTSTANDING. SO I KNOW AND I JUST HAD A MEETING TODAY.

THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS MOVING AS FAR AS WHAT THIS MULTIPLEX WILL LOOK LIKE.

WE'RE WE'RE DUE TO GET SOME, SOME DATA ANALYZED AND THE PARKS DEPARTMENT IS PREPARED TO GIVE A PRESENTATION ON THE NINTH ABOUT SOME OF THE FEEDBACK WE'RE GETTING FROM THE PUBLIC. IT CERTAINLY CAN CHANGE THE OVERALL PROJECT BASED ON WHAT THAT FEEDBACK IS.

SO WE'RE WE'RE LOOKING FORWARD TO THAT. I ALSO JUST SHARED BY PUBLIC WORKS THAT WE PLAN ON ALSO TALKING ABOUT SOME OF OUR FACILITY NEEDS THAT CERTAINLY WILL FALL IN THAT IN IN THE NEXT COMING WEEKS AS WELL.

SO I THINK I THINK YOU'RE RIGHT. RIGHT ON. THAT WAS PART OF THE CALCULUS THAT ACTUALLY WAS FEEDING INTO BEING CONSERVATIVE IN OUR SPENDING OF THE RESERVES BECAUSE OF PROJECTS LIKE THAT.

OKAY. ON THE SOLID WASTE BUDGET, I UNDERSTAND, YOU KNOW, THERE'S ONE PART OF THAT IS WOULD DEPEND UPON A RATE INCREASE, BUT ON AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT ON SOME OF THIS THAT OUR DIRECTOR SPOKE ABOUT THE DUMPING, THE CONSIDERABLE SORT OF ILLEGAL DUMPING AND THE COST OF, YOU KNOW, JUST RESIDENTIAL BULK WASTE PICKUP.

WHY AREN'T WE JUST BUDGETING APPROPRIATELY TO COVER THOSE COSTS SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE A DEFICIT IN THAT REGARD? IS IS THERE A WAY THAT WE CAN SIMPLY BUDGET APPROPRIATELY BASED ON THE FACT THAT WE KNOW WE HAVE THESE INCIDENTS OF ILLEGAL DUMPING AND SO ON, OR IS THAT NOT HOW THIS WORKS? AND I'M CERTAINLY OPEN TO THAT ANSWER.

SO IT'S AN ENTERPRISE FUND. AND SO AS AN ENTERPRISE IT IS TASKED TO OPERATE AS ITS OWN BUSINESS ENTITY WITHIN THE CITY. SO BUDGETING IT IN THAT WAY, YOU KNOW, THE BUDGET IS JUST A GUIDE.

AND THAT'S KIND OF AN ARTIFICIAL NUMBER. IT STILL HAS TO COME DOWN TO THE ACTUAL OPERATIONS TO BE ABLE TO, YOU KNOW, BUILD THE REVENUES TO ACTUALLY PAY FOR THE EXPENDITURES.

AND WHAT WE'VE ASKED OF AND IT'S NOT JUST LIKE SO SO THERE'S A COUPLE OF, OF THINGS THAT I DIDN'T REALLY SPEND THE TIME ON ON WHAT MIGHT SOME SOLUTIONS BE? THERE'S CERTAINLY AN OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK AT COMMERCIAL HAULING.

RIGHT. AND SO WE HAVEN'T REALLY, REALLY PRESENTED THAT TO COUNCIL.

WE WE BELIEVE THAT COULD BE A BIG BOOST. OUR, OUR MAINSTAY HAS ALWAYS BEEN THE RESIDENTIAL COLLECTION.

RESIDENTIAL COLLECTION. AS AS WE, AS WE SAID, HAS BEEN LOCKED IN FOR 17 YEARS AT ONE RATE.

AND I WISH I CAN GO TO HOME DEPOT AND BUY THE SAME HAMMER THAT I SPENT 17 YEARS AGO AND EXPECT THAT TO BE THE SAME COST.

IT'S JUST NOT. BUT BUT WHAT WE HAVE SAID AS A COUNCIL AND PREVIOUS COUNCILS IS THAT WE VALUE THAT,

[01:05:01]

AND BASICALLY THAT'S BEEN ALLOWED TO BE GENERAL FUND.

AND HOW THAT REFLECTS AS A SUBSIDY IS A DEPARTMENT CARRYING A DEFICIT.

WE DON'T ALLOW THAT TO JUST LIKE GO INTO RECEIVERSHIP, RIGHT.

WE, WE, WE USE GENERAL FUNDS TO TO BALANCE THE BUDGET IN THAT IN THAT CASE.

AND SO THERE COULD BE THOUGHTS OF, OF PROPPING UP SOME OF THOSE ENTERPRISE FUNDS WITH SOME OF THE GENERAL FUND RESERVES ONLY.

BUT TO DO IT CORRECTLY, IT'S LIKE, OKAY, WE CAN DO THAT FOR NOW.

BUT AT SOME POINT IN TIME WE WE NEED TO MAKE THE DECISIONS TO EITHER MAKE YOU SOLVENT BY ALLOWING YOU TO EXPLORE COMMERCIAL HAULING ALLOWING RESIDENTIAL RATES TO TO BE MORE REFLECTIVE OF MARKET TO PROVIDE OPPORTUNITIES TO DEAL WITH THE ILLEGAL DUMPING, WHICH, YOU KNOW, WILL ALWAYS BE, YOU KNOW, A DEFICIT.

SO THOSE ARE THE DISCUSSIONS THAT WE WOULD HAVE AS A PART OF A PRIORITY BASED BUDGET.

WE WOULD LITERALLY GET INTO OPERATIONS THAT THAT DETAILED AND SAY, OKAY, WE BELIEVE IN THIS AS A COUNCIL.

AND IF WE UNDERSTAND THAT WHEN IT COMES UP THAT WHY ISN'T THIS ENTERPRISE PERFORMING, WE CAN SAY SOLIDLY THAT IT IS PERFORMING. WE DECIDED TO BASICALLY TIE ONE HAND BEHIND THE BACK.

WE WE DECIDED WE WANTED TO KEEP THIS AT THIS LEVEL FOR THESE REASONS.

AND THEN IT BE CLEARLY STATED, AND IT IT EITHER IS WHAT CITIZENS WANT OR WHAT THEY DON'T WANT.

AND WE THEN CAN MAKE ADJUSTMENTS. BUT ESSENTIALLY THAT DECISION HAS BEEN MADE.

THE DEPARTMENT HAS RESPONDED AND I LIKE I THINK DIRECTOR MOORE WOULD WOULD AGREE.

THEY'VE BEEN DOING THAT IN AN OUTSTANDING FASHION.

IT'S JUST THAT THERE IS NO POSSIBLE WAY WITH THE GROUND THAT THEY'RE ON, THAT THEY WOULD BE IN THE BLACK WITHOUT THOSE SUBSIDIES.

SO I THINK THOSE ARE THE KIND OF QUESTIONS AND CERTAINLY WITH OTHER DEPARTMENTS WE HAVE SOME ABILITY TO AFFECT THAT. IF WE WANT TO CHARGE BACK DEPARTMENTS FOR THOSE USES, WE CAN THAT'S A THAT'S A DECISION THAT CAN BE DONE.

BUT THERE'S SOME GROUND THAT IS GOING TO BE OUTSIDE OF THE CITY THAT WE LITERALLY HAVE TO LOOK AT THE WAY THAT WE GO ABOUT DOING BUSINESS, IF THAT'S WHAT WE WANT TO CONTINUE TO DO. IT'S KIND OF A DECISION THAT HAS TO BE MADE FROM FROM THE POLICY LEVEL.

THANK YOU. TWO MORE QUESTIONS. THE URBAN REDEVELOPMENT FUND YOU KNOW, I UNDERSTAND THERE'S WE DON'T HAVE A COMMISSION, A PRESIDENT, AND SO ON.

I'M JUST CURIOUS, DO YOU HAVE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THIS COUNCIL ON THE BEST APPROACH? WELL, FOR THOSE FUNDS THAT ARE UNDERUTILIZED, IT SEEMS. YEAH, SURE. AND SO IT IT CAME UP. AND THE REASON WE ADDED THAT SLIDE DIRECTOR GOLDEN DIDN'T REALLY GO INTO IT.

BUT WHAT WE DID DO TO TO BALANCE THIS BUDGET WAS TO BASICALLY LOOK AT DOLLARS THAT HADN'T BEEN BEEN USED.

AND WHEN WE WENT BACK AND LOOKED AT THE RESOLUTION THAT HAD BEEN PASSED IT DIDN'T CREATE ANY MECHANISM FOR THE CITY MANAGER TO CONTINUE THAT ACTIVITY IN LIEU OF A COMMISSION NOT BEING ESTABLISHED.

SO, WITHOUT THAT RESOLUTION TO EITHER BEING AMENDED TO ALLOW THE CITY MANAGER TO HAVE SOME FORM OF IMPLEMENTATION TO CARRY OUT THE INITIATIVES OF THAT PROGRAM IT BASICALLY LAID DORMANT.

SO MY ONLY YOU KNOW, RECOMMENDATION. AND WE CAN CERTAINLY IF THE COUNCIL WANTS TO MOVE ON CREATING THAT COMMISSION, WE CAN CERTAINLY HANDLE IT LIKE A BUDGET AMENDMENT AND, AND GET THOSE, THOSE DOLLARS BACK IN THERE SO IT CAN OPERATE.

BUT OUR THOUGHT WAS WE LOOKED AT EVERYTHING ACROSS THE BOARD IF IT WASN'T BEING USED THIS IS THE WAY THAT WE WERE ABLE TO MAKE SOME OF THESE ENHANCEMENTS IN THIS BUDGET.

IT'S FRANKLY A STATUS QUO BUDGET. BUT IF IT DIDN'T HAVE IF IT HAD DOLLARS THAT DIDN'T GET USED, WE WE BASICALLY UTILIZE THOSE DOLLARS. SO THAT'S HOW WE WERE ABLE TO DO SOME OF THESE FANTASTIC THINGS THAT I WOULD SAY ARE FANTASTIC AND NOT HAVE TO RAISE TAXES OR CREATE ANY FEE INCREASES BECAUSE WE WERE ABLE TO USE THOSE THINGS.

I HAD ALSO SHARED IN SOME OF THE BUDGET MEETINGS THAT FUTURE BUDGETS MIGHT NOT BE SO, SO KIND AND FORGIVING BECAUSE PART OF THE GOAL ALSO IS TO BE MORE EFFICIENT IN THE USE OF OUR PROGRAMS AND INCREASING OUR VACANCIES.

[01:10:04]

AS WE START TO CLOSE UP THOSE VACANCIES AND GET INTO HIGHER LEVELS OF PERFORMANCE IN OUR PROGRAMS, WE'RE GOING TO SEE THE BUDGET TIGHTEN. AND THAT'S ONLY BECAUSE THERE'S BEEN DOLLARS THAT ARE ACTUALLY BEING USED, WHEREAS BEFORE THEY WERE CARRYING OVER FROM YEAR TO YEAR.

AND MY FINAL QUESTION IS I THINK IT'S THE NEXT SLIDE AFTER THIS.

OH, MAYBE THE SLIDE BEFORE IT. IT WAS THE ONE WITH THE VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS.

ALL RIGHT. I'M NOWHERE CLOSE. THERE WE GO. SO A COUPLE OF THINGS CATCH MY EYE HERE.

I MEAN, THE CITY COUNCIL CITY CLERK BUDGET EXCEEDS THE PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BUDGET.

THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BUDGET. THOSE SEEM LIKE SOME VERY CORE DEPARTMENTS.

THERE'S EIGHT OF US. AND THE CLERK'S OFFICE. HOW DO HOW DO THE SORT OF STAFFING LEVELS COMPARE? WHAT WHAT EXPLAINS THESE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN WHAT SEEMS LIKE IT WOULD BE A SMALL BUDGET VERSUS CORE DEPARTMENTS? SO YOU HAVE IN WITH YOUR CITY, CITY COUNCIL, OF COURSE, YOU HAVE YOUR EIGHT COUNCIL COUNCIL MEMBERS. YOU HAVE ALSO THOSE ACTIVITIES THAT INCLUDE LOBBYING OPERATIONAL ACTIVITIES. YOU ALSO HAVE EVENTS IN CITY COUNCIL.

CITY CLERK. OF COURSE YOU HAVE SALARIES, BENEFITS AND THEN THE OPERATIONS.

EACH DEPARTMENT WILL ALSO HAVE SALARIES, BENEFITS AND OPERATION AS WELL.

SO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MAY NOT HAVE A ROBUST OPERATIONAL BUDGET AS, AS THE CITY CLERK WOULD HAVE.

SO THAT'S WHY YOU SEE SOME OF THESE DIFFERENCES THERE.

DO YOU KNOW OFFHAND OR COULD A DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR LIKE, FOR EXAMPLE, WHAT IS THE STAFFING NUMBER IN PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT VERSUS THE CLERK'S OFFICE? I WOULDN'T KNOW THAT OFFHAND.

WE AS A DEPARTMENT HEAD.

GOOD EVENING. GOOD EVENING. THE PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS 12 TO 14 STAFF.

WE ALSO HAVE SIX VACANCIES. SO FULLY STAFFED, YOU'RE ABOUT 20.

YES. AND WHAT'S THE CLERK'S STAFFING? ABOUT FIVE.

I THINK IT'S ABOUT FIVE. IT'S FIVE. FIVE. OKAY.

AND SO THEN COUNCIL OF COURSE, HAS NO STAFF. NO.

BUT YOU MAY HAVE INTERNS. YOU MAY HAVE OTHER INITIATIVES THAT YOU MAY HAVE.

RIGHT. OKAY. THANKS. COUNCIL MEMBER. ATKINS. YES.

THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. MR. CITY ATTORNEY, I DO HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS REGARDING THE PRESENTATION, BUT THE TRUTH IS THAT MOST OF MY QUESTIONS ARE FROM THE BUDGET DOCUMENT THAT WAS PRESENTED.

THE PRESENTATION WAS VERY HIGH LEVEL AGGREGATE, ALL OF THOSE THINGS.

AND SO I'LL ASK SOME OF THOSE QUESTIONS. BUT THEN I'VE GOT SOME OTHER BASIC QUESTIONS REGARDING THE BUDGET THAT WAS PRESENTED AND AVAILABLE TO US AS COUNCIL MEMBERS AND ALSO TO THE PUBLIC. I'M GOING TO START WITH SOME QUESTIONS AROUND SOLID WASTE, JUST SO THAT I CAN UNDERSTAND THAT A LITTLE MORE CLEARLY.

I KNOW THAT COUNCIL MEMBER FRIEDLI HAD SOME QUESTIONS, AND I THINK COUNCIL MEMBER BUTLER MAY HAVE HAD SOME AS WELL.

SO WE ARE PLANNING EVERY YEAR FOR A DEFICIT IN THAT.

IS THAT WHAT I'M HEARING IS THAT WE KNOW THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE A DEFICIT, AND WE'RE PLANNING FOR THAT ENTERPRISE FUND TO RUN A DEFICIT EVERY YEAR, AND WE'LL PULL MONIES FROM THE GENERAL FUND TO SUBSIDIZE.

THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. AND THEN I ALSO HEARD MR. MOORE STATE, PARTICULARLY AS IT RELATES TO ILLEGAL DUMPING.

I TRIED TO WRITE AS FAST AS I COULD QUOTE, WE REALLY GET BEAT UP.

THE OTHER STATEMENT, HE SAID, IS REVENUE HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED.

SO FOR THOSE ILLEGAL DUMPINGS, WHAT WE'RE ALSO SAYING IS THAT WE WILL SUBSIDIZE ILLEGAL DUMPINGS, BECAUSE I BELIEVE THAT MR. MOORE ALSO MENTIONED THAT TO DATE, WE MAY HAVE COLLECTED $100 FROM ILLEGAL DUMPINGS.

IS THAT CORRECT? WHAT'S WHAT'S IRONIC IS THAT THE ILLEGAL DUMPING THAT TOOK PLACE TOOK PLACE AT THE SOLID WASTE

[01:15:08]

AND WHEN WE CAUGHT THE PEOPLE, THEY WAS TAKEN OVER TO THE SOLICITOR BROUGHT HIM INTO COURT.

HE SETTLED THE CASE FOR 100 BUCKS, AND THAT'S CORRECT.

BUT TO DATE, WE'VE ONLY COLLECTED $100 THAT I'M AWARE OF, THAT YOU'RE AWARE OF.

AND I'M. AND I'M GOING TO TELL YOU, I'M MY EARS ARE OPEN TO THAT.

AND IF, IF, IF WE'RE GOING TO COLLECT MONEY FROM ANYWHERE, I KNOW ABOUT IT.

RIGHT. SO $100. SO BUT THEN WE ALSO HAVE A DISCUSSION ABOUT WHAT IT'S COSTING OUR RATEPAYERS, OUR CITIZENS FOR RECYCLED $2. AND WE'RE SAYING THAT NOW THAT COST IS UP TO $6 AND SOME CHANGE.

SO WE WOULD CONTEMPLATE INCREASING THOSE AMOUNTS FOR THE CITIZENS OF THE CITY, BUT WILL SUBSIDIZE THE ILLEGAL DUMPINGS.

IS THAT WHAT I'M HEARING? NO, I THINK THAT'S PART OF THE SUBSIDIES.

WE'RE SAYING. WE'RE SAYING THAT WE KNOW THAT OUR HARD COST HAS CHANGED, BUT WE HAVE MAINTAINED THE RATE FOR OUR CITIZENS.

OKAY. SO WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT A RATE INCREASE.

IS THAT WHAT I'M HEARING FOR OUR CITIZENS? NO, WE HAVEN'T.

THIS THIS BUDGET DOES NOT. IT STARTED OFF WITH NO FEE INCREASES, RATES OR OR PROPERTY INCREASES.

OKAY. BUT WE'LL CONTINUE TO RUN A DEFICIT THOUGH.

THAT'S THAT'S PART OF THE WHAT WHAT WE'RE IDENTIFYING IS THAT THAT'S WHAT HAS BEEN MADE AN IMPORTANCE OF A COUNCIL SOMEWHERE ALONG THE LINE THAT WE WANT TO KEEP RATES THE WAY THEY ARE, EVEN THOUGH WE KNOW THE COST IS CHANGED.

RIGHT. AND THAT'S WHAT THAT'S THAT THAT'S WHAT THAT POINT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE. BUT I ALSO HEAR TWO THINGS IN THAT. AND I DON'T WANT TO CONFLATE THE ISSUES.

ONE IS KEEPING THE RATES THE SAME. THE OTHER IS NOT GOING AFTER ILLEGAL DUMPERS.

THOSE ARE TWO VERY DIFFERENT THINGS. THEY'RE NOT PAYING A RATE. THEY'RE NOT PAYING ANYTHING. OH, I THINK THAT'S OUR SUCCESS AS OF GOING AFTER ILLEGAL DUMPERS.

I THINK WE ARE GOING AFTER ILLEGAL DUMPERS. WE MAY NOT BE VERY GOOD AT CATCHING THEM AND APPROPRIATELY CHARGING THEM THE PENALTIES FOR THEIR US.

SO I THINK THAT'S I THINK THAT'S THE COMMUNICATION.

SO WE ARE GOING AFTER THEY THEY ARE HARD TO CATCH.

THEY HAVE GOTTEN WISE IN THE IN THE PAST, THEY WOULD DUMP AND LEAVE A LETTER OR SOME PIECE OF MAIL THAT WE CAN CHASE THEM ON.

NOW YOU FIND THE ILLEGAL DUMPING. THERE'S NOTHING IN IT.

AND FOR EXAMPLE, WHEN ILLEGAL TIRES GET DUMPED, THERE'S NO FOLLOW UP THAT YOU CAN FIND SO THAT YOU HAVE TO HAVE A CAMERA.

YOU HAVE TO CATCH TAGS, SOMETHING TO BE ABLE TO GO CHASE THEM.

WHEN SOLID WASTE GET TO THE SCENE, IT'S JUST A PILE.

WE GO THROUGH IT LOOKING FOR SOMETHING TO WORK WITH.

THERE'S NOTHING THERE, RIGHT? BUT IT'S THERE.

AND I THINK, MR. MOORE, YOU MENTIONED A WORD THAT I WAS GOING TO COME TO IF I IF MY MEMORY SERVES ME CORRECTLY.

IN A PREVIOUS SLIDE, IT WAS AROUND PUBLIC SAFETY.

I THINK THAT THERE WAS DISCUSSION AROUND 250 CAMERAS IN THE CITY.

IS THAT CORRECT? THAT WAS THAT WAS PART OF MY PRESENTATION AND THAT WAS PART OF OUR EYES IN THE SKY PROGRAM.

OKAY, SO WE'VE GOT 250 CAMERAS, BUT WE'RE NOT USING THAT TECHNOLOGY TO CAPTURE SOME OF THE DOLLARS THAT THE DIRECTOR OF THIS.

THAT PARTICULAR ENTERPRISE SAYS WE REALLY GET BEAT UP AND REVENUE IS NOT BEING IDENTIFIED.

SO WE'VE GOT CAMERAS ALL OVER THE CITY. SO IS THERE NOT AN OPPORTUNITY TO TRY TO IDENTIFY SOME OF THOSE DOLLARS USING THE TECHNOLOGY THAT WE'VE INVESTED IN SO THAT WE'RE NOT RUNNING THIS HUGE DEFICIT? I'M NOT I'M JUST TRYING TO REALLY FIGURE OUT HOW WE.

EVERY YEAR IT'S OKAY FOR US TO RUN A DEFICIT.

WE'VE GOT SOME TECHNOLOGY, WE'VE GOT SOME OTHER THINGS.

IF WE'RE NOT SORT OF WORKING TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE TRYING TO GO AFTER SOME OF THOSE DOLLARS, I KIND OF CUED THE POLICE CHIEF TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT OUR ACTIVITIES AND UTILIZING THOSE TECHNOLOGIES.

YOU GUYS. GOOD AFTERNOON, EVERYONE. I'M GOING TO BE VERY QUICK ON THIS.

SO WE USED TO HAVE A REALLY, REALLY BAD ILLEGAL DUMPING PROBLEM.

IT WAS VERY BAD. I THINK MOST OF YOU ALL ARE FAMILIAR.

WE HAVE ABOUT 250 CLOSE TO 300 CAMERAS SINCE WE'VE GOTTEN THOSE CAMERAS, DUMPING HAS REALLY GONE DOWN TREMENDOUSLY.

WE'VE CALLED A COUPLE PEOPLE, BUT IT'S NOT LIKE IT USED TO BE.

MATTER OF FACT, WHEN I USED TO COME TO COUNCIL MEETINGS, EVERY COUNCIL MEETING, THERE WAS A RESIDENT COMPLAINING ABOUT ILLEGAL DUMPING. AS YOU'VE NOTICED, WE DON'T HAVE THAT ANYMORE. ONE REASON WE DON'T HAVE THAT IS BECAUSE PUBLIC WORKS.

ONE AREA WHERE THEY USED TO ILLEGALLY DUMP BARRICADED THAT AREA SO THEY CAN'T GET IN.

SO WE HAVE CUT THAT DOWN TREMENDOUSLY. SO WE HAVE CAUGHT PEOPLE, BUT WE DON'T HAVE NEARLY THE AMOUNT OF CASES WE USED TO HAVE.

AND CHIEF, WHEN WE'RE CATCHING THEM, ARE THEY GOING THROUGH THE COURT SYSTEM TO PAY FOR THAT.

[01:20:04]

RIGHT. WE'VE GOT LAWS ABOUT ILLEGAL DUMPING. YES.

AND WE CATCH THEM. AND WE'VE ALSO WENT TO OUR HOUSES AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.

AND WE GOT TAG NUMBERS AND THEY ARE CITED AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE. YES.

OKAY. SO OKAY. BUT MR. MOORE MAY NOT BE AWARE OF THOSE COURT CASES OR THE DOLLARS THAT WE RECRUIT.

CORRECT. AND HE MAY NOT BE AWARE BECAUSE WHAT HAPPENS IS ONCE WE WRITE THEM A CITATION, WE DON'T NOTIFY THEM ALL THE TIME.

AND THAT'S HANDLED THROUGH THE COURT SYSTEM. SO HE MAY NOT KNOW SPECIFICALLY HOW MANY PEOPLE WE'VE CALLED OR HOW MANY PEOPLE WE HAVEN'T CAUGHT.

AND I HAVE NOT HAD A CONVERSATION WITH MR. MOORE ABOUT THAT. OKAY.

SO THANK YOU FOR THAT INFORMATION. I STILL WOULD LIKE SOME ADDITIONAL.

SO THE CHIEF SAID THAT WE'VE CAUGHT SOME FOLKS. WE'VE WE'VE WRITTEN SOME CITATIONS.

I WOULD LIKE TO SEE HOW MANY OF THOSE AND THE AMOUNT OF DOLLARS, I GUESS WORKING WITH THE CHIEF OF POLICE AND ALSO OUR JUDICIAL SYSTEM, BECAUSE IF WE'RE RUNNING A DEFICIT AND WE'RE SUBSIDIZING THAT, WE'RE USING THE CITIZENS DOLLARS.

AND WHEN CITIZENS COME AND THEY COMPLAIN ABOUT STREET PAVING, SIDEWALKS AND A WHOLE NUMBER OF THINGS, BUT WE'RE MAKING A CONSCIOUS DECISION TO RUN A DEFICIT.

THERE COULD BE DOLLARS TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE THINGS THAT THEY'RE COMPLAINING ABOUT. OKAY.

THANK YOU. CHIEF, THE OTHER THING. I'M SORRY, NOT CHIEF.

SORRY, MR. CITY MANAGER. SLIDE SIX PLEASE.

SLIDE SIX IS AROUND HOUSING STABILITY AND RAPID REHOUSING AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.

AND I KNOW THAT THE CITY MANAGER MENTIONED THAT THERE'S BEEN AN INCREASE IN THOSE DOLLARS BECAUSE SOME OF THE ARPA FUNDS ARE GOING AWAY.

AND SO MY QUESTION WOULD BE, ARE WE LEVERAGING THOSE DOLLARS WITH OTHER ENTITIES THAT ARE DOING SOME OF THE SAME WORK BECAUSE THEY'RE SERVING A SHARED CONSTITUENCY? THERE ARE OTHER ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE PROVIDING DOLLARS FOR REHOUSING, MORTGAGE ASSISTANCE, OR ARE WE JUST DOING IT ON OUR OWN AND NOT REALLY TAKING THE DOLLARS THAT WE'RE INVESTING IN THIS AS A PART OF THE BUDGET SO THAT WE HAVE GREATER IMPACT AND A FURTHER REACH? WE WE ARE WORKING IN PARTNERING WITH ADJACENT AGENCIES.

I KNOW IN MY VERY SECOND OR SECOND OR THIRD DAY ON THE JOB, I ATTENDED A FAIR THAT BROUGHT A NUMBER OF THESE PARTNERS TOGETHER. AND SO THERE IS A GREAT DEAL OF COLLABORATION GOING ON.

I THINK WHAT YOU MIGHT BE FEELING IS THE OVERWHELMING INCREASE IN DEMAND FOR THESE PROGRAMS. AND, AND IT ALSO FEEDS A LITTLE BIT INTO THE STATE OF THE OVERALL ECONOMY AND SOME OF THE, THE CHALLENGES THAT WE WERE SPEAKING ON WITH SOME OF COUNCILMAN FREHLEY'S QUESTIONS.

OKAY. AND I'M ASKING THAT QUESTION JUST BECAUSE OF A FEW OF THE ORGANIZATIONS I ACTUALLY SERVE ON THE BOARD OF ONE OF THEM, LOCATED RIGHT HERE IN THE CITY OF EASTPOINTE.

THEY DO SOME OF THE SAME WORK. I THINK THEY'RE SERVING SOME OF THE SAME PEOPLE.

SO YOU SAID THAT YOU DO RECALL US WORKING WITH SOME OF THOSE AGENCIES AND ENTITIES.

ARE YOU AWARE OF THOSE OFF THE TOP OF YOUR HAND, OR ARE YOU AWARE OF IF WE IN THIS BUDGET HAVE A LINE ITEM OF $350,000.

WHEN WE LEVERAGED THAT WITH SOME OF THE PARTNERS THAT YOU JUST MENTIONED.

WHAT IS THAT NUMERICAL IMPACT ON THE SERVICES THAT WE'RE ABLE TO PROVIDE? I CAN CERTAINLY DELVE INTO THAT DEEPER AND GET SOME INFORMATION FOR YOU ON THAT.

HAVING AN UNDERSTANDING OF THE OVERALL NEED IN THE COMMUNITY.

I MEAN, WE CAN CERTAINLY TALK ABOUT HOW MANY FAMILIES, HOW MANY FAMILIES WE'RE SERVICING AND, AND THAT THAT WE'RE WORKING WITH. AND WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT HOW TO GET THESE FAMILIES BACK ON THEIR FEET, PARTICULARLY IN THE RAPID REHOUSING AND THOSE KIND OF THINGS.

BUT I DON'T HAVE THAT IN COMPARISON TO THE OVERALL METRO METRO AREA NUMBERS.

WHAT THAT WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE FOR NEIGHBORING COMMUNITIES, SUBURBAN COMMUNITIES, OR WITH THE GREATER ATLANTA AREA.

SO I CAN CERTAINLY LOOK INTO THE LOOK INTO THAT AND SEE HOW WE COMPARE.

AND AND WHERE THERE'S OPPORTUNITIES TO BEEF UP OR FILL IN GAPS OR PARTNER.

OKAY. AND THOSE QUESTIONS ARE REALLY REGARDING BULLET HOME REPAIRS.

AND SO I KNOW THAT THERE ARE A GOOD NUMBER OF SENIORS IN OUR COMMUNITY WHO ARE ON A LIMITED INCOME, WHO HAVE A NEED FOR HOME REPAIRS. AND I SEE THAT WE'VE GOT $250,000.

AND SO THAT WAS REALLY A PART OF THE IMPETUS FOR MY INITIAL QUESTIONS ABOUT MAKING A DECISION TO RUN A DEFICIT.

I MEAN, WE I THINK WE HAVE TO GO AFTER THESE PEOPLE WHO ARE ILLEGALLY DUMPING IN OUR CITY, WHATEVER REVENUE ENHANCEMENT, THERE ARE TWO AREAS THAT I REALLY WANT TO FOCUS ON WITH THIS BUDGET.

[01:25:03]

AND SO WHEN I DON'T HEAR HOW WE'RE GOING AFTER DOLLARS, THAT COULD BE OUT THERE.

TO MR. MOORE'S POINT, REVENUE NOT BEING IDENTIFIED BECAUSE THEN WE'RE ABLE TO PUT MORE MONEY INTO A PROGRAM THAT MAY BE ABLE TO HELP OUR SENIORS WHO NEED THOSE DOLLARS TO MAKE REPAIRS TO THEIR HOMES.

THERE COULD BE SAFETY ISSUES AROUND THAT. IF IT GETS TO A CERTAIN POINT, THEN THERE ARE CODE VIOLATIONS.

THERE ARE A WHOLE NUMBER OF THINGS THAT COULD HAPPEN, BUT IF WE'RE MAKING A CONSCIOUS DECISION TO RUN A DEFICIT AND THEN NOT GOING AFTER REVENUE, I THINK THAT THAT DOESN'T SPEAK SO WELL TO THE THOUGHTFULNESS OF THE BUDGET AND HOW WE COULD REALLY IMPROVE OUR SERVICES TO THE CITIZENS.

SO THAT'S REALLY ONE OF THE REASONS WHY I WAS ASKING THAT QUESTION.

I THINK $250,000 IS GREAT, BUT I THINK IT'LL GO QUITE QUICKLY.

AND IF WE CONTINUE TO NOT REALLY LOOK AT REVENUE GENERATION, RATION, THEN WE WON'T HAVE THOSE DOLLARS TO REALLY HELP THOSE THOSE PERSONS WHO'VE LIVED HERE, THEY'VE PAID TAXES, THEY PAY UTILITIES, THEY DO ALL OF THOSE THINGS.

BUT WE WILL JUST LET THINGS LIKE ILLEGAL DUMPING AND THAT KIND OF STUFF JUST GO, BECAUSE WE'VE DECIDED THAT WE JUST WOULD SUBSIDIZE THAT.

SO I'M GOING TO MOVE ON BEYOND THAT. THE OTHER QUESTIONS THAT I HAVE THERE ARE MORE THAN I WOULD WANT TO SPEND TIME WITH THIS EVENING, BUT I WILL JUST SAY THAT IN THE DOCUMENT THAT WAS PROVIDED IN THE SECTION ENTITLED FINANCIAL SUMMARIES PARTICULARLY AND THIS MAY BE A QUESTION OF MR. CITY MANAGER, THIS MAY BE A QUESTION OF MR. GOLDEN. WHEN I LOOK AT THE FINANCIAL SUMMARIES AND THERE ARE SEVERAL PAGES I SEE THAT WE'VE GOT 20, 25 PROJECTED AND THEN WE'VE GOT 2025 AMENDED.

AND BECAUSE 25 FISCAL YEAR IS NOT YET COMPLETE, I'M ASSUMING THAT THAT IS REALLY ALSO PROJECTED BASED ON THE TRENDS.

CORRECT? CORRECT. OKAY. AND A LOT OF THOSE INSTANCES, THE NUMBERS ARE DOUBLED, MAYBE EVEN TRIPLED.

SO THAT LEADS ME TO A QUESTION OF METHODOLOGY.

HOW ARE WE COMING UP WITH THE NUMBERS TO BASE THE BUDGET? IF WE HAVE IF WE START OUT WITH A PROJECTED NUMBER AT ONE AMOUNT AND THEN WE'RE NOT QUITE FINISHED WITH 2025 FISCAL YEAR AND NUMBERS ARE DOUBLED, ALMOST TRIPLED. THERE'S ONE SECTION THAT I LOOKED AT, AND EVERY SINGLE LINE ITEM IN THAT SECTION WAS ABOVE WHAT HAD BEEN PROJECTED. SO THAT MAKES ME QUESTION THE METHODOLOGY.

SO MAYBE YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO METHODOLOGY. MR.. COULD YOU GIVE ME AN EXAMPLE OF ONE THAT YOU.

SURE. AND JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT I AM, IF YOU LOOK AT PAGE 58.

AND IF YOU GO TO EXPENDITURES. SO WE'VE GOT FISCAL YEAR 25 PROJECTED, BUT THEN WE'VE GOT FISCAL YEAR 25 AMENDED.

EVERY SINGLE NUMBER IN THE AMENDED IS INCREASED IN IN 1 IN 1 AREA.

IN TERMS OF PERSONNEL, WE'RE AT 500,574 BUT AMENDED IS 1.2 MILLION.

SO THAT LEADS ME TO ASK. AND SO WHEN I GO THROUGH THE DOCUMENT AND I'M STILL GOING THROUGH THE DOCUMENT, SO I'LL HAVE OTHER QUESTIONS THAT I COULD ASK AT A LATER DATE.

SORT OF THE METHODOLOGY, BECAUSE A LOT OF THE NUMBERS ARE JUST DIFFERENT.

THEY'RE JUST WAY ABOVE WHAT WAS PROJECTED. SO THAT THEN SAYS TO ME, FOR THIS PARTICULAR BUDGET FOR 26 IS THE SAME METHODOLOGY USED, BECAUSE IT LOOKS LIKE AS WE GET TOWARD THE END OF THE FISCAL YEAR, WE MAY BE DOUBLE OR TRIPLE WHAT WE WHAT WE MAY VOTE ON OR WHAT IS PROJECTED? NO. WHEN YOU LOOK AT FY 25 PROJECTED THAT AS THAT, THAT NUMBER WAS AS OF A CERTAIN DATE.

IT'S THE ACTUAL NUMBER THAT'S AT A CERTAIN DATE.

RIGHT. AND THEN THE AMENDED IS YOUR ACTUAL BUDGET AMENDMENT AMENDMENT AMOUNT.

SO THE PROJECTED NUMBER IS NOT THE NUMBER THAT WAS THE BUDGET NUMBER WHEN FISCAL YEAR 25.

NO. THAT IS YOUR ACTUAL NUMBER AT A CERTAIN DATE.

MAYBE IT'S FEBRUARY. FEBRUARY OF 2025. BUT WE CALL THAT.

SO IF IT'S THE ACTUAL NUMBER, WHY IS IT CALLED PROJECTED? BECAUSE IT'S THE FISCAL YEAR IS NOT OVER YET.

RIGHT. WHICH I THINK IS THE AMENDED. SO THERE ARE TWO.

SO IN THIS INSTANCE THERE'S THE FISCAL YEAR 25 PROJECTED FISCAL YEAR 25 AMENDED.

OKAY. SO I UNDERSTAND THAT FISCAL YEAR 25 IS NOT OVER, WHICH IS WHY I WAS SAYING THAT THAT NUMBER IS ALSO THEN WOULD BE PROJECTED BECAUSE THE

[01:30:04]

I CAN SEE WHY YOU'RE CONFUSED OR WHAT THE CONFUSION CAN COME FROM.

IT'S AN ACTUAL NUMBER. MAYBE IF WE PUT ACTUALS THERE, A PROJECTED ACTUAL WHAT THE PROJECTED ACTUAL IS, IS. OR PUT A DATE TO IT THAT SAYS THIS ACTUAL AS OF A CERTAIN DATE.

THEN IT WOULDN'T BE AS CONFUSING. SO WHAT IS THE PROJECTED? PROJECTED IS THE ACTUAL THIS IS THE ACTUAL EXPENDITURE FOR THIS PARTICULAR FUND.

SO I WANT TO SAY WE TOOK THE ACTUAL AS OF FEBRUARY 2025.

SO IT CAN BE CONSISTENT ACROSS THE BOARD. AND SO IN THIS CASE, THIS IS THE ACTUAL FOR AS OF THAT DATE.

SO IT'S NOT PROJECTED AS ACTUAL. IT'S ACTUAL.

OKAY. SO YOU SEE THE CONFUSION. IF WE SAY THAT IT'S PROJECTED THEN WE THINK THAT I THINK NOT WE I'LL SPEAK FIRST PERSON.

I THINK THAT THAT IS WHAT WE PROJECTED TO EXPEND FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BECAUSE IT SAYS FISCAL YEAR PROJECTED.

CORRECT. AND THEN THE NEXT COLUMN, TO ME, SEEMS LIKE IT WAS BASED ON THE TRENDS OF SPENDING BECAUSE IT WAS IN THE EXPENDITURE BUCKET.

WE'RE ABOVE THAT. SO THEN IT WAS AMENDED BECAUSE THAT COLUMN SAYS FISCAL YEAR AMENDED.

I CAN UNDERSTAND HOW THAT CAN BE CONFUSING. OKAY. SO THEN IT IS I WILL GO THROUGH THIS.

WE COULD DO THIS OFFLINE BECAUSE IT IS A BIT CONFUSING BECAUSE IT SEEMS THAT WE'RE ABOVE, IN MANY OF THESE INSTANCES, THE LINE ITEMS THAT WERE PROJECTED. OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU. THOSE ARE MY QUESTIONS. COUNCIL MEMBER, SHROPSHIRE.

THANK YOU. AND MY QUESTION IS AROUND. FIRST OF ALL, IT IS AROUND SINCE WE HAVE THIS PULLED UP, WHICH SPEAKS ON THE SUSTAINABLE ECONOMIC GROWTH.

NO GO UP. HOUSING ENHANCEMENT. SO WE ALREADY HAVE A PROGRAM WHERE ACTUALLY WE'RE, WE'RE CURRENTLY DOING THIS RIGHT NOW WHERE THEY'RE FIXING UP THE SENIOR HOMES. AND IT WAS WITH HOUSE PROUD AND SOMEBODY ELSE I CAN'T REMEMBER.

I THINK IT WAS GREEN. I CAN'T REMEMBER WHO IT WAS.

SO THAT PROGRAM IS GOING TO CONTINUE WHERE THE SENIORS ARE GETTING THEIR REPAIRS.

THAT'S NEEDED. CORRECT. YES. SO IT WAS JUST MORE ADDED INTO THE BUDGET TO CONTINUE THAT PROGRAM.

CORRECT. SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S ALREADY GOING ON WHERE THEY'RE PROVIDING SERVICE TO THE SENIORS, WHERE THEY'RE FIXING UP THEIR HOMES. BECAUSE IT MIGHT NEED BATHROOM FLOORS, RAMPS IN THE, IN THE BATHROOM PLUMBING, TOILET. THE CITY IS ALREADY DOING THAT.

THANK YOU FOR CONTINUING THAT PROGRAM THAT WE'RE CURRENTLY DOING.

MY QUESTION IS TO IN REFERENCE TO THE SANITATION.

AND I KNOW WE'RE SUPPOSED TO HAVE A SOME TYPE OF POLICY IN PLACE FOR COMMERCIAL HAULERS OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. AND I KNOW THAT THE CITY WORKED ON MAYBE ABOUT THREE YEARS AGO.

DO WE HAVE THAT IN PLACE? YES, WE CURRENTLY HAVE.

WHERE THE. WE HAVE FOUR PRIVATE HAULERS THAT COLLECT COMMERCIAL GARBAGE WITHIN THE CITY, AND THEY ARE REQUIRED TO PAY A 20% OF THEIR GROSS REVENUE TO THE DEPARTMENT.

AND THE LAST QUARTER, ALL OF THEM HAD MADE THEIR CONTRIBUTION TO THAT, TO THAT FRANCHISE FEE. SO THAT'S STILL WORKING. OKAY. SO LET ME ASK YOU THIS.

DO YOU THINK THAT MAYBE THAT FEE NEEDS TO BE RAISED AT COMMERCIAL HALL OF FEE? NO. HERE'S WHAT I THINK WE NEED TO DO. WHAT I THINK WE NEED TO DO.

AND I SPOKE TO THE CITY MANAGER ABOUT IT. AND WE'RE LOOKING AT TO CONSOLIDATE THOSE FOUR HAULERS INTO ONE.

AND AND CHARGE THAT 20% FRANCHISE FEE AND GET CONTROL OF WHAT'S ACTUALLY GOING ON OUT THERE IN OUR MARKET, BECAUSE OUR MARKET THAT WE HAVE, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT WE ARE COLLECTING 100% OF THE REVENUE IN WHICH WE SHOULD, BECAUSE WE HAVE PIRATES THAT ARE COLLECTING THE GARBAGE AS WELL, THAT DON'T PARTICIPATE IN THAT 20% FRANCHISE FEE.

SO THAT'S SOMETHING ONCE WE GET THIS, ONCE WE PROVIDE, ONCE WE GET AN EXCLUSIVE CONTRACT WITH ONE HAULER.

WE CAN THEN BETTER TRACK THE FUNDING, GET INTO IT AND CONTROL WHO'S PICKING UP GARBAGE WITHIN OUR CITY.

[01:35:07]

AND THAT WOULD HELP TRACK, CATCH TAG NUMBERS, WHOEVER IS DOING IT.

BUT ILLEGAL DUMPING IS GOING ON AROUND, IT'S GOING ON EVERYWHERE.

AND IT IS AND IT'S IT'S JUST UNFORTUNATELY, IT'S HARD TO CATCH.

IT'S JUST LIKE WHEN IT'S LIKE ABANDONED PROPERTY WHEN YOU THEY SET THE STUFF OUT.

IT HAS TO BE PICKED UP AND YOU CAN HUNT. YOU CAN LOOK FOR THE OWNER AND LOOK FOR THE OWNER, AND YOU CAN PUT IT ON TO THE TAXES. BUT IF THEY DON'T PAY THE TAXES, THEN THAT'S JUST A THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S ON THAT'S ON THE CITY. BUT I DO WANT TO GO BACK TO ADDRESS THE FACT THAT WHEN YOU CAUGHT THE ILLEGAL HAULER AND THEY HAD TO GO TO COURT AND FOR ANYONE TO MAKE THEM PAY $100 IS, YOU KNOW, NOT IS NOT RIGHT TO THE CITY WHEN THE FEE PROBABLY SHOULD HAVE BEEN MORE THAN THAT BECAUSE OF THE IMPACT THAT IT HAD ON THE CITY. BUT I, I DID WANT TO ADDRESS THOSE ISSUES.

ONE, THE CITY ALREADY IS CURRENTLY WORKING WITH THE SENIORS ON THE HOME INITIATIVE PROGRAM THAT THEY'RE CURRENTLY DOING AND TO TO JUST MAYBE CONTINUE TO PUT THE CAMERAS IN THE AREA WHERE THERE IS A PROBLEM WITH THE DUMPING AND THREE.

MAYBE THAT'S SOMETHING THAT THE CITY MANAGER AND THE CITY ATTORNEY CAN LOOK AT IS WITH THOSE CONTRACTS TO GENERATE MORE REVENUE.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER. ZIEGLER.

THANK YOU. AND THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION.

MR. CITY MANAGER FOR THE BLIGHT TAX. I THINK THAT IN THE PRESENTATION, IT SHOWED THAT WE'RE ONLY RECEIVING SOMETHING LIKE $350,000 THROUGH THE 50 WORST PROPERTY LIST. KNOWING THAT, THAT'S KIND OF A DYNAMIC LIST WITH HOUSES COMING ON AND OFF THE LIST, BUT THEN ALSO KNOWING THAT WE HAVEN'T HAD REALLY ANY STAFF BE ABLE TO PAY ATTENTION TO THE 50 WORST LIST.

HOW HOW CONFIDENT ARE WE THAT WE ARE TAXING APPROPRIATELY TO THE RIGHT PROPERTIES.

DESELECT YOUR LIGHTS ON THE CITY MANAGER. CAN I HAVE COUNCIL MEMBER MITCHELL NEXT? AND THEN COUNCIL MEMBER BUTLER. YES. SO AS WE PROBABLY HAVE DISCUSSED EARLIER, THE 50 WORST PROPERTIES PROGRAM DEPARTMENT IS GOING UNDER SOME REVAMPING.

AND SO AT THIS TIME, I CAN'T CONFIDENTLY SAY THAT THE PROGRAM IS, IS APPROPRIATELY BEING THE FEE IS APPROPRIATE. AT THIS POINT, WE WE REALLY THERE'S SOME THINGS THAT ARE IN THE WORKS, MEANING BEFORE WE HAVE DONE THE REVISITING OF THE 50 WORKS PROGRAM, THERE'S SOME, PROPERTIES THAT ARE IN THE SYSTEM, IF YOU WILL. BUT WE HAVEN'T ACTIVELY GONE OUT TO PUT MORE PROPERTIES IN THE SYSTEM UNTIL WE ACTUALLY GET A HANDLE ON WHAT THE PROGRAM IS DOING, IF IT'S DOING IT THE RIGHT WAY.

AND AND THAT'S WHERE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE WE'RE LOOKING TO BRING BACK TO COUNCIL OUR OUR, OUR, OUR STEPS FORWARD ON HOW THAT PROGRAM CAN, CAN, CAN BETTER MEET THE NEEDS OF THE CITIZENS.

SO THAT THAT'S KIND OF IN THE WORKS STILL AND AT, AT THIS POINT, I'M GOING TO KIND OF ASSUME THAT THOSE FEES ARE AT APPROPRIATE LEVELS, BUT I HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO TO KIND OF GET IN AND FIGURE OUT IF THEY ARE OR NOT.

THANK YOU. AND THEN AT THE LAST COUNCIL MEETING, WE HAD A RESIDENT UP HERE WHO HAD A A LETTER FOR A LIEN ON HER HOUSE FOR $0.96. I'M ASSUMING THAT THE OPPOSITE HAS BEEN TRUE, THAT THERE HAVE BEEN PEOPLE OR ENTITIES OR COMPANIES THAT HAVE BACK TAXES OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS AND THEY HAVEN'T BEEN APPROPRIATELY ADDRESSED.

[01:40:01]

WHAT, WHAT THAT REPRESENTED IS A SYSTEM THAT BASICALLY TAKES ANY OUTSTANDING AMOUNT AND SENT A LETTER TO UNFORTUNATELY, THAT DOESN'T NECESSARILY REPRESENT MAYBE I SHOULD SAY THAT'S PROBABLY NOT APPROPRIATE IN ALL CASES BECAUSE IN IN THAT CASE, IT WAS ACTUALLY A PAYMENT THAT HAD SHOWED UP LATE IN THE COUNTY SYSTEM THAT CREATED AN INTEREST, A INTEREST AMOUNT, AND THAT INTEREST AMOUNT WAS $0.96, BECAUSE MAYBE THAT PAYMENT DIDN'T GET THERE RIGHT ON TIME.

AND THEN THE SYSTEM DIDN'T AUTOMATICALLY TRIGGERED THE PAYOUT.

SO THE OPPOSITE OF OF THAT, HAVING SOME SOME USER WITH A HIGH NUMBER, IT WOULDN'T IT WOULDN'T REALLY AFFECT THAT SITUATION OR BE SOMETHING I WOULD BE CONCERNED ABOUT. WHAT WE ARE LOOKING AT IS IN THOSE CASES HAVING ANOTHER OFF ROAD PROCESS, IF YOU WILL. SO BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY THAT THAT LETTER AUTOMATICALLY GETS SOME ROOM ON THE DOCKET AND, AND, AND GIVES 30 DAYS TO RESPOND OR YOU'RE ACTUALLY IN A COURT CASE SITUATION WHICH COSTS THE CITY MUCH MORE MONEY THAN, SAY, $0.96 IN THIS SITUATION. FRANKLY, IT COSTS MORE THAN ANYTHING THAT WE WE HAVE FORESEEN TO BE LESS THAN $100.

SO WE'RE GOING TO ADJUST THE THRESHOLDS IN THE SYSTEM SO THAT THINGS THAT REFLECT $100 OR LESS, THAT WE HAVE ANOTHER PROCESS TO SAY, HEY, A REMINDER IT'S NOT CONNECTED TO A COURT DATE OR OR ANY KIND OF DEED PROCESS, LIEN PROCESS THAT WE CAN THEN JUST KIND OF REMIND CITIZENS THAT FOR WHATEVER REASON, WE'VE GOT THESE NUMBERS FROM THE COUNTY AND THEY SHOULD GET THOSE THINGS ADDRESSED SO THAT I WOULDN'T WORRY ABOUT FOLKS THAT AREN'T GOING UNPAID.

I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY WE ARE NOT COLLECTING AT 100%.

SO THERE ARE THINGS THAT WE MIGHT MIGHT DO TO MAKE SURE WE REMIND FOLKS THAT, YOU KNOW, PAYMENTS ARE, ARE, ARE DUE. BUT I THINK IT'S COORDINATING. I'VE HAD THIS WHOLE PROCESS KIND OF HIGHLIGHTED COORDINATING WITH YOUR YOUR ESCROW. SOME PEOPLE, YOU KNOW, LEFT CLOSING FELT LIKE EVERYTHING WAS TAKEN CARE OF.

THEY DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT THAT PART OF OF THEIR HOME OWNERSHIP ANYMORE.

COME TO FIND OUT THAT YOU KNOW, THE ESCROW IS NOT NOT APPROPRIATELY DOING IT.

AND THERE'S THESE WEIRD LITTLE BALANCES LEFT OFF.

SO THERE'S SOME PROCESSES WHERE WE CAN, YOU KNOW, HELP EDUCATE THE PUBLIC SO THEY CAN BE MORE IN TUNE WITH KEEPING AN EYE ON THEIR ESCROWS.

AND IN, IN SITUATIONS WHERE THERE MAY BE ELDERLY OR PEOPLE THAT HAVE THEIR HOMES ALREADY PAID UP.

THAT IT IT'S, YOU KNOW, THE SYSTEM IS NOT VERY KIND FOR BEING A DAY LATE OR WHATEVER.

AND WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE SOME ADJUSTMENTS SO THAT PEOPLE AREN'T GETTING DEALT WITH LIKE THEY ARE OR ARE NOT PAYING THEIR TAXES ON PURPOSE, THAT THERE'S SOME OVERSIGHTS. AND SO THAT WAS THAT SITUATION.

RIGHT? SO WHILE I WAS WAITING MY TURN, I LOOKED UP A PARTICULAR ENTITY IN WARD B THAT HAS PLAGUED EAGAN PARK A LOT, AND THEY ARE A TAX ATTACKS ON OUR RESOURCES HERE IN EASTPOINTE, AND THEY ARE BEHIND IN THEIR TAXES BY $42,000.

BY MULTIPLE THEY'VE BEEN IN BACK TAXES FOR A COUPLE YEARS NOW.

AND SO I WAS JUST CURIOUS ON HOW ON HOW THAT PROCESS LOOKS WHEN THERE'S, YOU KNOW, A FIVE FIGURE TAX BILL THAT NEEDS TO BE DUE YOU KNOW, LIKE, HOW HOW OFTEN DO WE DO WE COLLECT ON THOSE IN KIND OF LIKE, WHAT'S THE PROCESS FOR THAT? SO OUR TAX DEPARTMENT HAS RECENTLY FILED INTENT TO FIVE PHASE, RIGHT.

SO ALL OF THOSE TAXES THAT ARE IN ARREARS DELINQUENT, THOSE ARE THOSE INTENT TO FILE FOR THOSE PARTICULAR ACCOUNTS THAT ARE BEHIND. SO THOSE WERE FILED WITH FULTON COUNTY.

I THINK THE NEXT STEP IS IF THEY DON'T PAY THEN TO FILE LIENS ON THOSE FOR THOSE TAXPAYERS THAT THAT HAD ONLY INTEREST ONLY WE, WE, WE LOOKED AT THOSE ACCOUNTS.

THOSE WERE VERY FEW. SO FOR THE MOST PART WE WERE ABLE TO TAKE CARE OF THAT FOR THAT, THAT CITIZEN.

BUT WHEN IT COMES TO TAX, WE CAN'T WAIVE TAX.

[01:45:01]

IT ACCRUES AND IT GETS PUT ON THE NEXT YEAR'S TAX BILL.

THAT'S HOW IT USUALLY THAT'S THE PROCESS THAT WE USUALLY HAVE.

BUT FOR THE LARGER AMOUNTS WE HAVE IDENTIFIED THOSE AND WE PLAN ON MOVING FORWARD WITH THAT.

OKAY. AND THIS PARTICULAR ENTITY IS A MOTEL. AND IF THEY'RE NOT PAYING THEIR MUNICIPAL TAX, I'M ALSO ASSUMING THAT THEY'RE NOT PAYING INTO THE HOTEL MOTEL TAX AS WELL.

SO HOW DO WE LIKE, DO WE DO AUDITS ON THAT AS WELL TO ENSURE WE DO DO RANDOM AUDITS ON HOTELS? AND WE TRACK EACH MONTH HOTEL PAYMENTS. OKAY.

ALL RIGHT. AND THEN REGARDING THE FEDERAL GRANTS AND THINGS LIKE THE GRANTS THAT WERE FROZEN THIS YEAR WHERE ARE WE ON THOSE AND HOW IS THAT GOING TO IMPACT THIS NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET? FOR THE MOST PART WHEN I DID THAT PRESENTATION, MOST OF THOSE GRANTS WERE WITH THE DOJ.

WE DID HAVE SOME APPROPRIATIONS. WITH THE APPROPRIATIONS THERE HAVE BEEN SOME CHANGES AND ALSO REFILING WITH THAT PARTICULAR SENATOR'S OFFICE. HOWEVER, WITH DOJ, WE'VE RECEIVED CORRESPONDENCE FROM FOR THEM THAT THEY'RE GETTING BACK UP TO SPEED TO REIMBURSE. SO WE'RE JUST WAITING TO SEE WHEN THAT TIME WILL BE UP AND WHETHER OR NOT NEW GRANTS WILL BE ISSUED FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE.

OKAY. AND SO ALL THE OTHER GRANTS, INCLUDING THE REALLY LARGE ONE FOR WATER AND SEWER, THOSE HAVE BEEN UNFROZEN.

THE ONE FROM WATER AND SEWER. I THINK THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS, I BELIEVE THAT I THINK THAT IS OKAY BECAUSE WE'RE WE HAVE IN THE BUDGET THE THE MATCHING PORTION FOR THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS.

BUT IS MELISSA AVAILABLE? GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS. AND SO THE $15 MILLION THAT WAS AWARDED FOR US THROUGH THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, WE MET WITH ARMY CORPS ENGINEERS, AND THEY ARE IN RECEIPT OF THE $15 MILLION.

DOLLARS. SO WE JUST HAVE TO DECIDE THE MATCHING FUNDS, AND WE ARE WAITING FOR THE OFFICIAL AWARD TO BE PRESENTED TO MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

THEY'RE WAITING FOR SOME BASIC SURVEY INFORMATION AND TO MAKE SURE THAT WE OWN THE WATER LINES THAT ARE OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMITS.

SO EVERYTHING NOW IS ON ME AND MY STAFF FOR PROVIDING THAT DOCUMENTATION.

CONCERNING TAX PARCELS OUTSIDE THE CITY OF EASTPOINTE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE OWN IT.

AND THEN WHAT ABOUT THE GRANT? IT WAS FOR THE PATH PROJECT THAT WENT FROM ATLANTA DOWN MAIN STREET INTO DOWNTOWN AND THEN CONNECTED INTO WILLINGHAM CORRIDOR. THE RECONNECTING COMMUNITIES GRANT, IT WAS LIKE 60, $30 MILLION. YEAH. STAFF PROBABLY DOESN'T HAVE THAT UPDATE.

THE THAT'S AN ATLANTA REGIONAL COMMISSION GRANT THAT THEY APPLIED FOR AND RECEIVED IN THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION.

THEY ARE HAVING TO TO REAPPLY DURING THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION FOR THOSE FUNDS TO BE ABLE TO BE, I GUESS, RE-AWARDED OR ACTUALLY PROVIDED. AND SO THEY'RE IN THE PROCESS OF REAPPLYING WITH THE CURRENT ADMINISTRATION.

OKAY. THANK YOU. THAT'S ALL. YES. THANK YOU FOR YOUR PRESENTATION.

I WAS JUST WANTING TO REVISIT A COUPLE OF THOSE SLIDES.

I THINK ONE SLIDE HAD THE DEFICIT FROM YEAR TO YEAR THAT WE WERE RUNNING.

CAN WE GO BACK TO THAT ONE? I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I SAW THIS CORRECTLY.

IT'S LIKE A LINE GRAPH. THIS ONE. OKAY. AND AND WHO SETS THE PRICE OR THE FINES FOR SOMEBODY THAT GETS CAUGHT, YOU KNOW, ILLEGALLY DUMPING.

SO DO YOU HAVE THE YOU WERE ASKING WHAT DEFINES WHAT.

WHO SETS THE CHARGES? WHAT DEFINES FIND THE SOLICITOR.

OKAY, BECAUSE I'M LOOKING AT $1 MILLION DEFICIT.

SO THAT WOULD BE A LOT OF AND AND AS IT, AS IT IS RIGHT NOW, YOU SAID IT'S $100 FINE.

WELL THAT'S NOW NO THAT'S THE ONLY ONE THAT I'M AWARE OF THAT WAS COLLECTED.

OKAY. AS FAR AS THE SOLICITOR IS THE ONE THAT SAID THAT $100 FINE ON THE PARTICULAR CASE THAT I WAS AWARE OF.

AND AS THE CHIEF JUST STATED, THAT THERE COULD BE SOME THINGS GOING ON THAT I'M NOT EVEN AWARE OF.

[01:50:01]

CAN WE GO TO THAT ONE? THOSE NO ONE NEVER PAID FOR THOSE.

I THINK EVEN YOU SAID TIRES, IT WAS LIKE $5,000.

YEAH, WE HAD SOME FOR 15,000 AND WE HAD SOME FOR 7000.

TIRE REMOVAL. YEAH, 12,000 FOR ONE. AND WE HAD SOME ON NORTH COMMERCE.

WE HAD $15,000 WORTH OF TIRES DISPOSED OF. IN ANOTHER CASE, WE HAD 7000 ON WEST WOODBURY, AND WE HAD ABOUT $1,200 FOR TIRES ON LISLE CIRCLE.

SO EVEN IF SOMEONE PAYS THE FINE, IT STILL COSTS MORE TO CLEAN.

WELL, THERE WAS NO FINE ISSUE THERE BECAUSE THEY HAVE NO WAY OF KNOWING WHO DID IT RIGHT.

BUT IF THEY WERE TO PAY A FINE, THE CLEAN UP COSTS WOULD PROBABLY BE THE LEAST. THE LEAST IT SHOULD BE IS WHAT IT COST US.

THAT'S I GUESS THAT'S KIND OF MY POINT. SO I'M NOT SURE WHO STRUCTURED THESE FINES, BUT I STILL I SEE WHY IT'S RUNNING A DEFICIT BECAUSE IT'S NOT EQUATING TO THE CLEAN UP COST. SO IF YOU DO FIND THEM IT'S STILL WE'RE STILL LOSING.

SO I'M NOT SURE IF WE COULD REEVALUATE THAT PORTION IF WE ACTUALLY WANT TO PUT A DENT IN THIS MILLION DOLLAR DEFICIT, BECAUSE THAT'S A LOT OF $100 FINES. AND ALSO, COULD WE GO BACK TO THAT LAST SLIDE? WITH THE DEFICIT? OKAY. SO ARE YOU SAYING AS IS.

SO WE'RE PULLING MONEY OUT OF THE GENERAL FUND? DID I HEAR THIS RIGHT TO TO KIND OF BALANCE OUT THIS DEFICIT? SO YES, THE GENERAL FUND DOES SUBSIDIZE SOLID WASTE.

OKAY. AND THE OTHER OPTION WAS I THINK THERE WAS ANOTHER SLIDE THAT SAID THE COST HAS GONE UP, BUT WE DON'T WANT TO CHARGE THE TAXPAYERS MORE.

I THINK IT WAS LIKE $6 OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

OKAY. THANK YOU. YEAH. OH, YEAH. RIGHT THERE.

YEAH. NO, THAT'S PRETTY MUCH IT. I JUST WANTED TO RECHECK A COUPLE THINGS, BUT. BUT THANK YOU FOR YOUR PRESENTATION. THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. THANK YOU.

I'LL BE REAL BRIEF, MR. MOORE. IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THIS COUNCIL, PREVIOUS COUNCIL APPROVED FOR CITY MANAGER KING AT THE TIME TO CONSOLIDATE COMMERCIAL GARBAGE PICKUP TO ONE CARRIER SO WE COULD STOP THE PIRATING ISSUE.

IS THAT WAS THAT NOT ENACTED OR WHAT WHAT HAPPENED TO THAT? THERE WAS SOME LEGAL ISSUES THAT TOOK PLACE THAT REQUIRED OUR CITY ATTORNEY TO GET UNDER CONTROL.

OUR DIRECTOR OF PURCHASING WAS WORKING WITH HER ON THAT ISSUE.

NOW THAT OUR NEW CITY MANAGER IS HERE, I FELT THAT IT WAS GOOD TO BRING IT TO HIS ATTENTION SO THAT HE CAN WEIGH IN ON HOW HE WANTED IT TO BE HANDLED.

SO WHEN CITY MANAGER KING LEFT, WE WAS IN THE PROCESS OF GETTING THAT LEGAL STUFF STRAIGHTENED OUT. BUT NOW WE GOT TO COMPLETE THAT AND WORK WITH THE CITY MANAGER, NEW CITY MANAGER ON HOW TO PROCEED.

THANK YOU. ONE QUICK QUESTION FOR YOU. NOT FOR YOU, MR. MOORE. FOR ME? FOR SHANNON. OKAY. HOW YOU DOING? ONE QUICK QUESTION. I NOTICED THE $5 MILLION CAME FROM THE HOTEL MOTEL TAX.

IS THAT ALL THREE PARTS OF THE HOTEL? MOTEL TAX? THAT'S THE TOTAL. THAT'S THE TOTAL THAT WE'RE THINKING THAT WE'RE FORECASTING TO GET IN REVENUE.

AND SO THEN IT WOULD BE DIVIDED BASED UPON THE PREVIOUS SLIDE YOU SHOWED US INTO THE DIFFERENT CATEGORIES.

THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. AS IT RELATES TO THE COMMERCIAL HAULERS I WAS TRYING TO FOLLOW ALONG TOO, AND WAS LOOKING UP THE HISTORY.

IT LOOKS LIKE THERE WAS A SOLICITATION DONE. AND ON FEBRUARY 27TH, 2020, THERE WERE THREE VENDORS PRESENTED TO US.

BUT THEN AFTER THAT, THERE WAS A SOLICITATION DONE, AND ON MAY 10TH WAS DONE ON MAY 10TH, 2023. AND COUNCIL SELECTED WASTE ELIMINATOR, WHICH IS WHAT I THINK COUNCILMAN BUTLER WAS REFERRING TO.

THERE WAS A PRESENTATION FROM STAFF, A POWERPOINT THAT'S ONLINE FROM NOVEMBER 27TH, PRESENTED ON NOVEMBER 27TH, 2023, THAT TALKED ABOUT THE DIFFERENT STEPS AND THAT WE SELECTED THEM.

AND THEN WE NEED TO COME UP WITH REACHING OUT TO ALL OF THE COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES IN THE CITY AND FIND OUT WHO WAS COLLECTING AND FIGURE OUT A RATE.

AND THEN ON JANUARY 16TH, APPROVAL OF WASTE ELIMINATOR WAS OF 2024 WAS ON THE AGENDA, BUT IT WAS

[01:55:07]

I THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO. BUT THEN I HEARD YOU SAY EARLIER THAT THERE'S A 20% FRANCHISE FEE.

WHAT ARE WE TALKING ABOUT? COMMERCIAL HAULER IS SOMETHING DIFFERENT. PRESS THE MIC.

PRESS YOUR MIC FOR ME. PRESS THE MIC FOR ME. IS THAT AGAIN CORRECT? 20% FRANCHISE FEE ON THE COMMERCIAL HAULER ON THE PEOPLE WHO ARE DOING COMMERCIAL PICKUP.

CORRECT RIGHT NOW. AND SO WE THINK THAT THERE'S SOME CONCERNS WITH COLLECTIONS ON THAT.

AND SO NOW YOU'RE SAYING THAT MAYBE WE SHOULD MOVE.

WE HAVE MULTIPLE. SO WE SELECTED ONE THAT WAS LEGAL ISSUES.

WE NOW HAVE FOUR AT A FRANCHISE FEE OF 20% OKAY.

HERE'S WHAT HAPPENED. WE AT THAT POINT WE WAS TRYING TO CONSOLIDATE THE HAULERS TO ONE WHICH WAS THE WASTE ELIMINATORS.

HOWEVER, THERE WAS SOME ISSUES CAME UP WHEN IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE SUBMITTED TO COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL, AND THERE WERE SOME LEGAL ISSUES THAT CAME UP. WE HAD TO PULL IT.

ONCE WE PULLED IT, IT HADN'T BEEN BACK TO YOU ALL.

OKAY. AND THAT WAS PULLED BACK IN JANUARY. ON JANUARY 16TH OF 2024.

CORRECT. SO THE 2,520% FRANCHISE FEE ON MULTIPLE COMMERCIAL HAULERS WAS IN PLACE BEFORE THAT? YES. OKAY. AND BECAUSE A DECISION HADN'T BEEN MADE, POST THE SELECTION OF WASTE ELIMINATOR AS A SINGLE ONE BECAUSE OF LEGAL ISSUES, WE STILL HAVE THE FOUR AT THE 20% FRANCHISE FEE RIGHT ON MONTH TO MONTH WITH THE HAULERS.

AND THEN YOU'RE SAYING, THOUGH, THAT IF WE POTENTIALLY GO AT ONE, YOU SAID IT COULD POTENTIALLY BE LUCRATIVE AND I COULDN'T REMEMBER HOW.

YES. BECAUSE WHAT WE COULD DO IS ONCE WE GET ALL THE HAULERS OUT, WE CAN BETTER CONCENTRATE ON ONE HAULER BEING WITHIN THE CITY AND MAKING SURE THAT THEY ARE THE ONLY ONES THAT'S SERVICING THE THE COMMUNITY HERE WITH ALL THESE HAULERS.

YOU CAN'T. WE GOT ABOUT. I COUNTED 21 DIFFERENT HAULERS IN THE CITY THAT WAS VIOLATING OUR CURRENT ORDINANCE.

AND IT'S I MADE AN EFFORT TO PENALIZE ALL THOSE HAULERS THAT WAS HERE.

THAT SHOULDN'T BE HERE. AND AT THAT POINT, THE SOLICITOR WOULDN'T MOVE FORWARD WITH WHAT WE WERE TRYING TO DO.

HE WASN'T COMFORTABLE, IS WHAT HE SAID. SO. AND I SHOULD HAVE STARTED THERE.

YOU'RE RIGHT. WE AMENDED OUR ORDINANCE BACK IN 2019 PRIOR TO THE SOLICITATIONS AND ALL OF THAT.

OKAY. BACK TO THE BULK AMNESTY PICKUP, ILLEGAL DUMPING, RECYCLING AND CITY DEPARTMENT HEADS, USE OF SANITATION.

AND THEN SO THE CITY IS UTILIZING, UTILIZING SANITATION, AND SANITATION PROVIDING SERVICES, BUT WE'RE NOT REFLECTING THAT ON THE FRONT END.

WE SUBSIDIZE IT ON THE BACK END AND WE SHOW IT AS A NEGATIVE BUDGET, KNOWING THAT WE'RE USING ALL OF THESE SERVICES.

SO I CAN'T RECALL MY ACCOUNTING TERMS. IT'S BEEN A LONG TIME SINCE I'VE BEEN IN SCHOOL OR TOOK SOME CLASSES, BUT TRANSFER IN, TRANSFER OUT OR INDIRECT COSTS LIKE IS THERE A WAY WHEN WE BUDGET, WE ALREADY ARE.

BASICALLY, COUNCIL HAS NOT SAID TO END THE BULK AMNESTY PROGRAM.

NO, BECAUSE COUNCIL HAS SAID PICK UP ILLEGAL DUMPING OR HASN'T INDICATED ANY RESISTANCE TO KEEPING THE CITY CLEAN IN THAT WAY.

WE HAVE A RECYCLING PROGRAM THAT YOU INDICATED.

WE'RE LOSING ABOUT 400,000 BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T INCREASED THE FEES, AND THEN THE CITY DEPARTMENTS ARE HAULING A LOT OF STUFF.

SO WE KNOW THIS. AND THEN WE END UP PAYING IT, BUT WE SHOW IT AS A NEGATIVE KNOWING THAT WE'RE USING SERVICES, BUT THAT SANITATION IS PROVIDING SERVICES THAT THEY'RE NOT BEING COMPENSATED FOR.

SO I KNOW THERE'S SOME LIMITATIONS AND RESTRICTIONS ON, LIKE INTERFUND TRANSFER GOING FROM GENERAL FUND TO ENTERPRISE FUNDS AND TRANSFERRING.

BUT LIKE IS THERE AN ACCOUNTING WAY? AND IF YOU DON'T HAVE THE ANSWER TONIGHT, LIKE INSTEAD OF CONSTANTLY SHOWING NEGATIVE FOR PRACTICES WE HAVE APPROVED OR HAVEN'T SAID DISCONTINUE, HOW CAN WE WITHIN GAAP AND ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLES AND ALL OF THAT REALLY SHOW WHAT WE'RE DOING? BECAUSE EVERY YEAR WE HAD THE SAME CONVERSATION ABOUT SANITATION DURING BUDGET PRESENTATIONS AT THE AT THE MONTHLY BUDGET AND FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETINGS. WE'RE SEEING THIS CONSTANTLY, CONSTANTLY, CONSTANTLY LIKE, AT WHAT POINT ARE WE GOING TO ACKNOWLEDGE,

[02:00:03]

YES, MA'AM. MADAM MAYOR I SPOKE WITH CHARLES IN REGARDS TO THIS, AND HE BROUGHT THAT TO MY ATTENTION.

SO HE MENTIONED ALSO THESE DEPARTMENTS THAT USE SOLID WASTE SERVICES.

WHAT WE'VE DONE OR STARTED TO DO WE ADDED A DISPOSAL ACCOUNT TO EACH ONE OF THESE DEPARTMENTS THAT DISPOSE OF GARBAGE OR WASTE. PUBLIC WORKS HAS ONE. I THINK PARKS AND REC HAS ONE.

WATER. THEY DON'T HAVE ONE. OKAY. WE'LL PUT ONE IN THERE.

AND WATER AND SEWER. AND SO AS WE BEGIN TO ADD THOSE DISPOSAL ACCOUNTS TO THOSE FUNDS AND THOSE DEPARTMENTS, IT SHOULD ALLEVIATE THE COST THAT IT THAT SOLID WASTE ENDURES.

OKAY. SO THAT'S ONE OF THE ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR AREAS HE MENTIONED.

HE ALSO TALKED ABOUT BOOK AMNESTY, WHICH WE APPROVED FOR RESIDENTS.

THERE'S A COST FOR THAT. HOW ARE WE GOING TO SHOW THE COST OF THAT AS A REVENUE SOURCE, WHETHER IT'S COMING FROM RESIDENTS OR IT'S A PROGRAM THAT COUNCIL HAS APPROVED SO THAT THEY'RE NOT BEING NEGATIVE FOR THAT, AS WELL AS ILLEGAL DUMPING. THERE WAS QUESTIONS ABOUT HOW DO WE ENFORCE IT.

I DON'T KNOW IF OUR POLICE INVOLVED. WE CHIEF TALKED ABOUT THE CAMERAS, LIKE KNOWING THAT THEY'RE PROVIDING SERVICES, THAT THEY'RE BEING AUTHORIZED OR ALLOWED OR PERMITTED TO PROVIDE WITHOUT RECEIVING REVENUE.

HOW ARE WE GOING TO ADDRESS BULK AMNESTY, ILLEGAL DUMPING AND RECYCLING? CAN WE CHARGE FOR BOTH? THERE'S NO MONEY FOR THAT.

LET ME TELL YOU WHY. IT'S ALL GETTING CAUGHT UP IN THAT ONE RIGHT THERE.

AND THAT RATE CHANGE. YOU DON'T CHANGE THAT RATE AS THEY KIND OF DISCUSS ON THAT.

I THINK YOU'RE ASKING AN EXCELLENT QUESTION. WHEN IT COMES DOWN TO IF THE COUNCIL MAKES THAT DECISION, ANOTHER APPROACH COULD BE MAKING A DELIBERATE TRANSFER FROM GENERAL FUND INTO THE ENTERPRISE FUND, BECAUSE THAT PROGRAM IS EXTRAORDINARY. AND AND IT MEANS THAT IT HAS A PRIORITY WITH THE COUNCIL AND THAT THE COUNCIL IS WILLING TO PAY FOR THAT, THAT SERVICE.

BECAUSE IN, IN IN BOTH THOSE CASES, THERE'S NOT A DIRECT LINE OF REVENUE.

IF, IF THE RESIDENTS AREN'T PAYING FOR, SAY, BULK AMNESTY AND THE, THE, THE DIRECTOR MOORE HAD CLEARLY SAID THAT THAT COST IS IS BEYOND JUST THE DEPARTMENT IN, IN THE FORM OF TIPPING FEES OR THE TRANSFER STATION.

THOSE ARE HARD COSTS THAT WE CAN'T GET AROUND.

AND SO IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S A PRIORITY, THE COUNCIL THEN WE CAN CERTAINLY MAKE A DELIBERATE PAYMENT INTO THE ENTERPRISE FUND FROM THE GENERAL FUND. THANK YOU, MR. JONES. I THINK IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO KNOW THE AMOUNT OR ESTIMATED AMOUNT LOOKING AT THE LAST 3 TO 5 YEARS, THAT FOR THE BULK AMNESTY COSTS, I SEE THE CHRISTMAS TREE PICK UP ON HERE.

THAT MIGHT NOT BE AS MUCH, BUT ILLEGAL DUMPING, RECYCLING AND THE CITY, LIKE, LOOKING AT THOSE AND SEEING WHAT THE TOTAL IS, IT PROBABLY EXCEEDS THE ALLEGED NEGATIVE FUND BALANCE FOR SANITATION.

BUT WE COULD HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT WHETHER WE WANT TO COVER THEM ON THE FRONT END SO THAT THE FY 26 BUDGET IS WE'RE BASICALLY ALLOWING A NEGATIVE BALANCE EVERY TIME.

AND WE WERE TALKING ABOUT COMMERCIAL HAULERS REALLY BEING SOMETHING THAT WOULD HELP TIP IT, BUT I AND I DON'T THINK THIS NEGATES COMMERCIAL HAULERS.

I JUST THINK WE NEED TO HAVE THOSE AMOUNTS AND MAKE THOSE DECISIONS.

SO MY QUESTION IS, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU ALL CAN HAVE TO US FOR THAT DECISION TO BE MADE WITH THE FY 26 BUDGET APPROVAL THAT'S REQUIRED BY CHARTER TO BE DONE ON JUNE 2ND.

OR THERE COULD BE A BUDGET AMENDMENT SHORTLY THEREAFTER. BUT I THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD BE LOOKING AT BECAUSE ONCE WE DO IT, ONCE WE SUBSIDIZE IT ON THE BACK END, IT'S LIKE, WHY DON'T WE DO IT ON THE FRONT END? LIKE, IF WE'RE GOING TO DO IT, WHY RUN THE WHOLE YEAR, HAVE MONTHLY PRESENTATIONS OF NEGATIVE, NEGATIVE, NEGATIVE, THAT END OF YEAR NEGATIVE NEGATIVE.

AND THEN WE SAY WE'RE GOING TO SUBSIDIZE IT. SO THAT'S THE SANITATION ISSUE.

THE OTHER IS DO WE HAVE A STATUS ON THE IG RATE STUDY FOR ELECTRIC RATES? I DON'T THINK THEY WERE DOING WATER. NO.

[02:05:09]

YES, IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE AVAILABLE TONIGHT, BUT THEY REACHED BACK OUT TO US AND LET US KNOW THAT IT'D BE AVAILABLE FOR NEXT MONTH.

SO THEY'LL BE HERE TO PRESENT IT AT THE NEXT WORK SESSION.

THANK YOU, MADAM DEPUTY CITY CLERK, IF YOU CAN PUT THAT ON THE JUNE 9TH WORK SESSION, THAT WILL BE AFTER WE APPROVE THE BUDGET.

BUT IF ANYTHING IS NEEDED TO CHANGE, WE COULD DO A BUDGET AMENDMENT.

SO IG RATE STUDY. THE OTHER THING IS ON THE SLIDE WITH THE RESERVES AND I AND I APPRECIATE YOU SHARING THE PRESENTATION, SHARE WITH THE COMMUNITY. BUT IT WOULD BE HELPFUL FOR US TO GET THESE SLIDES TOO. THIS IS A GOOD ANALYSIS.

I'D LIKE TO HAVE THESE. I DON'T KNOW IF THEY'RE FOLDED INTO THIS AMENDED BUDGET PRESENTATION OR SEPARATE, IT. BUT AS IT RELATES TO THIS THE RESERVES. SO IF WE LOOK AT THE RESERVES IN THE GENERAL FUND EACH YEAR, THEY GO UP EXCEPT FROM 25 TO 26. SO BASICALLY THIS IS SAYING FOR THE FY 26 BUDGET, WE'RE TAKING $1.2 MILLION FROM RESERVES BECAUSE IT WENT DOWN FROM 18.4 TO 17.6.

MAYBE MY MATH IS OFF. THAT'S NOT ONE POINT. WHAT IS IT? THAT WOULD BE FOUR PLUS SIX IS AT 900. WHATEVER THE DEDUCTION IS I CAN TAKE OUT MY COMPUTER, MY MATH, MY CALCULATOR.

BUT THIS IS SHOWING THAT WE'RE USING RESERVE FUNDS.

WHAT ARE WE USING THOSE RESERVE FUNDS FOR? WHAT? THIS. THIS IS JUST A PROJECTED. SO WE'RE WHEN WE DO THE BUDGET, YOU KNOW, IT'S A ZERO BASED BUDGET.

HOWEVER WHEN YOU LOOK AT THIS IT'S BASED OFF OF WHAT WE BUDGETED FOR EXPENDITURES.

RIGHT? SO IF WE TAKE THE WHETHER IT'S THE GREATER OF THREE MONTHS OR THE MINIMUM OF IN THE GENERAL FUNDS CASE, 12 MILLION, WE TAKE THAT 25%, MULTIPLY IT BY WHAT WE PROJECT.

THE THE EXPENDITURE IS GOING TO BE. AND SO THAT'S WHAT THAT'S WHAT COMES.

THAT'S HOW WE COME UP WITH THE THE PROJECTED FOR 2026.

SO THAT'S HOW WE COME UP WITH USING $800,000 OF RESERVES.

THAT'S THE $800,000 DEDUCTION. NO, WE'RE NOT USING RESERVES IN THIS CASE.

NO, MA'AM. DO YOU SEE HOW THE NUMBER WENT DOWN BY? YES, I DO. SO IT COULD BE WE CAN LOOK AT IT AND THEN YEAH, IF YOU CAN LET ME KNOW WHAT THAT 800,000 DECREASE IN RESERVE IS ATTRIBUTABLE TO.

THE. OTHER THING IS THE URBAN REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, I KEEP HEARING THE DISCUSSION ABOUT THE COMMISSION HAS NOT BEEN CREATED, AND SO I JUST DID SOME SEARCHES ONLINE IN THE MINUTES.

AND ON DECEMBER 3RD, 2018, THERE WAS A PUBLIC HEARING HELD.

THERE'S URBAN REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY IS A STATE STATUTORY COMMISSION WHICH REQUIRES PUBLIC HEARINGS TO ADOPT THE URBAN WORK URBAN DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM. SO WE HAD ONE ON DECEMBER 3RD, 2018.

THEN WE HAD ONE ON JANUARY 7TH, 2019. AT THAT MEETING, THE URBAN REDEVELOPMENT PROGRAM WAS ADOPTED, WHICH DESIGNATED THE AREA AND WHAT THE PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF THE WORK WAS.

AFTER THAT, ON JUNE 21ST, 2021, WHICH IS THE RESOLUTION THAT HAS BEEN REFERENCED SEVERAL TIMES IN THE LAST PARAGRAPH OF THAT RESOLUTION, IT READS. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF EASTPOINTE IN ACCORDANCE WITH OCGA 36, 61 DASH 18, THAT THE EASTPOINTE CITY COUNCIL SHALL CREATE THE EASTPOINTE URBAN REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND APPOINT ITSELF AND CONVENE AS THE EASTPOINTE URBAN REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS FOR THE PURPOSE OF EXERCISING ITS REDEVELOPMENT POWERS. SO THE EASTPOINTE COUNCIL APPOINTED ITSELF TO SERVE ON THAT BOARD.

AND IN FACT, I BELIEVE THERE WAS AT LEAST ONE MEETING HELD.

OF THAT AUTHORITY TRYING TO FIND MY.

[02:10:05]

BUT I DO BELIEVE THAT THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE PROVIDED THE RECORD KEEPING FOR THAT MEETING.

AND SO, MADAM DEPUTY CITY CLERK, IT WOULD BE HELPFUL IF YOU ALL COULD SEARCH YOUR RECORDS FOR THE MINUTES FROM. THERE WAS AT LEAST ONE, IF NOT TWO, MEETINGS OF THE URBAN REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, WHICH IS COMPRISED OF THE MEMBERS OF THE EASTPOINTE CITY COUNCIL. AFTER THOSE MEETINGS, THERE HAS NOT BEEN A RESOLUTION OF THIS COUNCIL CHANGING WHO THE BOARD MEMBERS WOULD BE NOR REMOVING ANY BOARD MEMBERS. SO THE COMMISSION WAS ESTABLISHED.

THE AUTHORITY WAS ESTABLISHED. THE COUNCIL APPOINTED ITSELF AS THE BOARD.

THERE WERE A COUPLE OF MEETINGS. I'M NOT SURE WHERE WE'RE GOING WITH THAT, BECAUSE YOU INDICATED THAT IN THE FY 26 BUDGET, THERE ARE NO FUNDS ALLOCATED BY THE URBAN REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY.

BECAUSE IT WAS NOT WHAT DO YOU SAY? BECAUSE THERE ARE NO COMMISSION MEMBERS.

THAT'S NOT TRUE. SO THE ORDINANCE, THE RESOLUTION ITSELF INDICATES WHO WAS APPOINTED.

THE CLERK'S OFFICE SHOULD LOOK AT THEIR MINUTES.

I BELIEVE THEY SERVED AS THE RECORD KEEPERS FOR THE 1 OR 2 MEETINGS THAT WAS HELD BY THAT AUTHORITY.

SO I THINK THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL. I MEAN, IF WE'RE GOING TO PROCEED, LET'S PROCEED WITH ACCURATE INFORMATION AND MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE THE ACTUAL HISTORY.

I HAVE THE SIGNED RESOLUTIONS OF EVERYTHING THAT I JUST MENTIONED, AS WELL AS THE PUBLIC NOTICES FOR THOSE MEETINGS ESTABLISHED TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS OF ESTABLISHING IT. SO THAT'S AVAILABLE TO EVERYONE.

BUT WHAT WE DON'T HAVE WAS NOT ONLINE IS THE MINUTES FROM THE MEETING, BECAUSE THAT IS A SEPARATE AUTHORITY.

WE NEVER CREATED A LINK ON THE CITY'S PAGE, LIKE THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONER PLANNING ZONE.

THEY MIGHT HAVE THEIR MEETINGS MINUTES THERE. IT'S NOT THERE.

BUT IF YOU ALL COULD SEARCH YOUR RECORDS, YOUR FILES TO SEE IF YOU HAVE ANY MINUTES FROM THOSE MEETINGS, BECAUSE THOSE WOULD HAVE BEEN SEPARATE AND APART FROM THE COUNCIL MEETING. I THINK FOR. RIGHT NOW. THAT IS ALL I HAVE. WE CAN ASK ANY OTHER QUESTIONS I MIGHT HAVE OFFLINE, BUT I THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT.

MR. MOORE COMES HERE EVERY YEAR DURING THIS TIME TO HAVE THE SAME CONVERSATION WITH US.

THE ONLY TIME HE DIDN'T HAVE IT IS WHEN HE RETIRED AND THEN CAME BACK TO US.

WE'RE HAVING THESE SAME DISCUSSIONS EVERY YEAR, AND WE KNOW WHAT IS HAPPENING OR WHAT WE'RE ALLOWING TO HAPPEN.

SO WE NEED TO GET THE DOLLAR FIGURES IN THE AMOUNT SO WE CAN MAKE THE DECISION SO THAT WE CAN ENSURE THAT THAT WHAT IS BEING AUTHORIZED OR ALLOWED IS ACCURATELY REFLECTED IN THE BUDGET SO THAT THERE'S NOT A NEGATIVE FUND BALANCE.

AND THEN ALSO, ONCE WE GET THE ELECTRIC RATE STUDY FROM IG, WE MIGHT NEED TO VISIT ELECTRIC RATES.

BUT RATES, BUT IT DOESN'T SOUND LIKE THAT'S GOING TO BE COMPLETED BY THE TIME THE CHARTER REQUIRES US TO APPROVE THE BUDGET.

BUT WE CAN ALWAYS DO BUDGET AMENDMENTS. AND THEN THE OTHER THING IS THE PRESENTATION ON THE WHAT WAS IT, MISS JESSIE? OH, PAY AND CLASSIFICATION STUDY.

MAKING SURE THAT WE GET THAT INFORMATION SOONER RATHER THAN LATER.

WE TALKED ABOUT IT GOING INTO EFFECT JULY 1ST AND BEING RETROACTIVE, I THINK, TO APRIL 5TH.

AND SO WE JUST NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE ABLE TO, TO STAY ON THAT.

BUT THANK YOU SO MUCH. COUNCIL MEMBER AGAIN. YES.

ONE MORE QUESTION. MADAM MAYOR, YOUR QUESTION, IT REALLY JOGGED MY MEMORY.

IT WAS ABOUT THE RESERVES. AND I THINK YOU HAD A QUESTION ABOUT WHAT HAD WE SPENT RESERVE DOLLARS ON.

I THINK MR. GOLDEN JUST ANSWERED, NO, NO, THAT WAS A PROJECTION.

ACTION. CORRECT. THAT WE HADN'T SPENT RESERVE DOLLARS.

THAT'S THAT'S FOR FY 26. THE PROJECTION WAS WHAT ARE WE USING THE $800,000 IN THE BUDGET FOR FOR BUDGET EXPENSES? BECAUSE WE CAN'T CLEARLY WE HAVEN'T SPENT IT.

WE'RE NOT IN FY 26 YET, BUT THERE'S AN $800,000 REDUCTION IN RESERVES.

[02:15:04]

AND THE REASON I ASK THE QUESTION ALSO IS BECAUSE I THOUGHT THAT I HEARD CORRECTLY THAT CITY MANAGER JONES STATED THAT WE HAD USED RESERVE DOLLARS FOR SOME EXPENSES. IS THAT CORRECT? NO. WELL, I THOUGHT YOU WERE GOING TO SAY THAT WE HAVE BALANCED THIS BUDGET WITHOUT RESERVES.

WE HAVE SAY THAT ONCE MORE. I THOUGHT YOU WERE GOING TO POINT OUT THAT WE BALANCED THIS BUDGET WITHOUT RESERVES.

NO. SO I'M NOT SURE WHAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO.

OUTSIDE OF THAT, I THOUGHT THAT YOU HAD MENTIONED IN YOUR PRESENTATION THAT THERE HAD BEEN SOME EXPENDITURES OF RESERVE DOLLARS, AND YOU HAD ALSO FURTHER LOOKED TO MAKE SURE THAT IT DID NOT REQUIRE STAFF TO NOTIFY COUNCIL WHEN THAT HAPPENED.

OKAY. YEAH. SO THAT THAT REFERENCE, IF YOU CAN GO BACK TO THE RESERVE LINE.

I'M SORRY. YEAH. I DIDN'T RECALL THAT RIGHT AWAY.

SO IN, IN WATER AND SEWER, IF YOU LOOK AT IF YOU CAN TRACK THE YEARS, YOU WILL SEE IN IN 2024 WE ACTUALLY USED RESERVES MORE THAN THE UNASSIGNED NUMBER.

THE UNASSIGNED NUMBER IS THE BALANCE. SO WHENEVER YOUR RESERVE NUMBER GETS GETS HIGHER THAN THE BALANCE, THEN THAT MEANS YOU HAVE A DEFICIT IN, YOUR RESERVES.

SO WE WERE DOING GOOD. IF YOU LOOK AT 2023 AND IT STARTS GOING IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION IN 2024, 2025, AND IT'S PROJECTED TO CONTINUE TO GO IN THAT DIRECTION IN 2026.

AND THOSE ARE ATTRIBUTED TO, IN PART AT LEAST VERY OBVIOUSLY, THE ALL OF THE EMERGENCY ISSUES THAT WE'VE HAD WITH MAIN BREAKS AND THOSE THINGS THAT YOU MAY RECALL, WE HAVE SOMETIMES MULTIPLE IN 1 IN 1 YOU KNOW, IN ONE MEETING YOU'LL RECALL THAT WE'LL HAVE MULTIPLE THOSE THINGS HAVE BASICALLY BEEN A TREND AND IT'S NOT SHOWING ANY, ANY INDICATION THAT IT'S GOING TO STOP BEING A TREND.

SO THAT'S WHY IT'S PROJECTED THAT WE'LL AT LEAST HAVE THE SAME TAXING ON, ON RESERVES THAT WE WILL.

OKAY. IN THAT. IN THAT ENTERPRISE. OKAY. SO TWO QUESTIONS REGARDING THAT BECAUSE JUST THIS EVENING, THERE ARE A FEW THINGS THAT WE'VE MOVED TO CONSENT.

I THINK THEY'RE EMERGENCY EXPENDITURES. SO IN IN THOSE INSTANCES AND WE'VE YOU'VE GUYS GOT HAVE HAVE GOT TO GO INTO THE RESERVE.

HOW DO YOU THEN NOTIFY OR HOW DO YOU PLAN TO NOTIFY COUNCIL THAT THIS IS AN EMERGENCY EXPENDITURE.

IT WILL REQUIRE US TO GO INTO A RESERVE. RIGHT.

THAT THAT AGAIN IS A BEST PRACTICE. I'VE SUGGESTED THAT WE DO THAT TO STAFF UP TO THIS POINT.

THERE'S NOTHING IN THE POLICY THAT REQUIRES THAT.

AND THEY HAVEN'T BEEN DOING STAFF HASN'T HASN'T BEEN RECOGNIZING THAT.

SO WE WILL BE RECOGNIZING THAT MOVING FORWARD.

BUT THAT'S EXACTLY THE PRACTICE THAT WE'VE BEEN DOING UP TO THIS DATE.

OKAY. AND THE OTHER QUESTION IS AROUND YOU'RE ABLE TO SUBSTANTIATE THAT THE NUMBERS THAT ARE PRESENTED HERE TONIGHT IN RESERVES THAT THEY ARE ACTUALLY IN RESERVE ACCOUNTS. IS THAT CORRECT? ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT OUR BANK ACCOUNTS AND LOOKING AT THAT? YES. SO YOU CAN SUBSTANTIATE THAT THOSE DOLLARS ARE THERE, AND SO AM I CORRECT IN THAT LOOKING AT THIS, WE'RE TO HAVE UPWARDS OF 37 MILLION. UPWARDS.

OKAY. AND THOSE DOLLARS ARE THERE, TO MY KNOWLEDGE, THOSE DOLLARS ARE THERE.

IF I IF I FIND OUT AT ANY POINT THEY'RE NOT THERE, YOU'LL BE THE FIRST TO KNOW.

WELL, THE COUNCIL WILL BE THE FIRST TO KNOW. OKAY.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER. ZIEGLER.

THANK YOU. SO I LIKE THE IDEA OF, YOU KNOW HAVING THIS AS A PART OF THE THE BUDGET BOOK AND THINGS LIKE THAT. I DO HAVE A QUESTION ON THE Y AXIS THERE, BECAUSE IT LOOKS LIKE THERE IS LIKE LIKE 150 MILLION IN GENERAL FUND BECAUSE IT REACHES UP TO 150. BUT THAT'S NOT TRUE.

IT'S JUST YOU'RE JUST LOOKING AT THE DIFFERENT COLOR BLOCKS.

YEAH. BECAUSE I THINK THAT THE NEXT SLIDE THAT SHOWS JUST THE STORMWATER.

I THINK THAT THAT ONE IS A LITTLE BIT IT IT KIND OF SHOWS THE DATA A LITTLE BIT MORE INTUITIVELY.

YEAH. THAN, THAN WHAT THIS KIND OF SHOWS, I, I DO LIKE HOW YOU CAN KIND OF SEE IT ACROSS YEARS,

[02:20:03]

THANKS. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR PRESENTATION THIS EVENING. AGAIN, IF WE COULD GET THESE ADDITIONAL SLIDES REGARDING GO TO THE SLIDE IN FRONT OF THIS. IS. COOL. YEAH.

SO I THINK THAT'S WHERE THE PRESENTATION THAT WAS PROVIDED TO US ENDED.

IF YOU CAN HAVE STABILIZATION RESERVE POLICY, KEEP GOING FORWARD.

YEP. FROM THE STABILIZATION RESERVE ALL THE WAY TO THE END.

OUR SLIDES THAT WE DON'T HAVE. YES, MA'AM. THANK YOU.

NEXT LET'S GO TO ITEM NUMBER 14, REZONING PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3380 BACHELOR STREET.

[IV.14. Zoning Application P2025RZ-001-03 Request to Rezone Property Located at 3380 Bachelor Street from R-1A (Urban Residential) Zoning District to R-T ( Zoning District with Concurrent Variances to Reduce the Minimum Lot Area from 3,000 to 2,148 Square Ft]

THANK YOU. MAYOR. WE'RE HAVING DIRECTOR SMITH COME UP AND WALK US THROUGH THIS ITEM.

GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL, KIMBERLY SMITH, PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR.

WE ALSO HAVE WITH US MR. LEE KELLY, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, IN REFERENCE TO THIS ITEM.

PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3380 BACHELOR STREET, CASE NUMBER P2025 R'S.

THAT'S 001. THAT'S ZERO THREE. CASE TYPE IS A REZONING WITH THE CONCURRENT VARIANCE.

THE APPLICANT IS FUZED DESIGN STUDIO. TIMOTHY HELMS IS THE APPLICANT.

THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY ZONED R1A, WHICH IS OUR URBAN RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT.

THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A REZONING FROM R-1 A TO TO RT.

RESIDENTIAL TOWNHOUSE DISTRICT WITH A CONCURRENT VARIANCE TO REDUCE THE MINIMUM LOT AREA FROM 3000FT² IN AREA TO 2140FT².

THE CURRENT ZONING AS STATED IS R1 A, WHICH IS OUR URBAN RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT.

THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION IS TRADITIONAL URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD.

STAFF AND PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED DENIAL OF THIS REZONING.

PETITION TO REZONE THE PROPERTY FROM R1, A TO R, WITH A CONCURRENT VARIANCE IN THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE REQUIREMENT.

THE PROPOSED ZONING APPLICATION DOES NOT CONFORM WITH OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR THE TRADITIONAL URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD LAND USE CATEGORY.

SPECIFICALLY, THE TRADITIONAL URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD LAND USE CATEGORY PROVIDES FOR FUTURE PLANS IN THIS AREA TO PROTECT HISTORIC NATURE. SINGLE FAMILY HOMES WHICH THIS PARTICULAR SITE HAS AN EXISTING HISTORIC SINGLE FAMILY HOME CURRENTLY ON IT.

THIS PARTICULAR TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD ZONING DISTRICT LAND USE CATEGORY.

ALSO THE INTENT IS TO PROVIDE FOR JOBS, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, OPPORTUNITY FOR CITY RESIDENTS AND TO RESTORE TRADITIONAL PEDESTRIAN SCALE CHARACTER AND EMPHASIZE HIGH QUALITY DESIGN AND STANDARDS IN BUILDING.

AND FOR THOSE REASONS, STAFF AND PLANNING COMMISSION HAVE RECOMMENDED DENIAL OF THIS PETITION.

THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT. OKAY. THE APPLICANT CAN COME FORWARD AT THIS TIME IF YOU'D LIKE TO SHARE ANY INFORMATION WITH COUNSEL.

SURE. I'LL INTRODUCE MYSELF WHILE WE'RE PULLING UP THE PRESENTATION.

TIMOTHY HELMS WITH FUZE DESIGN STUDIO. IT'S ACTUALLY PRETTY APPROPRIATE THAT WE TALK ABOUT THE PROJECT BECAUSE IT'S ACROSS FROM EGAN PARK, WHICH YOU MENTIONED SEVERAL TIMES IN THE BUDGET PRESENTATION. SO I THINK IT'S A PRETTY GOOD TIME FOR US TO BE HERE.

AND THE OTHER THINGS I'LL SAY WHILE WE'RE WAITING ON THIS TO BE PULLED UP IS I ALWAYS FORGET HOW GOOD THE AIR CONDITIONING WORKS IN THIS BUILDING. I ALWAYS SHOULD BRING A JACKET. AND SECONDLY, IN THE PRESENTATION, PROBABLY NOT TALKED ABOUT ENOUGH IN THE BUDGET WAS THE 30% REDUCTION IN CRIME, WHICH SPEAKS TO WHAT YOU GUYS ARE DOING HERE, BUT ALSO WHAT THE POLICE FORCE IS DOING AND YOUR FIRST RESPONDERS.

SO I THOUGHT THAT WAS PRETTY COOL. THERE YOU GO.

THANK YOU. SO THE PROJECT THAT WE'RE HERE TO TALK ABOUT TODAY IS

[02:25:07]

WHEN THEY WERE TALKING EARLIER, THEY DID MENTION THAT THIS IS IN THE TRADITIONAL URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD.

WHAT WAS NOT MENTIONED IS THAT IT'S THERE'S A SLIVER OF THE PROPERTY THAT IS ON THE REGIONAL CENTER.

SO WHILE TRADITIONAL URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD DOES CALL FOR SINGLE FAMILY HISTORIC HOMES TO BE SAVED AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE, THEY BOTH TRADITIONAL URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD AND REGIONAL CENTER ALLOW FOR TOWNHOME USE.

AND AS YOU CAN SEE IN SOME OF THE PHOTOS THAT WE'LL PRESENT THE THE HOUSE IS, YOU KNOW, WE CALL HISTORIC VALUE IF IT'S GOING TO BE REDEVELOPED AS A SINGLE FAMILY HOME, IT'S MOST LIKELY GOING TO BE TORN DOWN AND REBUILT AS A NEW SINGLE FAMILY HOME, JUST AS THE THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WAS. THE SINGLE FAMILY HOME WAS TORN DOWN AND AND REBUILT AS A BRAND NEW HOME.

THIS IS THE SURVEY AS IT'S EXISTING. SO THE SINGLE FAMILY HOME YOU SEE HERE, AND THEN THE TO THE RIGHT ON THE SCREEN IS ACTUALLY THE THE ADU. THE ADU IS UNUSABLE. THE SINGLE FAMILY HOME IS BEING OCCUPIED RIGHT NOW.

IS THERE A WAY TO MAKE THIS A LITTLE LARGER? LIKE FULL SCREEN? IS THERE A WAY TO MAKE IT FULL SCREEN? AND IT'S ROTATED NOW. SORRY. THERE WE GO. THERE WE GO. AND THEN BACK TO FULL SCREEN. PERFECT.

THANK YOU. SORRY. IT'S MAYBE A LITTLE EASIER TO SEE.

OKAY, SO ON THE BOTTOM HERE, WE HAVE THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN.

THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN IS CALLING FOR THE VARIANCE CHANGE FROM R1 A TO R R AND THEN ALSO A REDUCTION FROM 3000FT² TO 2148FT². THAT'S A 29% REDUCTION IN THE LOT SIZE, MINIMUM LOT SIZE. ON THE SITE PLAN, YOU CAN SEE THAT WE'RE TRYING TO ENGAGE WITH THE PARK ON THE LEFT OF THE PROPERTY.

AS YOU'RE LOOKING AT IT HERE BY PLANTING HEAVY PLANTINGS ON THE WALKER AVENUE SIDE AND THEN ALLOWING FOR DOG RUNS ON THE NORTH ADJACENT PROPERTY TO OUR NEIGHBORING PROPERTY, AS WELL AS BRINGING IN SOME SEATING ELEMENTS IN THE CENTER OF THE PROPERTY.

SO REALLY TRYING TO ENGAGE WITH THAT COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT AND BRING THE PARK A LITTLE BIT ON TO THE SIDE.

SOME OF THE INSPIRATION FOR HEAVY PLANTINGS ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE THERE.

SO GO BACK JUST ONE SO YOU CAN SEE THERE'S KIND OF A MIRROR UNIT THING HAPPENING HERE.

SO TO THE FAR LEFT IS A ONE UNIT, WHICH WE'LL CALL A ONE TO THE SECOND UNIT WOULD BE A TWO, AND THEN THAT BUILDING WOULD BE ESSENTIALLY MIRRORED. THE FAR LEFT UNIT IS TWO BEDROOM, TWO, TWO AND A HALF BATH PLANNED. AND THEN THE MIDDLE.

THE SECOND UNIT IS THREE BEDROOM, THREE BATH.

AND THESE ARE THE FLOOR PLANS HERE. VERY PRELIMINARY FLOOR PLANS, VERY PRELIMINARY.

AND THE ELEVATIONS THAT WE'RE GOING TO SHARE AS WELL THIS IS THE OTHER FLOOR PLAN.

THESE ARE THE ELEVATIONS. SO ON THE BOTTOM YOU'LL SEE WALKER AVE.

THE CURRENT SITE ACTUALLY UTILIZES WALKER AVE FOR THE DRIVEWAY.

SO WE THOUGHT WE'D KEEP THE SAME SAME THING THAT'S HAPPENING THERE WITH THE CURRENT SITE.

AND THEN, OF COURSE, ON BACHELOR STREET ADJACENT ADJACENT TO THE PARK THERE YOU SEE AT THE TOP THERE AGAIN, CRAFTSMAN STYLE. BUT THESE ARE ALSO VERY PRELIMINARY.

SO WE'RE TRYING TO UTILIZE A LOT OF BRICK WITH THERE.

THERE IS ACTUALLY A SMALL REDUCTION BY BRINGING SOME OF THE HEAVY LANDSCAPING AND AND BRICK PERCENTAGE, A LARGE PERCENTAGE OF BRICK ONTO YOUR BUILDING.

THAT ALLOWS YOU TO ACTUALLY GET YOUR MINIMUM DOWN, JUST, I THINK ABOUT 5% OR SO IN VARIANCE.

IT'S STILL NOT ENOUGH TO GET US TO WHERE WE WANT IT TO BE.

SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE TRYING TO GO WITH THAT VARIANCE.

THESE ARE SOME INSPIRATIONAL IMAGES. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT ON THE SITE PLAN IS THE ABILITY TO NOT ONLY PARK TWO VEHICLES INSIDE THE GARAGES, BUT TO BE ABLE TO PARK TWO VEHICLES ON THE PARKING PADS.

IN ORDER TO DO THAT, WE MIGHT DO SOMETHING SIMILAR TO WHAT'S ON THE BOTTOM RIGHT HAND SIDE HERE, WHICH IS ACTUALLY TAKEN FROM ATLANTIC STATION.

[02:30:02]

SO YOU WOULD ACTUALLY BE ABLE TO KEEP CARS OFF OF THE STREET, WHICH WE KNOW SOME NEIGHBORS WERE CONCERNED ABOUT.

THESE ARE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. SO I REALLY WANT TO HIGHLIGHT THE SECOND ROW ON THE FAR RIGHT AND THEN THE THIRD ROW ON THIRD ROW, SECOND PICTURE THERE.

THE REASON WHY I WANT TO HIGHLIGHT THOSE IS BECAUSE THOSE ARE ACTUALLY OUR NEIGHBORS. THOSE ARE ACROSS THE STREET ON ON WALKER.

AND THAT IS ACTUALLY RIGHT TO OUR BACK, THE BACK OF OUR PROPERTY.

AND SO THESE ARE SIX STORY BUILDINGS. AND THEN WE GO FROM SIX STORY TO WHAT'S CURRENTLY THERE, WHICH IS A ONE STORY TO THE PARK. IT REALLY IS NOT A GOOD URBAN MIX OF, OF WHAT YOU THINK OF WHEN YOU THINK HIGH, MEDIUM, LOW. SO WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING AND I CREATED A SLIDE HERE TO KIND OF GIVE YOU THIS INSPIRATION.

SO RIGHT NOW YOU SEE AT THE TOP THE EXISTING HOME, AS IT IS KIND OF DWARFED BY THE, THE BY THE HOTELS ON THE LEFT. YOU SEE THAT SAME THING? THAT'S THE HOTEL IN THE DISTANCE WITH OUR HOME HERE.

AND THIS LITTLE DIAGRAM ON THE BOTTOM KIND OF SHOWS YOU YOU KNOW, VERY LOOSELY THE HEIGHT OF THE HOTEL, THE HEIGHT OF OUR PROPOSED STRUCTURE AND THEN THE BUILDING ON THE, THE LEFT WHERE EGAN PARK IS, THAT'S A SINGLE FAMILY HOME THAT HAS A TALL PITCH ON THE ROOF.

SO THAT'S KIND OF THE HIGHEST POINT OF THE HOUSE.

SAME THING. HIGHEST POINT OF THE HOTEL. WE FEEL LIKE IT IS A REALLY GOOD STEP DOWN, IF YOU WILL, FROM FROM THE HOTEL. AND I WANT TO JUST KIND OF GIVE SOME ARCHITECTURAL WORDS THAT WE YOU KNOW, I GUESS I'D THROW OUT THERE. CONTEXT.

RIGHT. THAT'S THAT'S WHAT WE THINK OF WHEN WE THINK OF URBAN DESIGN.

HOW DO YOU PROVIDE THE SAME CONTEXT FROM THE SINGLE FAMILY, CRAFTSMAN STYLE HOME, GIVE THAT SAME CONTEXT TO THE THE TOWNHOME UNITS AND THEN ALSO RELATE TO THE SIX STORY BUILDING THAT'S ON YOUR LEFT.

SO WE THINK IT REALLY YOU KNOW, PROVIDES GOOD CONTEXT AND GOOD COHESIVENESS WITH THE COMMUNITY BRINGING ALSO BRINGING THAT PARK INTO THE SITE GIVES GOOD COHESIVENESS. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

I JUST WANTED TO ADD TO HIS PRESENTATION THAT WE HAVE BEEN THE OWNER OF THIS PROPERTY SINCE 2008, SO IT'S NOT THAT WE ARE HERE BUYING SOME PIECE OF LAND AND GOING TO DEVELOP AS A DEVELOPER.

WE HAVE BEEN IN THE COMMUNITY. WE UNDERSTAND THAT.

WE WANT TO BLEND IN THE COMMUNITY, GIVE SOMETHING WHICH IS NICE, AND THAT'S WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO HERE, BUT MAKE THE BEST USE OF THE PLACE, WHICH MAKES SENSE FINANCIALLY.

AND ALSO IF WE ARE PERMITTED TO DO WHAT WE ARE SUGGESTING.

THAT WILL DEFINITELY QUADRUPLE THE TAX COLLECTION FOR THE CITY.

AND IF I MAY SUGGEST THAT IF THE COUNCIL WOULD THINK THAT IF WE ARE ASKING FOR TOO MANY UNITS IN THE PLACE WE ARE OPEN TO, IF WE HAVE TO DOWNSIZE TO 3 OR 2, WE WOULD BE ENTERTAINING THAT AS WELL.

SO WE JUST WANTED TO HAVE A LOOK AT IT. IT'S NOT LIKE WE ARE A DEVELOPER COMING HERE, BUYING SOMETHING, PUTTING UP A COMMERCIAL UNIT AND GOING AWAY. WE'VE BEEN HERE FOR YEARS.

IT'S BEEN 17 PLUS YEARS. WE ARE HERE TO STAY, BUT WE WANT TO GIVE SOMETHING NICE WHICH WILL GIVE NICE PROPERTY IN THE COMMUNITY.

THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL? COUNCILMEMBER BUTLER? YES, I DO HAVE A QUESTION.

I GUESS THIS IS FOR STAFF. GO AHEAD.

SO AS THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TO TEAR DOWN THE WHITE HOUSE AND THE HOUSE ADJACENT TO IT, THAT'S NEXT DOOR TO THE HOTEL. SO IS IT BOTH OF THOSE HOUSES? ONE OF THE STRUCTURES IS THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE, AND THE SECOND SMALLEST STRUCTURE IS A HABITABLE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE OR A GARAGE.

SO IT'S STILL A PART OF THAT SAME PROPERTY? YES.

THAT WAS MY QUESTION. THANK YOU. WHAT WAS YOUR QUESTION AGAIN? COUNCILMAN BUTLER? YES, MA'AM. MADAM MAYOR, THERE'S A HABITABLE STRUCTURE.

IF YOU LOOK AT THIS PICTURE, YOU HAVE THE WHITE HOME.

THEN RIGHT BEHIND IT, THERE'S A BUILDING. AND I DIDN'T KNOW IF THAT WAS ANOTHER HOUSE.

IS THAT A PART? IT'S A ACCESSORY STRUCTURE TO THE PRIMARY.

SO ALL OF THAT WILL BE TORN DOWN FOR THIS. YES.

[02:35:05]

SO LET ME ASK YOU THIS. HAVE. HAVE IT BEEN THROUGH THE SEA? AND WHAT DID THE RESIDENTS SAY? THE THE RESIDENTS MADE COMMENT.

THEY WERE NOT. THEY WERE NOT IN SUPPORT. THEY WERE NOT IN SUPPORT? NO. AND HOW MANY ATTENDED THE MEETING? THERE WERE ABOUT 30.

30. OKAY. YES. MY NEXT QUESTION IS THIS DID THE PLANNING AND ZONING PUT ANY CONDITIONS ON IT.

IF FOR SOME REASON IT'S APPROVED. LET ME MAKE MAKE A CORRECTION. FOR THIS PARTICULAR CASE, FOR THE CCIM, THERE WERE ACTUALLY NO ATTENDEES ON THE CCIM MEETING.

HOWEVER, WHEN IT CAME BACK FOR PLANNING COMMISSION, THERE WERE MULTIPLE ATTENDEES THAT SPOKE IN OPPOSITION TO THE, SAY, MULTIPLE. IT WAS AT LEAST 3 TO 5 THREE THAT SPOKE IN OPPOSITION.

YES. OKAY. AND DID YOU ALL PUT ANY CONDITIONS ON IT IF FOR SOME REASON.

WE HAVE NOT. OKAY. YOU HAVE NOT. SO THERE ARE NO CONDITIONS? NO. AND IT'S GOING TO BE HOW MANY UNITS YOU SAID.

HOW MANY? THERE IS A PROPOSAL FOR FOUR UNITS TO BE PLACED ON THE PROPERTY.

HOW MANY? SO IS FOUR UNITS. IS IT PER PERSON OR JUST FOUR UNITS TOTAL? HOW MANY? HOW MANY WILL THEY RENT OUT? JUST A QUESTION.

TOTAL? FOUR. OH, JUST FOUR TENANTS. YES. ESSENTIALLY, EACH ONE OF THE UNITS WOULD BE A TENANT. SO IT'S FOUR TENANTS. THAT'S CORRECT.

AND THIS IS NOT WHAT'S IN KEEPING WITH WHAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD LOOKS LIKE.

BASED ON THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. IT HAS A TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD LAND USE DESIGNATION.

AND SO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SPEAKS SPECIFICALLY TO HISTORIC PRESERVATION.

THIS PROPERTY WAS BUILT IN 1920. AND WE SAW THAT AS AS FAR AS THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THE INTENT WAS TO PRESERVE THOSE TYPE OF STRUCTURES IN THIS AREA.

SO LET ME ASK YOU THIS. HOW MANY NEIGHBORHOODS DO YOU HAVE THAT IN WHERE YOU PRESERVE THE NATURE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD WHEN IT COMES TO BUILDING STUFF LIKE THIS? THAT'S NOT COMPATIBLE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD? IS IT ALL THE NEIGHBORHOODS IN THE CITY? THE INTENT FOR FIRST HALF WHEN WE'RE DOING OUR ANALYSIS, IS TO PROTECT ALL THE NEIGHBORHOODS WHEN IT'S SPECIFICALLY STATED IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

OKAY. SO, SO PRETTY MUCH IT STATED IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO BASICALLY DO TO KEEP EVERY NEIGHBORHOOD KIND OF LOOKING THE SAME. WHEN IT'S COMPATIBLE AND WHEN IT'S STATED INSIDE, WHAT'S COMPATIBLE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD? YES. OKAY. THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER THANK YOU.

AND THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR PRESENTATION. AND JUST TO PIGGYBACK ON A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT COUNCIL MEMBER SHROPSHIRE SAID, I THINK IT'S VERY INTERESTING THAT THE APPLICANT WAS PRESENT IN ZERO, ATTENDED FROM THE CITY OF EAST POINT TO SPEAK IN REGARD TO THIS REQUEST. MY ISSUE WITH PLANNING AND ZONING, AND WHEN COUNCIL HAS THE BALL IN THEIR COURT TO MAKE APPROPRIATE DECISIONS FOR ALL NEIGHBORHOODS, IS THAT OFTENTIMES WHEN YOU GO AGAINST WHAT PLANNING AND ZONING HAS RECOMMENDED, YOU RUN A DANGER OF GOING AGAINST PLANNING AND ZONING AND IMPACTING THE QUALITY OF LIFE FOR PEOPLE THAT ULTIMATELY HAVE TO LIVE WITH THE DECISIONS THAT YOU VOTE FOR.

SO IT'S GOING TO BE VERY INTERESTING HOW THIS PLAYS OUT ONCE IT COMES BEFORE US.

SO JUST WANTED TO ADD THAT TAD BIT OUT THERE TO THE PERSON THAT IS DEVELOPING.

[02:40:05]

I NOTICED THAT WHEN DEVELOPMENT. SURE, IF IT'S ONE DEVELOPMENT LIKE I'M NOT SURE IT'S FOR ONE OR BOTH OF YOU, BUT YOU ALL CAN DECIDE WHO RESPONDS WHEN DEVELOPMENTS LIKE THIS ARE.

CAN YOU TELL US A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THE PROPERTY? OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SO IF I GIVE YOU THE HISTORY WE BOUGHT THIS PROPERTY IN 2008, AND WHEN WE BOUGHT IT WAS GENERAL COMMERCIAL BLOCK.

AND OVER THE PERIOD OF TIME IT THE ZONING CHANGED, WHICH WE WE HAD NO IDEA IT DROPPED OFF FROM A GENERAL COMMERCIAL TO RESIDENTIAL.

ONLY WHEN WE BOUGHT WE HAD SOME OTHER IDEAS TO PROBABLY BUY MORE LOTS IN THE BACK AND MAYBE PUT UP ANOTHER HOTEL.

THAT WAS THE INITIAL IDEA, BUT THEN THE ECONOMY WAS BAD IN 2000.

OCTOBER 8TH. WE BOUGHT IT IN AUGUST. WE BOUGHT AT A FULL PRICE, AND THEN THE ECONOMY TANKED AND WE COULDN'T DO ANYTHING ELSE.

IT'S BEEN THERE FOR SUCH A LONG TIME, BUT WE THINK IF WE PUT UP A NICE DEVELOPMENT UP THERE, IT WILL ENHANCE THE AREA. IF YOU HAVE A SIX STORY BUILDING NEXT DOOR, IT'S A HOTEL ON THE THIS ON THE WEST SIDE.

ON THE SOUTH SIDE WE HAVE A SIX STORY HOTEL, AND THIS IS AT THE INTERSECTION OF WALKER STREET AND BACHELOR.

SO IT'S NOT THAT LIKE IF YOU HAVE A BIRD'S EYE VIEW, IT WOULD NOT INTRUDE AS IF THAT IS A VERY BIG STRUCTURE OR IT'S GOING TO LIKE BE OVERWHELMING IN THAT BLOCK, THAT IT WILL DISTURB THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA.

WE'VE BEEN IN EGAN PARK, WE KNOW THEY HAVE DONE A GREAT JOB.

WE WANT TO BE THERE, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, HAVING A 1920 BUILDING IS JUST A TWO BEDROOM HOUSE.

IT DOESN'T MAKE ECONOMIC SENSE FOR OUR INVESTMENT.

SO IF WE IF WE HAVE TO MAKE THE BEST SENSE OF THE LOCATION, THIS IS WHAT WE CAME UP WITH.

BUT AT THE SAME TIME, WE ARE KIND OF OPEN THAT IF THE COUNCIL THINKS THAT, HEY, YOU FROM FOUR, IF YOU WANT TO GO BACK 3 OR 2, WE ARE OPEN TO THAT.

BUT IF WE ARE LIKE KIND OF CONSTRAINED THAT YOU CANNOT DO ANYTHING AND YOU STILL HAVE TO MAINTAIN THE CHARACTER, THERE IS NOTHING ELSE WE CAN DO ON THE LOCATION.

OKAY. MY NEXT QUESTION IS IF YOU WERE TO PUT HOMES ON THE LOCATION, HOW MANY COULD POSSIBLY GO IF YOU HAD TO PUT WE CAN PUT TWO HOMES, RIGHT? YEAH, WE CAN PUT TWO HOMES. YES. TWO HOMES.

YES. YES, MA'AM. OKAY. AND WHAT WOULD BE THE PRICE POINT OF THOSE TWO HOMES? GREAT QUESTION, EXCELLENT QUESTION. I WOULD CERTAINLY APPRECIATE THAT.

AND I WAS COMING TO THAT. IT IS LIKE IF, IF WE HAVE DONE THE STUDY, AND IN AEGEAN PARK, IF YOU GOOGLE OR IF YOU CHECK, THERE IS NOTHING LESS THAN $500,000 EACH HOUSE WHICH ARE RIGHT NOW LISTED THERE ARE OUR NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR IS BRAND NEW HOUSE IS LISTED AS $780,000. THERE'S ANOTHER HOUSE ON THE BACHELOR'S RATE, WHICH IS $650,000, BUILT IN 1920, REFURBISHED. AND IT'S NOT A NEW, NEW STRUCTURE.

NOW, IF WE BUILD $800,000 HOUSE IN THIS ECONOMIC SCENARIO, THAT HOUSE WILL SIT AT LEAST FOR 3 TO 4 MONTHS.

IT WON'T SELL. BUT IF WE PUT TWO SMALL HOUSE, IT WILL BE LESS THAN 500,000 AND IT WILL BE STILL AFFORDABLE.

YOU CAN ATTRACT YOUNG COUPLES WHO ARE PROFESSIONAL AND THEY CAN.

THEY WILL BLEND IN THE COMMUNITY AND YOU KNOW IT WILL STILL LOOK NICE.

SO IT WOULD DEFINITELY BE RIGHT NOW THE PRICE POINT IS SUCH THAT IT WOULD BE VERY DIFFICULT FOR SOMEBODY TO BUY OR SPEND THAT KIND OF MONEY IN, SAY, $800,000. I MEAN, IT WON'T MAKE SENSE. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. MA'AM. I HAVE A QUESTION, BUT I'M TRYING TO PULL UP THE R-1A.

ZONING DISTRICT TO SEE WHAT USES ARE PERMITTED.

JUST GIVE ME A SECOND.

SANDERS 2062. YEP, I GOT IT. THANKS.

THANK YOU.

[02:45:09]

I SEE THAT THERE'S A HOTEL ACROSS THE STREET AND A HOTEL ON THE SAME BLOCK.

A LITTLE BIT AHEAD. DO YOU KNOW WHEN THIS WAS ON COMMERCIAL? TO OUR KNOWLEDGE, THE PROPERTY HAS NOT BEEN REZONED TO COMMERCIAL.

IT'S ALWAYS BEEN OUR WAY. ONE A IT'S OUR KNOWLEDGE.

YEAH. URBAN RESIDENTIAL, WHICH BASICALLY ALLOWS HOMES.

SINGLE FAMILY, DETACHED DWELLING, FAMILY DAYCARE.

HOME HOMESTAY LODGING OR WHOLE HOUSE LODGING.

PERMITTED THROUGH USE. DOESN'T EVEN GET TO. COMMERCIAL OR HOTEL.

SO I'M JUST. I WAS JUST TRYING TO CALIBRATE THE EXPECTATION THAT AT ONE POINT THIS WAS GOING TO POTENTIALLY BE A HOTEL.

HOW LARGE IS THIS LOT FROM AN ACRE PERSPECTIVE? THIS LOT IS 0.19 PLUS OR MINUS ACRES, WHICH IS ABOUT 20%.

SO A 1043 FIVE 60 IS THAT ABOUT ALMOST 2.2 TENTHS OF AN ACRE? YES. IT IS VERY SMALL. AND THE REQUEST. I REMEMBER A SIMILAR TOWNHOME REQUEST NEAR THEIR RESIDENTIAL. THIS WOULD PUT FOUR UNITS ON 2/10 OF AN ACRE.

YES. SO THE VARIANCE THAT THEY'RE REQUESTING DOES THAT, LIKE, BRING THE PROPERTY TO THE ARE THEY ASKING TO BUILD TO LIKE THE STREET. ARE THEY WHICH WHAT ARE THEY.

THEY'RE ASKING FOR A LOT AREA A MINIMUM LOT AREA OF FOR THREE LOT AREA IS 3000FT².

AND THEY'RE ASKING FOR A VARIANCE TO REDUCE THAT TO ABOUT 2100FT².

IS THAT BECAUSE THIS IS NOT A 3000 SQUARE FOOT LOT? CORRECT. SO THEY'RE ASKING FOR IT TO BE REDUCED TO THE SIZE OF THE LOT SO THEY CAN STACK FOR TOWNHOMES NEAR RESIDENTIAL. SO YEAH, IT'LL BE INTERESTING TO SEE HOW THIS GOES.

ON THE OTHER LIGHTS ON. AND THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING HERE TONIGHT, THOUGH THIS REQUIRES A PUBLIC HEARING. WHICH, YES, THIS REQUIRES A PUBLIC HEARING.

IT DOESN'T INDICATE ON HERE, BUT THIS WILL BE SET ON OUR AGENDA FOR MONDAY FOR A PUBLIC HEARING.

AND COUNCIL WILL EITHER MAKE A DECISION THEN OR NOT, BUT YOU ALL WILL BE BACK ON.

IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE YOU WANT TO SHARE BEFORE YOU LEAVE? THE ONLY THING I'D LIKE TO SAY IS TO YOUR LAST POINT WE'VE CALCULATED ROUGHLY THAT THE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE WOULD BE ABOUT 60% LOT.

SO WE'D BE BUILDING ON ABOUT 60% OF LOT, INCLUDING THE PARKING PADS THAT WE MENTIONED IN THE PRESENTATION ON 2/10 OF AN ACRE.

THAT'S CORRECT. YEAH. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU SO MUCH.

THANK YOU, THANK YOU. NEXT UP, LET'S GO TO ITEM NUMBER EIGHT.

[III.8. Council Discussion and Possible Action on Alcohol License for Consumption on Premises at Sunshine Blue Waters, LLC (UBAR) (3515 Camp Creek Parkway) - Public Hearing Held April 21, 2025]

BUT THEN IT SAYS YOU BAR 3515. CAMP CREEK IS THE.

YOU CAN COME FORWARD. OFFICER.

GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. MISS NAOMI LEWIS IS APPLYING FOR ALCOHOL.

LICENSE FOR CONSUMPTION ON PREMISE OF EXISTING BUSINESS U BAR, LOCATED AT 3515 CAMP CREEK PARKWAY.

MISS LEWIS IS THE REGISTERED AGENT FOR THE EXISTING BUSINESS AT THE U BAR, AND HAS NO HISTORY WITH THE CITY OF EASTPOINTE.

MISS LEWIS HAS PASSED A BACKGROUND PROCESS HERE TO ADVERTISEMENT REQUIREMENTS MINUTES AND OBEY ALL BYLAWS REQUIRE.

AS A NEW APPLICANT, THE POLICE DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDS THE ISSUANCE OF THE ALCOHOL LICENSE FOR CONSUMPTION ON PREMISE OF BEER, WINE AND LIQUOR. SO WHAT HAPPENED BETWEEN THE LAST TIME THIS WAS BEFORE US AND NOW? BECAUSE THE LAST TIME IT WAS BEFORE US, THERE WERE SOME THINGS THAT THE WERE INDICATED WERE NOT DONE.

SUNSHINE BLUE WATERS IS ALLEGEDLY ON THIS SINCE JANUARY 2024.

WE'RE NOW IN MAY OF 2025. SO WHAT HAPPENED BETWEEN LAST HEARING AND THIS HEARING?

[02:50:06]

AND NOW THEY HAVE IT AS OF MAY 2ND, THE BUSINESS LICENSE.

SO SINCE TEN DAYS AGO. YES. SO WHO'S OPERATING THE ESTABLISHMENT NOW? THE NAOMI LEWIS. UNDER WHAT? ALCOHOL LICENSE.

IT WAS FROM THE PREVIOUS OWNER. THAT'S THE LICENSE THAT THEY HAD FOR UP UNTIL MATTER OF FACT, HE HE RENEWED IT. IN JANUARY OF THIS YEAR.

HE RENEWED IN JANUARY OF THIS YEAR, BUT SHE BOUGHT IN JANUARY OF 2024.

SO I SEE THE APPLICANT IS HERE AND I THINK SHE HAS REPRESENTATION. MAYBE THEY SHOULD COME FORWARD. BUT I'M CONFUSED.

IF THE FORMER OWNER RENEWED A LICENSE AND CHIEF ALLOWED YOU TO RESPOND BEFORE THE APPLICANT.

BUT IF THE FORMER OWNER RENEWED A LICENSE IN JANUARY 2025 BY BUSINESS THAT WAS ALLEGEDLY OWNED BY SUNSHINE BLUE WATER SINCE JANUARY 2024. HOW IS THAT POSSIBLE? THIS WILL HAPPEN.

SO THAT'S WHY I SAID PULL IT OFF THE CALENDAR.

BECAUSE WE SPOKE WITH THE PREVIOUS OWNER. HE NEVER TOLD US HE SOLD THE BAR.

HE HAS NOT SOLD THE BAR. WHAT HAPPENED IS SOMEHOW HE DID MORE LIKE A LEASE TO PURCHASE OPTION, WHICH YOU CANNOT HAVE A LIQUOR LICENSE IF YOU'RE TRYING TO SELL YOUR BUSINESS UNDER YOUR NAME.

SO HE KIND OF LIKE LEASED THE PURCHASE TO THESE INDIVIDUALS WHO TOOK OVER THE BUSINESS.

HE NEVER INFORMED US OF THAT. SO WHEN HE TRIED TO GET HIS LIQUOR LICENSE, HE CAME UP HERE AND TRIED TO GET LIQUOR LICENSE IN ANOTHER BUSINESS NAME.

THEY DIDN'T EVEN HAVE A BUSINESS LICENSE ON HIS NAME BECAUSE THEY WERE STILL OPERATING UNDER TECHNICALLY THE BAR, ALTHOUGH IT WAS NOT THE U BAR. SO WE TOLD THEM IS YOU CAN'T GET A LICENSE.

HE CAN'T HAVE A LICENSE UNTIL THIS GETS STRAIGHTENED OUT. YOUR BUSINESS IS NOT EVEN IN YOUR NAME THAT YOU'RE CLAIMING.

SO HOW CAN YOU HAVE A LIQUOR LICENSE UNDER IT? THEY CAME TO SHOW US PAPERWORK WHERE THEY TECHNICALLY KIND OF PURCHASED THE BUSINESS LAST YEAR.

AL, THE OWNER, NEVER INFORMED US THAT HE SOLD THE BUSINESS.

HE WAS JUST OPERATING QUASI LEGALLY. SO WHAT WE DID WAS WE PULLED ALL LICENSES.

HEY, NOBODY CAN HAVE A LICENSE HERE IN ORDER TO HAVE A LIQUOR LICENSE, THAT'S WHAT YOU HAVE TO DO.

YOU HAVE TO HAVE A BUSINESS LICENSE IN YOUR NAME, A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY IN YOUR NAME.

ALL THE PAPERWORK HAS TO BE DONE WITH THE CITY.

AND AFTER THAT IS APPROVED WE CAN LOOK AT GETTING A LIQUOR LICENSE.

THEY WERE ALREADY IN WORKS WITH THE CITY, BUT THEY COULDN'T GET A CO BECAUSE THEY HADN'T HAD THE PROPER INSPECTION.

SO ONCE THEY GOT THE PROPER INSPECTION AND THE LIQUOR LICENSE AND THE BUSINESS LICENSE WAS APPROVED, THAT'S WHEN THE ALCOHOL LICENSE WAS APPROVED.

SO, I MEAN, I THOUGHT ALCOHOL LICENSE WAS FOR US TONIGHT FOR APPROVAL.

I'M SORRY. CORRECT. THAT'S WHAT IT'S FOR TONIGHT.

YES. SO SO RIGHT NOW THE U BAR DOESN'T HAVE AN ALCOHOL LICENSE.

WE ISSUED THEM A TEMPORARY LICENSE UNTIL THEY GET THIS STRAIGHT.

BUT THE TEMPORARY LICENSE IS ABOUT TO END. WHEN WAS THE TEMPORARY LICENSE ISSUED? WE JUST ISSUED A TEMPORARY LICENSE. WHAT, TWO WEEKS AGO? THREE WEEKS AGO? YES, IT WAS ABOUT THREE WEEKS AGO.

WE ISSUED A TEMPORARY LICENSE, AND WE MADE IT FOR EXACTLY, I THINK, FOUR WEEKS.

AND I TOLD THEM IF THEY CAN'T GET THAT DONE FROM THAT POINT, THEY CAN'T GET ANY MORE TEMPORARY LICENSES, BECAUSE THE WAY THIS THING WAS DONE WAS NOT PROPER FROM THE BEGINNING.

SO THE TEMPORARY LICENSE WAS ISSUED THREE WEEKS AGO.

WHAT WERE THEY OPERATING UNDER PRIOR TO THOSE THREE WEEKS? THEY DIDN'T HAVE A THEY DID NOT HAVE A LEGAL LIQUOR LICENSE PRIOR TO THAT.

WAS IT UBER OPERATING AT THAT TIME? YES THEY WERE.

SO THEY WERE OPERATING PRIOR TO THREE WEEKS AGO WITHOUT A LIQUOR LICENSE.

CORRECT? NOT ILLEGAL LIQUOR LICENSE. IT WAS ISSUED A TEMPORARY, BUT WE PULLED IT BECAUSE WHAT OCCURRED IS IT WAS HE WAS TRYING TO GET A LIQUOR LICENSE UNDER SOMEONE ELSE'S NAME AND THEY WERE UNAWARE.

SO BASICALLY IT WAS JUST IT WAS NULL AND VOID.

SO I AVOIDED THE LIQUOR LICENSE COMPLETELY. WHEN DID YOU VOID THAT ONE? ABOUT 3 OR 4 WEEKS AGO. WHEN THEY CAME BEFORE LAST WEEK.

LAST WORK SESSION WHEN THEY CAME. I HAD A MEETING WITH THEM TWO DAYS LATER IN MY OFFICE, AND I SAID, WE'RE TAKING AWAY ALL THIS PAPERWORK BECAUSE THIS WAS NOT DONE PROPERLY FROM THE ONSET.

AND YOU HAVE TO BRING US ALL YOUR DOCUMENTATION.

SO WHILE THE LIQUOR LICENSE WAS VOIDED, WAS YOU ARE STILL OPERATING WERE YOU STILL OPERATING WHEN YOU ABORTED? THIS LITTLE. I SEE YOU TURNING TO THE APPLICANT.

[02:55:04]

I DON'T KNOW IF THEY WANT TO ANSWER, BECAUSE THAT IS A WHOLE NOTHER LEVEL OF LIABILITY.

BUT GOOD EVENING, MADAM MAYOR. MEMBERS OF COUNCIL, LET ME BACK UP JUST TO CLARIFY A FEW MORE THINGS.

SO WHEN YOU MENTIONED THE JANUARY 2024. WHAT HAPPENED IS THAT'S THE DAY THAT IT WAS SUBLEASED TO MY CLIENT.

SO WE'RE NOT OPERATING THAT YEAR, BUT THE AGREEMENT WAS THAT SHE WOULD TAKE OVER ONCE ALL LICENSES ARE ISSUED.

SO IT'S NOT JUST THE ALCOHOL LICENSE, THE BUSINESS LICENSE.

YOU HAVE FOOD SERVICE PERMITS, YOU HAVE WASTEWATER DISCHARGE PERMITS.

YOU HAVE LICENSES NOT ONLY IN THE CITY OF EASTPOINTE.

YOU HAVE A STATE OF GEORGIA ALCOHOL LICENSE, AND YOU HAVE FULTON COUNTY LICENSES AS WELL.

SO WE UBER IS OPERATING OVER THE PREVIOUS OWNERSHIP UNTIL THE END OF LAST YEAR.

SO NAOMI, ALTHOUGH HE HAD SUBLEASED IT THEN, THE AGREEMENT WAS SHE WOULD NOT TAKE OVER AND START OPERATING UNDER THE NEW BUSINESS UNTIL THE LICENSES WERE IN PLACE. SO WE BEGAN TRYING TO APPLY FOR LICENSES SO THERE WOULD BE NO LAPSE IN A LICENSE.

AND AS YOU'RE AWARE, THE CITY OF ATLANTA, CITY OF EASTPOINTE, AND A LOT OF OTHER JURISDICTIONS ALLOW TEMPORARY LICENSES FOR ALCOHOL, BUT THERE'S NOT TEMPORARY LICENSES FOR A LOT OF OTHER ANCILLARY ANCILLARY LICENSES THAT ARE ASSOCIATED.

SO WE HAD TO GET THE FOOD SERVICE PERMIT AND OTHER THINGS CHANGED OVER.

WHAT HAPPENED IS THERE WAS A DELAY IN CHANGING OVER THESE LICENSES, BECAUSE PART OF THE REASON THE PREVIOUS OWNER SUBLEASED IT IS BECAUSE HE WAS HAVING FINANCIAL DIFFICULTIES. HE WAS BEHIND ON TAXES AND OTHER THINGS OF THAT NATURE.

SO WHAT WE DID WAS HE APPLIED FOR A STATE LICENSE EARLY.

SO WHEN YOU APPLY, YOU CAN APPLY FOR A LICENSE BEFORE YOU'VE ACTUALLY TAKEN OVER THE BUSINESS.

SO ESPECIALLY TO THE STATE WE APPLY FOR THAT LICENSE EARLY IN 2024.

WE REALIZE WE HAD TAX ISSUES FOR THE PREVIOUS OPERATOR.

AND AS WE WENT THROUGH THE AS WE WENT FORWARD, WE HAD TO RESOLVE THE PREVIOUS OWNER HAD TO RESOLVE THOSE ISSUES PRIOR TO NAOMI TAKING OVER THE BUSINESS AND TRANSFERRING. THEY'RE NOT ONLY TAX ISSUES WITH THE STATE, BUT THEY'RE TAX ISSUES WITH THE CITY AS WELL.

NAOMI SUBLEASED TWO BUSINESSES SIMULTANEOUSLY.

WE WERE ABLE TO TRANSFER THE LICENSE TO THE OTHER LOCATION AROUND JULY OF LAST YEAR.

BUT IN BOTH INSTANCES, THE PREVIOUS OWNER AND THE FINANCIAL DIFFICULTIES.

AND THAT'S WHAT HELD UP A LOT OF THE PROCESS.

ALSO, AS MENTIONED, WE ORIGINALLY TRIED TO APPLY FOR THE BUSINESS LICENSE AS WELL, AND WE HAD ISSUES WITH GETTING THE CEO AND THE INSPECTION.

SO ALL THAT TO SAY, IT'S A LOT MORE DETAIL THAN ALL THAT STUFF.

BUT THE PREVIOUS OPERATOR OPERATED UNDER HIS LICENSE ALL OF LAST YEAR.

WE WERE ABLE TO TRANSFER THE ALCOHOL LICENSE TOWARDS THE END OF DECEMBER, RIGHT BEFORE THE NEW YEAR.

WE WERE ABLE TO GET THE CITY AND STATE LICENSE IN THE NEW OPERATOR'S NAME.

WE ISSUED A TEMPORARY LICENSE. THE ISSUE WAS THAT WE THERE'S SOME WE FOUND OUT THAT THE TEMPORARY, I GUESS, WAS SUPPOSED TO EXPIRE OR SOMETHING SOMETIME THIS YEAR.

WE SAW THE DATE ON THE TEMPORARY, SAY, DECEMBER 31ST, BUT INTERNALLY, I GUESS IT WAS GOOD FOR 120 DAYS.

BUT THE DATES ARE 90 DAYS. SORRY. SO WITH ALL THAT BEING SAID, SHE ONLY TOOK OVER THE BUSINESS RIGHT BEFORE THE NEW YEAR THIS YEAR, ONCE ALL THE OTHER ISSUES WERE RESOLVED. SO IN ORDER TO ACTUALLY GET THE TEMPORARY ISSUE, THE CITY MADE THE PREVIOUS OWNER PAY THE THE TAXPAYER DRINK FOR THE ENTIRE YEAR BECAUSE HE HAD GOTTEN RID OF THE BUSINESS OR WAS IN THE PROCESS OF IT? HE WASN'T KEEPING UP WITH THOSE PAYMENTS. SO AS YOU CAN IMAGINE, THERE'S DISAGREEMENT BETWEEN MY CLIENT AND HIM ABOUT WHO'S HAD TO TAKE CARE OF IT.

BUT HE'S PAID UP ALL THE TAXES FOR THE CITY OF EASTPOINTE THROUGH LAST YEAR.

AND THEN HE WAS ABLE TO PAY UP AND CLEAR OUT THE TAXES WITH THE STATE AS WELL.

SO THAT'S HOW WE GOT HERE. SO IT'S NOT A FULL SHE TOOK OVER AT LEAST WHAT OBLIGATIONS.

BUT THE REASON WHY WE HAD TO HOLD THE PREVIOUS OWNER'S FEET TO THE FIRE IS BECAUSE HE IS ACTUALLY THE PERSONAL GUARANTEE ON THE LEASE, SO HE HAS SOME SKIN IN THE GAME. IF WE GO UNDER AND WE DON'T GET A LICENSE, HE'S STILL RESPONSIBLE.

SO WE HAVE THAT TO HOLD THEM TO IT. BUT AT THE SAME TIME, WE HAD TO MAKE SURE WE DIDN'T WANT TO BE RESPONSIBLE FINANCIALLY FOR SOMETHING THAT HAPPENED BEFORE. SO THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARITY.

YOU SAID THAT THE LICENSE WAS FOR 90. THE TEMPORARY WAS FOR 90 DAYS.

YES. BUT WE DIDN'T. SO THE WAY THE CITY CODE IS WRITTEN, I CAN'T REMEMBER HOW LONG IT SAYS IN THE CODE, BUT IT SAYS THAT THE THE THE POLICE CHIEF HAS DISCRETION ISSUED TEMPORARY LICENSE, AND THEN IT CAN BE EXTENDED UNDER THE DISCRETION OF THE POLICE CHIEF AS WELL.

BUT WHEN THEY. WE FOUND OUT WHEN WE MET WITH THE POLICE CHIEF THAT IT WAS FOR 90 DAYS.

BUT THE CERTIFICATE WE GOT SAID THE END OF THE YEAR.

I GUESS IT WAS A TYPO. HOWEVER, IT WAS DONE, SO THAT'S WHY WE DIDN'T REALIZE THAT IT HAD EXPIRED AT THAT TIME.

AND THEN HE WE SPOKE WITH HIM ABOUT THE BUSINESS LICENSE ISSUES, AND AT THAT TIME, WE FINALLY GOT EVERYTHING CHANGED OVER. BECAUSE THE OTHER ISSUE IS WHEN YOU'RE GOING THROUGH, YOU'RE TRYING TO GET A BUSINESS LICENSE. YOU HAVE TO LIKE, FOR INSTANCE, YOU HAVE TO GET A FOOD SERVICE PRINT, YOU HAVE TO GET ALL THESE PERMITS. SO ALL THESE VENDORS, YOU HAVE TO CHANGE THINGS OVER. SOMETHING ELSE THAT HAPPENED IS ON THE OTHER BUSINESS THAT MISTER THE OWL HAD AS THEY'RE CHANGING OVER THE POS SYSTEMS, THEY HELD $40,000 IN HIS OTHER BUSINESS.

SO AS WE'RE CHANGING THINGS OVER, THEY SAID, WELL, IF YOU'RE CHANGING IT OVER, WE CAN'T GIVE MONEY TO THE NEW BUSINESS UNTIL THE LICENSE WAS ISSUED. SO IT TOOK A WHILE TO GET THAT CHANGED.

[03:00:04]

WE'VE BEEN IN CONTACT WITH THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. WE'VE BEEN TRANSPARENT. WHEN WE. WHEN THE POLICE CHIEF ASKED US WHERE WE SAW HIM, WE TOLD HIM THE TRUTH ABOUT EVERYTHING THAT HAPPENED IN THE PROCESS, INCLUDING THE BUSINESS LICENSE SITUATION. AND WE APPLIED FOR IT AND WERE ABLE TO GET THE CEO.

AND THE OTHER THING IS THE BUSINESS LICENSE APPLICATION. AS YOU'RE GETTING THESE DOCUMENTS, IT EXPIRED, THE CEO APPLICATION EXPIRES IN 60 DAYS AND THE BUSINESS LICENSE EXPIRES IN 30 DAYS.

SO THEY FAILED INSPECTIONS END OF THE YEAR. AND ESSENTIALLY YOU HAVE TWO BUSINESSES ACQUIRING.

AND SHE'S TRYING TO GET ALL THE NEW DOCUMENTS IN PLACE, WORKING WITH SOMEONE WHO'S LEAVING THE BUSINESS AND WAITING FOR THEM TO RECTIFY THEIR PREVIOUS ISSUES. BECAUSE EVEN IN DECEMBER WE HAD NO HE HAD NO OPTION.

HE HAD TO RENEW HIM. HE HAD TO PAY THOSE FEES FOR WE COULD BE ISSUED A LICENSE.

SO THE CITY WAS ABLE TO OBTAIN THOSE FEES FROM THE PREVIOUS OPERATOR.

AND THAT'S HOW WE GOT HERE TODAY. SO HAS THE UBER BEEN OPERATING CONSISTENTLY FROM JANUARY 1ST, 2025 TO NOW? IT HAS, AND IT HAS NOT HAD AN ALCOHOL LICENSE THAT ENTIRE TIME, THOUGH.

IT'S A IT'S A TEMPORARY ALCOHOL LICENSE. SO FROM THE CITY AND THE STATE.

SO? SO I MEAN, YOU HAVEN'T BEEN APPROVED THROUGH COUNCIL, BUT COUNCIL HAS AN ISSUE.

CHIEF SAID HE CAN DO A TEMPORARY RIGHT. IT WAS A 90 DAY LICENSE THAT SHOULD HAVE ENDED IN MARCH.

THE END OF MARCH IS WHEN IT SHOULD HAVE ENDED. THAT'S WHEN THEY CAME LAST MONTH TRYING TO GET A LICENSE, BUT THEY HAD NO PAPERWORK. SO THAT'S WHEN I SAID, HEY, WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE THIS MEETING BECAUSE NONE OF YOUR PAPERWORK IS CORRECT, SO WE CAN'T GIVE YOU A LICENSE. SO WE'RE NOT EVEN GOING TO COME UP HERE AND PRESENT THIS TO COUNCIL, BECAUSE YOU DON'T EVEN HAVE A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY, NOR DO YOU HAVE A BUSINESS LICENSE IN NAME.

SO THAT'S WHEN WE PULLED IT. SO IT EXPIRED IN MARCH.

YOU SAID IT WAS WHAT? ANY REISSUE. DID YOU REISSUE THIS NEW BUSINESS A TEMPORARY LICENSE? I ISSUED A TEMPORARY LICENSE FOR ONE MONTH BECAUSE THEY HAD AN ISSUE WHERE THEY GOT TO PAY A FINE FOR NOT HAVING A LICENSE, AND I TOLD HIM I'D GIVE HIM A MONTH TO GET EVERYTHING CORRECT.

AND WHEN DID YOU. WHEN DID THAT MONTH START? SO THEY HAD A TEMPORARY LICENSE FROM FOR A MONTH FROM WHEN TO WHEN? IT WOULD HAVE BEEN THE THURSDAY AFTER THE LAST CITY COUNCIL MEETING. I HAVE IT ON MY PHONE. WELL, SORRY. WE MET WITH THE POLICE CHIEF THE THURSDAY AFTER THE LAST COUNCIL MEETING. SO THIS IS MAY IN APRIL. ARE YOU SAYING THAT APRIL? YES. OKAY. SO YOU'RE WITHIN THE 30 DAYS? YEAH.

I BELIEVE IT'S JUNE. YEAH. YEAH. COUNCIL MEMBER.

SHROPSHIRE. THANK YOU. THIS IS SO CONFUSING. DO THE UBER PREVIOUS OWNER, DO HE STILL OWN ANY PORTIONS OF IT, OR ARE YOU THE SOLE OWNER AS OF TODAY? ME AND MY BUSINESS PARTNER, KEVIN KILPATRICK ARE THE SOLE OWNERS.

AL IS NOT AFFILIATED WITH IT ANYMORE. DO YOU AND MR. KILPATRICK OWN ANY OTHER OTHER BUSINESS? NO. AS FAR AS AS FAR AS RESTAURANTS, YES.

WE OWN UBER AND BVS ON THE SOUTH SIDE. SAY THAT AGAIN.

UBER. AND ALSO ON THE SOUTH SIDE. ON THE SOUTH SIDE? YES. IN THE CITY OF SOUTH FULTON. CITY OF SOUTH FULTON.

OKAY. OKAY. AND HE HAS NO MORE TIES TO THIS BUSINESS.

EVERYTHING HAS BEEN SETTLED BY HIM. AND, YEAH, IT'S JUST ME AND KEVIN KILPATRICK.

SO LET ME ASK THIS BECAUSE IT SAYS ON THE CITY WEBSITE, AND WE MIGHT BE LOOKING AT IT WRONG.

THAT AND I DON'T KNOW IF SOMEBODY CAN LOOK INTO IT THAT THERE'S STILL A HE OWED TAXES.

SO THE TAXES THAT HE OWED WAS THE LIQUOR LICENSE TAXES.

SO EVERY MONTH BASED ON YOUR SALES, HE HAD A BALANCE THAT WAS DUE AND HE HAD NOT PAID.

SO BEFORE HE WAS ABLE TO EVEN APPLY FOR A LIQUOR LICENSE.

HE HAD TO CLEAR THAT BALANCE UP, WHICH HE CLEARED UP IN DECEMBER. OH, OKAY.

SO THAT WAS SO HE CLEARED THAT UP NOW. AND THAT WAS ANOTHER ISSUE BECAUSE WE NEVER KNEW HE SOLD A BUSINESS BECAUSE HE WAS STILL PRETENDING THAT HE HAD SOMETHING TO DO WITH THIS.

SO BUT ACCORDING TO THESE INDIVIDUALS HERE, THEY SAID THEY BOUGHT THE BUSINESS RIGHT OUT.

BUT THERE'S SOME TYPE OF I GUESS, BUILDING. MAYBE HE OWNS THE BUILDING OR SOMETHING.

HE WAS SAYING. YES. SO WAIT, SO. SO HE STILL OWNED THE BUILDING? NO, HE IT'S A IT'S AN ASSIGNMENT OF THE LEASE.

IT'S ASSIGNMENT OF THE LEASE. SO HE WAS SELLING THE BUSINESS. SO THEY'VE ASSUMED THE LEASE.

SO THEY'VE ASSUMED THE LEASE OBLIGATIONS FROM HIM. AND THAT'S WHAT I WAS SAYING.

HE SIGNED THE ORIGINAL LEASE. HE SUBLEASED TO THEM.

SO TECHNICALLY, THEY'RE BOTH ON THE HOOK IF THE BUSINESS GOES UNDER.

BECAUSE HE WAS A PERSONAL GUARANTOR ON THE LEASE.

SO. SO BOTH OF THEM ARE STILL. SO AL IS STILL ON THE HOOK.

IF THE HE'S ON THE HOOK FINANCIALLY, HE'S NOT ON THE HOOK BUSINESS WISE, FINANCIALLY.

[03:05:05]

SO IF THEY WERE TO DEFAULT THE PROPERTY, THE LANDLORD WOULD COME AFTER NAOMI.

KEVIN KILPATRICK AND OR AL RAY. SO ALL ANY OF ALL THREE OF THOSE.

SO HE STILL HAS TIES TO THE BUILDING AS A PERSONAL GUARANTOR? NO LEGAL TIES, NO RIGHTS TO IT. NO PERSONAL GUARANTOR IS JUST LIABILITY.

HE HAS LIABILITIES. I WISH WE COULD TAKE HIM OFF FROM LIABILITIES, BUT, I MEAN, HE HAS NO LEGAL RIGHTS, JUST LIABILITIES. I'M STILL A BIT CONFUSED.

I WANT TO ASK THE ATTORNEY. BECAUSE I'M. YEAH.

I MEAN, THINK ABOUT IT THIS WAY. WAIT, THERE'S.

IS IT OKAY IF I SPEAK? SO IT'S ALMOST LIKE LIKE A COSIGNER, MAYBE.

IT SOUNDS LIKE THAT. THIS AL FELLA IS STILL A PART OF THE LEASE, BECAUSE IT'S HIS LEASE THAT HE HAS SUBLEASED TO THESE INDIVIDUALS. AND SO WHOEVER THE LANDLORD IS.

LET'S PUT IT LIKE THIS. SO IF YOU'RE BUYING A HOUSE AND YOU AND YOUR HUSBAND BUY A HOUSE, RIGHT? AND YOU GUYS GET A DIVORCE AND YOU HAVE TO REFINANCE THE HOUSE TO GET ONE OF YOUR NAMES OFF, THAT REFINANCING DIDN'T HAPPEN. SO AL IS STILL ON THE MORTGAGE, IF YOU WILL.

IT'S JUST THAT THIS IS A LEASE AS OPPOSED TO A MORTGAGE.

I JUST USED THAT AS AN EXAMPLE. DOES THAT HELP? SO WHICH MEANS IF THEY DEFAULT ON THE PAYMENT.

HE CAN COME AND TAKE IT BACK. NOT NOT NOT AL CAN'T.

THE LANDLORD COULD. THE LANDLORD CAN. RIGHT? AL WOULD THEN BE HELD RESPONSIBLE, JUST LIKE THEY WOULD TO PAY THE MONEY TO PAY WHATEVER THE DEFAULT WERE WAS. SO THAT GIVES THE LANDLORD AN ADDITIONAL POCKET TO GET THEIR FUNDING.

BECAUSE HIS LEASE WASN'T UP, BECAUSE THE LEASE WAS NOT UP.

AND SO HE SUBLEASED THE BALANCE OF THE LEASE TO THESE INDIVIDUAL.

THE LEASE IS UP. SO ONCE THE LEASE IS UP, THESE INDIVIDUALS THEN COULD PROBABLY ENTER INTO A NEW LEASE WITHOUT AL.

SO HOW LONG WILL IT BE BEFORE THE LEASE IS UP? I BELIEVE THAT'S A SECOND DATE. YOU HAVE IT ON THERE.

I THINK I HAVE IT RIGHT HERE. YEAH. IT IS. IT WAS LIKE TWO.

LOOK FOR THE ORIGINAL ONE RIGHT HERE. OKAY. SORRY.

AND NOW THE EXTENDED EARLIER. WHERE IS IT? IT WAS 2015. SO 234512689. 11.

OH IT'S TWO MORE YEARS. TWO MORE YEARS. TWO MORE YEARS.

YEAH. 20. 27. OKAY. THE MOST RECENT ONE COMMENCED IN FEBRUARY 1ST, 2017.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. YES. SO AT AT THIS MOMENT, YOU HAVE A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY.

IS THAT CORRECT? YOU'VE GOT YOUR STATE LIQUOR LICENSE, CORRECT? CORRECT. AND YOU'VE GOT YOUR FULTON COUNTY LICENSES, IS THAT RIGHT? CORRECT. OKAY. AND ALL OF THE TAXES THAT ARE DUE TO THIS CITY TO YOUR KNOWLEDGE AND, CHIEF, THEY HAVE BEEN CAUGHT UP AND THEY HAVE BEEN PAID TO MY KNOWLEDGE, YES.

OKAY. AND YOU HAVE ISSUED CHIEF BUCHANAN A TEMPORARY LIQUOR LICENSE FOR THEM TO OPERATE.

IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT. TEMPORARY. SORRY.

EXCUSE ME. I'VE ISSUED A TEMPORARY LICENSE. WE DID IT FOR 30 DAYS.

AND THE ONLY REASON WE DID IT FOR 30 DAYS IS BECAUSE WE ISSUED A 90 DAY TEMPORARY PERMIT PREVIOUSLY, AND THEY HAVEN'T GOTTEN ANY COMPLIANCE, SO WE WEREN'T GOING TO ISSUE AN EXTENDED ONE MORE THAN 30 DAYS.

AND THAT EXPIRES WHEN THIS WEEK. THIS WEEK? YES.

OKAY. SO THIS IS FOR ACTION THIS EVENING. CORRECT.

OKAY. AND LIKE I SAID, WE'RE NOT ISSUING ANY MORE BECAUSE WE FEEL LIKE THAT'S A LONG TIME TO GET THIS SITUATION TAKEN CARE OF.

OKAY. I THINK I JUST HEARD THE MAYOR TO SAY THAT THERE CANNOT BE ACTION ON THIS THIS EVENING.

I THINK IT WAS ADVERTISED FOR ANOTHER PUBLIC HEARING.

SO THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS HELD ON APRIL 21ST.

[03:10:03]

IF IT'S BEEN ADVERTISED FOR ANOTHER PUBLIC HEARING, THAT ABSOLUTELY CAN BE TAKEN ADDRESSED TONIGHT.

SO DO WE KNOW IF IT'S BEEN ADVERTISED FOR ANOTHER PUBLIC HEARING? THERE'S NO INDICATION ON HERE THAT ACTION WILL BE TAKEN.

NO. SO WE NEED TO ADVERTISE FOR ANOTHER PUBLIC HEARING.

BUT ALSO SO WHAT? I'M SORRY. SO WHAT I'M GOING TO DO IS IT NEEDS TO BE ADVERTISED FOR ANOTHER PUBLIC HEARING FOR APPROVAL.

IN ADDITION TO THAT, I'VE ALREADY HAD SPOKEN WITH THEM. I'VE TOLD THEM THAT IT PROBABLY WILL GO WITHOUT A LIQUOR LICENSE UNTIL ALL THIS IS TAKEN CARE OF, BECAUSE I GAVE HIM 30 DAYS FOR THE SIMPLE FACT THAT I FELT LIKE THEY HAD ALREADY BEEN FOR FOUR MONTHS, SO WE DIDN'T WANT TO. A TEMPORARY LICENSE TECHNICALLY ONLY FOR 90 DAYS, SO WE ISSUED IT PAST 90 DAYS TO TRY TO ASSIST THEM.

THEY WERE ABLE TO GET EVERYTHING TAKEN CARE OF, BUT YET THEY STILL HAVE THINGS THEY HAVE TO DO.

SO AFTER THIS WEEK, THEY WON'T BE TO SEE ALCOHOL IN TWO.

ANOTHER PUBLIC HEARING. WHAT WAS THE FINE FOR OPERATING WITHOUT A LICENSE? YOU SAID THERE WAS. THEY WERE FINE. YES. WE WERE LOOKING BECAUSE OF HOW IT WAS DONE.

WE'RE ACTUALLY GOING TO FIND THE ORIGINAL OWNER BECAUSE HE TRIED TO DO SOME DECEIVING THINGS WITHOUT GOING TO A LOT OF DETAILS WHERE HE'S BEING FINED.

AND HOW LONG DOES THE PUBLIC HEARING HAVE TO BE ADVERTISED? I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS A LEGAL QUESTION OR I THINK, YES.

IT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE IT WAS NOT ADVERTISED FOR A SECOND ONE BECAUSE IT HAD ALREADY HAD ONE.

I JUST RECALLED THE CLERK ASKING WHETHER OR NOT THERE NEEDED TO BE ANOTHER ONE, BUT IF.

THE CITY COUNCIL ALREADY HAD ONE, WHICH I THINK THEY DID IN APRIL, THEN ANOTHER PUBLIC HEARING WON'T BE NECESSARY.

OKAY, BUT DID THE. AND PLEASE FORGIVE ME BECAUSE I DON'T RECALL AT THE TIME OF THE LAST PUBLIC HEARING NONE OF THIS WAS SITUATED.

NO, THEY DIDN'T HAVE A BUSINESS LICENSE, SO THEY WEREN'T TECHNICALLY ABLE TO APPLY.

DID THE COUNCIL HEAR ANY COMMENT FROM. DID YOU OPEN IT UP FOR A PUBLIC HEARING AT THAT TIME? WE'D HAVE TO LOOK BACK AT THE MEETING. MINUTES TO DATE.

WHAT'S THE DATE TODAY? IT WOULD HAVE BEEN APRIL 20TH.

FIRST MINUTE SHOULD HAVE BEEN APPROVED AT LAST MEETING.

HOLD ON A MINUTE, IF I MAY. YOU GUYS CAN CONFIRM, BUT IT WAS OPEN FOR PUBLIC HEARING.

THAT'S WHEN WE SPOKE LAST TIME. AND THEN ALSO WE SPOKE WITH THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.

WE GOT THE BUSINESS LICENSE PRETTY FAST. WE GOT IN TIME TO ADVERTISE.

AS MENTIONED, WE WERE INFORMED WE DIDN'T HAVE TO ADVERTISE.

I'M NOT THE CITY ATTORNEY, BUT MY I, I AGREE WITH THE CLERK'S POSITION THAT IT'S BEEN ADVERTISED BEFORE AND THAT'S ADEQUATE NOTICE FOR THE PUBLIC.

SO WE ADVERTISED PREVIOUSLY, WE GOT THE BUSINESS LICENSE AND THE POLICE DEPARTMENT TOLD US THAT WE NEED TO ADVERTISE AGAIN.

SO WE WOULD HAVE ADVERTISED. WE HAD PLENTY OF TIME TO ADVERTISE IF THAT WAS NEEDED.

SO CHALLENGES IS YOU GOT THE BUSINESS LICENSE ON MAY 2ND.

THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS HELD ON APRIL 21ST. YEAH, WE KNOW WE ADVERTISED FOR THAT PUBLIC HEARING.

I UNDERSTAND, BUT YOU DIDN'T HAVE A BUSINESS LICENSE AT THE TIME THAT THAT WAS ADVERTISED. SO HOLD ON.

LET ME JUST LOOK AT THE MINUTES. I DON'T. OKAY.

LET'S JUST DO. THIS LET'S DO. SO MADAM MAYOR, I WAS I STILL HAD MY MIC ON.

SO I WOULD LIKE TO ASK A QUESTION OF THE ATTORNEY, MADAM ATTORNEY.

SO THE THE PUBLIC HEARING THAT WAS ADVERTISED PREVIOUSLY.

IF THE APPLICANT DID NOT HAVE THE BUSINESS LICENSE IN THEIR NAME.

ARE WE SAYING THAT THAT PUBLIC HEARING DOES IS IS NULL AND VOID? IT DOESN'T COUNT TOWARD THIS LICENSE THAT THEY'RE SEEKING.

SO I THINK THE. THE THING THAT WILL TURN ADVICE WOULD BE WHETHER OR NOT IT WAS OPENED, THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED, WHETHER OR NOT ANYONE SPOKE OR NOT, IF I RECALL CORRECTLY.

AND YOU GOTTA FORGIVE ME BECAUSE I DON'T RECALL.

IS THAT THERE WAS. LIKELY A MOTION TO JUST DEFER IT BECAUSE OF THE LACK OF THE BUSINESS LICENSE AT THE TIME. AND SO THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS NOT HAD IN THE NORMAL COURSE, LIKE WE WOULD HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING. THAT'S WHAT I RECALL.

AND I COULD BE WRONG. AND IF THAT'S THE CASE, THEN YES, I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT YOU HAVE ONE WITH THE NEW INFORMATION FOR THE PUBLIC TO BE HEARD. PER OUR ORDINANCE. OKAY. SO THE MINUTES FROM THE APRIL 21ST MEETING WERE APPROVED ON MAY 5TH, BUT I'M NOT ABLE TO ACCESS THEM ONLINE.

[03:15:06]

SO YOU CAN LOOK AT THOSE MINUTES. COUNCILMEMBER ATKINS, DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE? YES. I JUST WANTED TO SAY SO FOR CHIEF FOR THIS.

ONCE THEY DID COME MEET WITH YOU, YOU GAVE YOU ISSUED THEM A TEMPORARY LICENSE BECAUSE THEY HAD GOTTEN THEIR BUSINESS LICENSE AT THAT POINT.

CORRECT? SO, YES. SO WHAT OCCURRED IS ORIGINALLY THEY DIDN'T HAVE THE CO AND THEY DIDN'T COULDN'T GET A CO.

THEY HAD A BUSINESS LICENSE. SO WHEN THEY MET WITH ME THEY WAS ACTUALLY MEETING WITH THE BUSINESS LICENSE DEPARTMENT THE SAME DAY.

SO THEY HAD EVERYTHING READY. SO I ISSUED THEM A TEMPORARY LICENSE SO THEY CAN GO FORWARD.

SO THE GOAL WAS TO MAKE SURE THEY HAD ABOUT 30 MORE DAYS TO GET EVERYTHING IN LINE.

AND THAT'S THEIR SITUATION. AND AT THAT POINT, THEY WERE NOT ADVISED.

THEY DIDN'T KNOW THAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO HAVE A NEW PUBLIC HEARING.

THEY WERE TOLD THAT THEY DIDN'T HAVE TO. SO SOMEHOW THEY WERE TOLD THEY DID NOT HAVE TO.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THOSE ARE MY QUESTIONS. COUNCIL MEMBER BUTLER.

THANK YOU. SO IN SUMMATION IS THEY WERE NOT INFORMED THEY NEEDED A NEW PUBLIC HEARING.

AND WHEN YOU GAVE THEM THE ADDITIONAL 30 DAYS, THEY SATISFIED ALL THE REQUIREMENTS THAT YOU SET FORTH.

THAT'S OF COURSE CORRECT. YES. THANK YOU. HAVE YOU BEEN ABLE TO LOCATE THE MINUTES? MADAM DEPUTY CITY CLERK, CAN YOU CALL MISS MCCULLOUGH? THEY. I MEAN, OR IF YOU GO ONLINE, IT'S ASKING ME FOR LOGIN INFORMATION.

WHEN I CLICK ON THE MINUTES. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT LOGIN INFORMATION IS.

MAY 5TH MEETING. YEAH.

YEAH OKAY. YEAH, YEAH.

IF YOU GUYS WANT TO. GET A SECOND.

YEAH. WE'RE JUST WAITING TO CONFIRM ON THE MINUTES WHETHER OR NOT THE ACTUAL PUBLIC HEARING WAS HELD. I DO RECALL THE CHIEF PULLING IT.

I DON'T REMEMBER IF IT WAS BEFORE OR AFTER THE PUBLIC HEARING.

SO WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT OUR MINUTES TO CONFIRM.

YEAH. OKAY.

OKAY. AND JUST FOR CLARITY, THE REASON WE PULLED THEM IS BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T HAVE A LICENSE.

BUT THE REASON WE DIDN'T KNOW THEY HAD NO LICENSE IS BECAUSE WE WAS UNDER THE ASSUMPTION, BASED ON CONVERSATIONS WE HAD, THAT THE PREVIOUS OWNER WAS STILL THE OWNER, AND WE DIDN'T REALIZE THEY WERE THE NEW OWNERS BECAUSE HE WAS TRYING TO DO SOME THINGS THAT WAS NOT LAWFUL. I GET IT. AND I GET WHAT YOU ALL HAVE EXPLAINED.

THE ISSUE RIGHT NOW IS WHETHER OR NOT THE PUBLIC HEARING HAS ACTUALLY BEEN HELD.

IT WAS PULLED LAST TIME, AND I CAN'T REMEMBER IF THAT WAS BEFORE OR AFTER THE HEARING.

THE MINUTES FOR APRIL 7TH AND APRIL 21ST SHOULD BE ONLINE BY NOW, BUT THEY'RE NOT.

SO THAT'S WHY I'M HAVING TO ASK. LET ME ASK YOU A QUESTION TO REACH OUT TO THE CITY CLERK.

COUNCIL MEMBER. SHROPSHIRE. IT SHOWS THAT ON MAY 10TH.

WE APPROVED THAT APRIL 21ST. MAY 5TH. WE APPROVE THE APRIL 21ST MEETING MINUTES.

CORRECT. BUT THEY'RE NOT AVAILABLE ONLINE. SO ONCE THEY ONCE THEY ARE PUT IN THE JUST THE MINUTES, THE COLUMN FOR THE MINUTES, THEY'RE ACTUALLY ABLE TO BE RETRIEVED.

RIGHT NOW THEY AREN'T. IF YOU GO TO THE APRIL 21ST MEETING AND CLICK ON IT, IT'S ASKING FOR A LOGIN AND PASSCODE AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT IS.

[03:20:01]

AS THE AGENDA, THE AGENDA PACKET. IT'S A GOOD POINT.

LET'S SEE. YEAH. BECAUSE IT'S USUALLY ATTACHED TO THAT APRIL 21ST.

NO IT WOULD HAVE BEEN THE MAY 5TH AGENDA PACKET.

BECAUSE WE APPROVED IT ON MAY AND MAY. OBVIOUSLY.

AND AS WE KNOW, THEY'RE NOT IN THERE. I KNOW THEY HELD IT.

WAIT. LET ME SEE. KEEP GOING. OOPS. YOU'RE RIGHT.

IT'S THERE. LET'S SEE. I DIDN'T LOOK HERE.

SO THIS IS WHAT WE HAVE. ATTORNEY WIGGINS COUNCIL MEMBER ATKINS MADE A MOTION TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.

COUNCIL MEMBER MARTIN ROGERS PROVIDED THE SECOND.

THE MOTION CARRIED. CORPORAL JESTER RECOMMENDED THAT THE ISSUANCE OF AN ALCOHOL LICENSE BE DEFERRED UNTIL THE BUSINESS LICENSE IS APPROVED.

NO ONE CAME FORWARD TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OR OPPOSITION.

COUNCIL MEMBER MITCHELL MADE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. COUNCILMEMBER ATKINS PROVIDED THE PROVIDED A SECOND AND THEN THE MOTION CARRIED.

COUNCIL MEMBER MITCHELL MADE A MOTION TO OPEN THE FLOOR FOR DISCUSSION OF THE PUBLIC HEARING.

COUNCILMEMBER ATKINS PROVIDED A SECOND DEPUTY.

ATTORNEY. FREEMAN RECOMMENDED DEFERRING THE ISSUANCE OF THE ALCOHOL LICENSE UNTIL THE BUSINESS OWNER CAN COMPLY.

COUNCILMEMBER MITCHELL ASKED WHY THE BUSINESS WAS NOT IN COMPLIANCE. CORPORAL JESTER ANSWERED THAT THE BUSINESS LICENSE IS NOT IN THE APPLICANT'S NAME. COUNCILMEMBER MITCHELL ASKED, WHAT IS THE CORRECT ACTION? TERRY BAILEY ANSWERED THAT THE APPLICANT WILL HAVE TO OBTAIN A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY AND GET A BUSINESS LICENSE TRANSFERRED OVER. COUNCILMEMBER SHROPSHIRE MADE A MOTION TO POSTPONE THE ACTION ON THE ALCOHOL LICENSE.

COUNCILMEMBER MARTIN ROGERS PROVIDED THE SECOND AND THE MOTION CARRIED. MAY I ASK IF IN YOUR READING OF THAT IT DIDN'T SOUND LIKE.

IN YOUR READING OF THAT, IT DID NOT SOUND LIKE YOU CALLED FOR THE PUBLIC TO COME UP? I HEARD YOU SAY NO ONE CAME UP. BUT IS THAT IN RESPONSE TO A QUESTION FOR, YOU KNOW, AN INVITATION FOR THE PUBLIC? AND NO ONE JUST CAME UP, OR THAT'S GOING TO REQUIRE GOING BACK AND LOOKING AT THE VIDEO.

SO WHICH WHAT'S NEXT, THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY.

I'M WILLING OR THE CLERK CAN GO. YOU COULD LOOK AT THE MEETING THAT'S ONLINE.

IT WAS A COUNCIL MEETING. SO YOU CAN EASILY ACCESS IT ON THE CITY'S FACEBOOK PAGE IS THE EASIEST WAY OR THERE'S AN ARCHIVE LINK, BUT IF YOU COULD LOOK AT THAT QUICKLY AND LET US KNOW, AND WE CAN MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ITEM AND THEN COME BACK.

THANK YOU. NUMBER SEVEN THE ECONOMIC UPDATE OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY PLAN, MR. JONES? YES. DIRECTOR ROGERS WILL WALK US THROUGH THIS ITEM.

GOOD EVENING. MAYOR. COUNCIL. WE HAVE MR. JEFF KOSKY PRESIDENT OF KB ADVISORY GROUP, THAT IS WITH US VIRTUALLY. AND IF WE COULD ACCESS HIM ONLINE, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.

AND HE'S HERE TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS FROM HIS PRESENTATION OF THE STRATEGY PLAN UPDATE FROM LAST MONTH.

WHERE ARE YOU AT? WERE YOU ALREADY ABLE TO LOOK AT IT? TURN THE WHEEL. WHILE WE'RE WAITING ON. WAITING ON? YES. I CANNOT TAKE CREDIT FOR IT. IT WAS ALL.

I'M HERE. OH! HE'S THERE. HOLD ON JUST A MOMENT, MR. KOSKI. I WAS JUST SAYING I NEED TO THANK MR. KELLY PUBLICLY BECAUSE HE WAS ABLE TO PULL IT UP MUCH QUICKER

[03:25:06]

EVEN THOUGH THEY DIDN'T. I MEAN, I THINK THAT THE THE NEW FACTS WOULDN'T CHANGE THE REQUIREMENT UNDER THIS SECTION. GIVE ME ONE SECOND.

THANK YOU. LET'S SEE.

SO THE LAW REQUIRES. I'M NOT SURE IF YOU CAN HEAR ME, BUT I ONLY HEARD MUMBLES.

MEMBERS EXCEPT WHEN SOMEONE WAS RIGHT IN FRONT OF THE SCREEN. I DID NOT HEAR A SINGLE WORD THAT'S BEEN SAID.

IF ANYONE WAS TALKING TO ME. NOT YET. MR., THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR PATIENCE.

WE'RE TRYING TO WRAP UP THE PREVIOUS ITEM REALLY QUICKLY, IF WE CAN, AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO COME TO YOU.

SO PRIOR TO A PUBLIC HEARING, YOU KNOW THAT THE APPLICANT HAS TO DO THE ADVERTISEMENTS IN THE PAPER. AND THEN THE.

PUBLIC HEARING SECTION SAYS. GIVE ME A SECOND.

I JUST HAD IT. WHERE IS IT? ALCOHOL LICENSE, PUBLIC HEARING REQUIREMENT.

YEAH, I KNOW IT'S IN 11, AND I'M JUST LOOKING FOR THE SECTION ON THE PUBLIC HEARING.

MR.. CHAPTER 1110.

MRS 2219. YOU KNOW, IT'S THE PUBLIC HEARING THAT'S REQUIRED FOR THE ALCOHOL LICENSE.

I FEEL LIKE I JUST SAW.

TEN FOR THE LICENSE.

I GUESS YOU COULD HAVE GONE TO THE NEXT ONE BECAUSE I CAN'T FIND IT NOW.

SO SECTION 11, DASH 1050. JUST GIVE ME A MINUTE.

I'LL JUST READ IT OUT LOUD. THE RUNNING OF THE ADVERTISEMENT REQUIRED IN THIS SECTION MAY BE CONCURRENT WITH THE TIME THAT THE APPLICATION IS FILED, AND IF THE TWO DAY'S ADVERTISEMENT IS NOT MADE BEFORE THE FILING OF THE APPLICATION, THE APPLICATION SHALL STATE THAT THE ADVERTISEMENT IS BEING MADE.

THE APPLICANT SHALL ALSO CAUSE TO BE PLACED UPON THE LOCATION, THE SIGN IN A FORM PRESCRIBED BY THE POLICE CHIEF OR A DESIGNEE.

THE DATE AND LOCATION OF THE COUNCIL MEETING FOR WHICH THE HEARING ON THE APPLICATION OR APPEAL BEFORE THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SHALL OCCUR FOR THE TWO WEEKS IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING THE PUBLIC HEARING. SO I DO UNDERSTAND THAT THEY MADE THEY GOT THE LICENSE ON MAY 2ND.

I GUESS THE QUESTION IS WHETHER OR NOT THE APPLICATION WAS THE APPLICATION WHICH REQUIRED WHICH WAS A PREREQUISITE FOR THE HEARING, WHETHER OR NOT IT WAS MADE PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING AND IT JUST WAS ISSUED MAY 2ND, OR IF APPLICATION WAS MADE PRIOR TO THAT. THE APPLICATION FOR A BUSINESS LICENSE OR APPLICATION FOR ALCOHOL LICENSE.

THE APPLICATION FOR THE ALCOHOL LICENSE. OH, THE APPLICATION FOR THE ALCOHOL LICENSE WAS MADE IN PRIOR TO MAY 2ND.

[03:30:05]

SO THAT'S THE ONLY CONSIDERATION THAT THIS CODE SECTION IS REQUIRING IS THAT THAT APPLICATION.

BE MADE NOT THE BUSINESS LICENSE APPLICATION.

AND IF THEY ARE, THEY WERE THE APPLICANTS PENDING THE BUSINESS LICENSE.

I STILL WOULD THINK THAT YOU'VE MET THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS REQUIREMENTS FOR A PUBLIC HEARING.

SO CHIEF JUST SAYS THAT THE TEMPORARY LICENSE EXPIRES THIS WEEK.

WE DON'T MEET AGAIN UNTIL MONDAY. RIGHT. SO YOU STILL WILL HAVE A LAPSE OF TIME WHERE THERE WON'T BE AN ALCOHOL LICENSE? CHIEF, DO YOU KNOW WHAT DATE IT EXPIRES? OH, RIGHT BEFORE THE WEEKEND.

TODAY IS THE 12TH. 15. TODAY IS THE 12TH. CHIEF, YOU WANT TO GET YOUR COUNCIL MEMBER BUTLER COUNCIL MEMBER. MADAM MAYOR, BASED UPON WHAT HAS BEEN SAID TO US BEFORE, THAT THE CHIEF ALLOWED THEM 30 DAYS TO GET THEIR BUSINESS IN ORDER AND THE FACT THAT THEY HAVE.

I PROPOSE TWO OPTIONS. ONE, ALLOW THE CHIEF TO EXTEND THE TEMPORARY LICENSE BECAUSE THEY FULFILLED ALL THE AGREEMENTS. IF THERE IS A NEED FOR ANYTHING TO BE PROLONGED OR ALLOW THEM TO HAVE THEIR LIQUOR LICENSE.

COUNCIL MEMBER, SHROPSHIRE. I WAS GOING TO SAY, DO WE NEED TO AMEND THE NOT AMEND, BUT ADD IT TO THE AGENDA TO MAKE A VOTE? TONIGHT? I MEAN, THAT'S A DECISION BY BY THE COUNCIL, IF THAT'S WHAT YOU GUYS SEEK TO DO TO ADD IT FOR.

YOU'LL HAVE TO SUSPEND THE RULES THEN ADD IT.

AND AND THE CONCERN ABOUT THIS IS THAT IN PRECEDENT.

BECAUSE IF ANOTHER APPLICANT COMES BEFORE US, WE'LL BE TRYING TO DEAL WITH THE SAME THING.

SO, CHIEF, IS IT POSSIBLE EXTENDED? I WILL EXTEND IT TO TUESDAY, WHICH WOULD GIVE THEM AN OPPORTUNITY TO COME BEFORE COUNCIL MONDAY.

OKAY. DO YOU HAVE DO YOU HAVE THAT DISCRETION YOURSELF.

RIGHT. YES. ANY OTHER COUNCILMEMBER ATKINS? YES.

THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. BASICALLY, THOSE ARE MY SENTIMENTS.

MY COLLEAGUES HAVE JUST SAID THE SAME THING. IT SEEMS THAT THEY HAVE MET WHAT HAS BEEN ASKED OF THEM BY THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.

THE CITY ATTORNEY HAS STATED THAT IT SEEMS THAT THEY'VE MET THE LETTER OF THE LAW REGARDING THE PUBLIC HEARING AND ALL OF THOSE THINGS.

AND SO I JUST WANTED TO BE ABLE TO JUST HAVE THIS BODY TO VOTE IT UP OR DOWN BECAUSE THEY'VE DONE THOSE THINGS.

THANK YOU. SO PLACING ON THE AGENDA FOR ACTION ON MONDAY, MADAM DEPUTY CITY CLERK.

THANK YOU. ROGER. GOOD EVENING AGAIN, MAYOR AND

[III.7. Council Discussion and Possible Action for Approval of the Updated Economic Development Strategy Plan (EDSP) 2025]

LET ME. DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. KOSKY OR MR. ROGERS REGARDING THE UPDATED ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN? WHY MR. KOSKY GETTING SITUATED? TECHNOLOGY.

MR. ROGERS, NO ONE IS CHIMING IN FOR QUESTIONS.

COUNCIL MEMBER ATKINS. YES, MADAM MAYOR, I DON'T HAVE A, I GUESS, A QUESTION OF MR. KOSKY. IT WOULD BE A QUESTION OF CITY MANAGER JONES.

I GUESS ONCE WE HAVE APPROVED THIS DOCUMENT AND BECAUSE IT IS OUR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC PLAN DOES THE STAFF HAVE

[03:35:04]

IT WOULD CERTAINLY BE CUSTOMARY, AS INITIATIVES DEVELOP OUT OF THE PLAN, THAT THOSE INITIATIVES WOULD BE BROUGHT TO CITY COUNCIL.

CAN YOU HEAR ME ON ZOOM NOW? YES. CAN YOU HEAR ME ON ZOOM? YES WE CAN. I THINK I GOT THE OKAY, I'M TRYING TO TALK ON ZOOM, SO MR., IF YOU CAN MUTE HIM, IF YOU CAN GO CALL HIM.

IT SOUNDS LIKE WE'RE HAVING TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES.

HE CAN'T HEAR US, BUT WE CAN HEAR HIM. NO ONE.

DOESN'T SEEM LIKE I'M TALKING ON ZOOM. HELLO? CAN ANYONE HEAR ME? CAN YOU MUTE HIM, PLEASE? AND, MR. ROGERS, IF YOU CAN CALL HIM. NO ONE HAS ANY QUESTIONS.

IT SEEMS FOR MR. I RECEIVE.

WHAT IS THE DESIRED ACTION FOR THIS MR. ROGERS? I MET MR. JONES. IT HASN'T BEEN APPROVED BY COUNCIL YET.

I THINK WE'RE GOING TO BRING THIS FORWARD TO.

IF IT MEETS COUNCIL APPROVAL FOR COUNCIL'S VOTE NEXT WEEK.

I'M LOOKING TO DIRECTOR ROGERS TO MAKE SURE I'M CORRECT ON THAT.

WE'RE BRINGING THIS FORWARD NEXT. NEXT COUNCIL? YES. OKAY. THAT'S CORRECT. CITY MANAGER. SO THERE'S A DESIRE TO PLACE THIS ON THE MAY 19TH AGENDA.

DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY OBJECTION TO GOING THERE? I WANTED TO GO TO A FUTURE MEETING. THANK YOU.

OH, COUNCIL MEMBER. THANK YOU. AND I'VE SAID THIS ONCE BEFORE.

ONCE THESE PLANS ARE PERMITTED, I GUESS I'M NOT PERMITTED.

BUT ONCE THEY ARE APPROVED AND WE MOVE FORWARD, I GUESS WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR ARE DELIVERABLES.

YEAH. SO, I MEAN, I'M ALL FOR APPROVING THIS PLAN, BUT WHAT WILL WE SEE IN AUGUST? SEPTEMBER. AND I KNOW WE HAD DISCUSSED THAT I LOOK BUT NO I HAD A CONVERSATION WITH THEM.

SO IF WE CAN HAVE AN IMPLEMENTATION TIMELINE ON MONDAY, I THINK THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL.

BEING SHARED THAT IT'S NOT IN THE PLAN? I'M NOT SURE.

I'M NOT LOOKING AT IT RIGHT NOW. ALL RIGHT. MAY 19TH AGENDA.

THANK YOU. UPDATE ON POLICE IN CHIEF. IS CHIEF STILL WITH US?

[III.2. Update on Policing]

BUT I'M BACK, AND I PROMISE TO BE SHORT. UPDATE ON POLICING.

THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, SO WE HAVE JUST A COUPLE UPDATES.

THANK YOU ALL FOR GIVING ME AN OPPORTUNITY. TALKING TO THE JUDGE ABOUT AN IMPORTANT MATTER THAT CAME UP.

SO I DO APOLOGIZE. SO OUR FUTURES INTEGRATION IS GOING WELL.

WE'RE GOING TO PUT A FLIER IN THERE. THE UTILITIES, OUR PLANS FOR JUNE ABOUT OUR FUTURES INTEGRATION, WHICH MEANS YOU CAN HAVE YOUR CAMERAS HOOKED UP TO OUR SYSTEM, AS WELL AS A FLIER ABOUT SQUATTERS AND WHAT THE PROCEDURES ARE.

SO THAT'S COMING UP IN OUR JUNE IN YOUR JUNE POWER BILL.

SO YOU SHOULD HAVE THOSE FLIERS, FLIERS. SO WE'RE WORKING ON THAT RIGHT NOW. A COUPLE THINGS I WANT TO GO OVER.

AND IT'S BASICALLY JUST ABOUT THE SCHOOL ZONE CAMERAS.

WHAT THE LAW SAYS AND HOW IT OPERATES AND THINGS OF THIS NATURE.

WE'VE HAD A COUPLE COMPLAINTS AND I JUST KIND OF WANT TO KNOW, LET PEOPLE KNOW.

SO. IT'S OUR HALF BEFORE SCHOOL, HOUR AND A HALF AFTER SCHOOL.

THAT'S WHEN THE CITATIONS ARE GIVEN. ALSO, IT CAN BE WRITTEN DURING THE DAY OF SCHOOL.

THE LIGHTS ONLY HAVE TO BE FLASHING BEFORE SCHOOL AND AFTER SCHOOL.

[03:40:04]

I MEAN, SCHOOL ZONE STARTS AND SAYS SCHOOL'S ON ENDS.

WE WERE TOLD BY THE COMPANY THEY HAD ALL THOSE REQUIREMENTS MET.

WE FOUND OUT AFTERWARDS A COUPLE OF SCHOOL ZONE SIGNS WERE NOT UP.

SO WHAT WE'RE DOING IS WE'RE WORKING WITH THE JUDGES TO MAKE SURE IF ANYBODY HAD A COMPLAINT AT THAT TIME, I THINK I. SOME RESIDENTS HAVE CALLED ME AND I TOLD THEM, I CAN ASSURE THEM WE'LL MAKE SURE THIS IS HANDLED PROPERLY AND PROFESSIONALLY, SO IT WILL NOT BE ANY ISSUES TO THEM. AND SO I JUST WANT TO KIND OF GIVE A QUICK UPDATE ON THAT BECAUSE SOME RESIDENTS ASKED ME ABOUT THAT BEFORE, AS WELL AS SOME COUNCIL MEMBERS. SO I JUST WANT TO KIND OF GIVE AN UPDATE ON THAT.

AND I'VE ALSO SPOKEN WITH THE JUDGE ABOUT THE ISSUES THAT WE HAD.

THANKS. CHIEF COUNCIL MEMBER. MITCHELL, YOU HAVE AN UPDATE ON SCHOOL ZONE CAMERAS AS ITEM NUMBER 26.

IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE YOU'D LIKE TO CHIEF ON THIS? OH, YES. THANK YOU, CHIEF, FOR THE PRESENTATION. DO YOU REMEMBER AROUND WHAT DAY? I GUESS WE FINALLY GOT ALL THE BLINKING LIGHTS UP.

EVERYTHING SHOULD BE OPERATIONAL. WE HAD ONE ISSUE AT PARK WEST, BUT THE ISSUES THAT YOU'RE REFERRING ABOUT WAS ACTUALLY RECENTLY, AND I SPOKE TO. I ASKED YOU TO HAVE ALL THE RESIDENTS CALL ME, AND MANY HAVE.

SO WE'VE TAKEN CARE OF THAT. AND WE'VE ALSO SPOKE WITH THE JUDGE ABOUT THAT TIME PERIOD.

AND I ASKED EVERYBODY, IF YOU HAVE AN ISSUE, GO AHEAD AND YOU CAN APPEAL.

IT'S NOT A IT'S NOT A LICENSE THAT GOES IT'S NOT A TICKET THAT GOES ON YOUR LICENSE.

SO IT'S NOT A POINT. IT'S A CIVIL ISSUE. SO I'VE ALREADY SPOKEN TO THE JUDGE.

SO IF YOU HAVE ANY ISSUES I HIGHLY ENCOURAGE YOU TO CONTEST IT OKAY.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. ANY. COUNCILMAN KIMLEY-HORN.

THANK YOU. SO I, I THINK THAT THERE'S STILL PEOPLE WHO ON THE AT THE INTERSECTION OF SYLVAN AND OAKLEY THAT THEY ARE YOU KNOW, COMING SOUTH ON SYLVAN THAT THEY'RE GOING AROUND, PEOPLE STOPPED AT THE RED LIGHT AND THEY'RE GOING INTO ONCOMING TRAFFIC, AND THEY'RE STILL RUNNING THAT RED LIGHT. IS THERE ANYTHING THAT WE CAN DO? I THINK THAT THERE'S A CAMERA THERE, BUT I'M NOT SURE, YOU KNOW, THE SURVEILLANCE AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

YES. WE HAVE A CAMERA THERE. SO WHAT WE DID IS THIS WE ACTUALLY TOLD OUR TRAFFIC UNIT TO START WRITING CITATIONS, AND WE PUT THEM UP THERE, SO THAT SHOULD SLOW DOWN.

YOU SHOULD SEE A LARGE DECREASE OF THAT BECAUSE THAT'S A DANGEROUS INTERSECTION, FIRST OF ALL.

AND PEOPLE SHOULDN'T BE GOING AROUND ANYBODY IN THE WRONG DIRECTION. SO THAT'S BEEN HANDLED AND IT'S CONTINUOUSLY BEING HANDLED ON A DAILY BASIS.

OKAY. THANK YOU. OH YOU'RE WELCOME. CATHERINE MARTIN ROGERS.

CHIEF, I JUST WANTED TO SAY THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR PRESENTATION AND JUST THE SMALL MENTION OF THE TRUCK TRAFFIC ON WASHINGTON ROAD, GETTING A LOT OF COMPLAINTS OUT OF THE ONE OF THE COMMUNITIES THAT I REPRESENT OVER THERE.

I BELIEVE THEY'RE TRYING TO ACCESS THE CAMP CREEK BUSINESS PARK.

YES. AND THEN I ALSO WANT TO TAKE THIS MOMENT TO THANK THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT FOR THAT YIELD SIGN, GOING BACK UP OFF OF THE 285 RAMP. THAT ALMOST CAUSED ANOTHER ACCIDENT, BUT THE TRUCK TRAFFIC ON WASHINGTON ROAD.

SO I'VE ACTUALLY STARTED A DETAIL, ESPECIALLY ON THE WEEKENDS, BECAUSE WE GET A LOT OF COMPLAINTS.

I WENT TO ONE OF COMMUNITY MEETINGS, AND THERE WERE A LOT OF COMPLAINTS ON THE WEEKENDS WHERE THEY'RE USING STREETS THEY'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO UTILIZE FOR THAT SPECIFIC PURPOSE. SO I WILL KEEP MONITORING THAT, BUT I'LL START A DETAIL ON THE WEEKEND SPECIFICALLY FOR THAT.

AND BEN HILL ROAD, I HAVE IT FOR BEN HILL AS WELL.

THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. YES. THANK YOU. CHIEF, REGARDING SPEEDING IN NEIGHBORHOODS.

STILL GET A LOT OF COMPLAINTS ABOUT SPEEDING IN NEIGHBORHOODS, PEOPLE BLOWING THROUGH STOP SIGNS AND THOSE KINDS OF THINGS.

AND THE IMMEDIATE RESPONSE TO THAT FROM A LOT OF NEIGHBORS IS SPEED HUMPS.

AND WE JUST CANNOT BE A CITY FULL OF SPEED HUMPS.

SO WHAT IS PUBLIC SAFETY? WHAT IS WHAT IS THE POLICE DEPARTMENT DOING REGARDING CHANGING BEHAVIOR AROUND THAT, ISSUING CITATIONS. AND I AND I KNOW YOU HAVE A LOT OF COMPLAINTS BECAUSE I GET THEM TOO.

AND THE FIRST THING THEY SAY IS CAN WE GET SPEED BREAKERS OR SPEED HUMPS IN NEIGHBORHOODS? AND I TELL THEM, YOU KNOW, I DON'T THINK THAT'S THE SOLUTION.

I THINK PEOPLE SLOWING DOWN AND US ISSUING CITATIONS IS A BETTER SOLUTION BECAUSE IT DIRECTLY AFFECTS PEOPLE'S POCKETS AND IT CHANGES BEHAVIOR MORE SO THAN SPEED BUMPS.

SO WE'RE JUST WE HAVE INCREASED OUR TRAFFIC UNITS AND WE'RE STILL INCREASING OUR TRAFFIC UNIT.

WE ARE FOUR OFFICERS SHORT OF BEING FULLY STAFFED.

FOUR. SO YOU SHOULD SEE A LOT OF THESE ISSUES SUBSIDING.

[03:45:01]

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP AND SERVICE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

LET'S GO TO NUMBER TEN COUNCIL DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON THE COMPENSATION OF ASSOCIATE JUDGES.

[IV.10. Council Discussion and Possible Action on Compensation of Associate Judges]

I BELIEVE AT SOME POINT WE WERE LOOKING AT WHETHER TO, WHO ARE HOW AND WHAT TO HIRE NEW JUDGES.

AS MY APPOINTMENT WAS UP THIS YEAR, THAT MEANT THE ASSOCIATE JUDGES WERE UP AS WELL, AND COUNCIL MADE IT AT THAT POINT, WANTED TO LOOK AT THE COMPENSATION FOR THE ASSOCIATE JUDGES BEFORE POSTING ANY POSITIONS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE WERE COMPETITIVE IN GETTING SOMEONE IN TO BE OF ASSISTANCE ON OUR ASSOCIATE JUDGES.

I WAS TASKED WITH GOING AND FINDING OUT WHAT OTHER COURTS WERE PAYING THEIR ASSOCIATE JUDGES AND PROVIDED THAT INFORMATION ON A PRIOR DATE.

I'M NOT SURE IF YOU ALL STILL HAVE IT. BUT THERE WAS A LOOK AT COLLEGE PARK, HAPEVILLE FAIRBURN, UNION CITY, FOREST PARK, ATLANTA, SOUTH FULTON, RIVERDALE, MORROW, DEKALB STATE BECAUSE THEY HAD THE SAME VOLUME OF SOME OF THEIR SMALLER COURTS. DEKALB MAGISTRATE, OF COURSE, EASTPOINT AND CHAMBLEE AS WELL.

AND AS YOU CAN SEE, WE ARE FAR BEHIND WHAT OTHERS WERE PAYING AT 175 PER SESSION, WITH THE HIGHEST AMOUNT ON SOME OF THOSE BEING 4 TO 500, AND IT DEPENDED ON WHAT TYPE OF CALENDAR THEY WERE ON, WHETHER THEY GOT 400 OR 500.

AND THEN THERE ARE SOME THAT WERE JUST FLAT 500.

SO I DID LOOK AT WHAT THE DIFFERENCES WERE BETWEEN SOME OF THOSE WHEN I MADE THE RECOMMENDATION, WHICH IS STILL SLIGHTLY BELOW WHAT THEY HAVE.

AND THAT IS BECAUSE SOME OF THEM ONLY HAVE ONE CALENDAR A MONTH OR TWO CALENDARS A MONTH, OR THREE CALENDARS A MONTH.

SO TO ABSORB $500 PER SESSION MADE SENSE FOR THAT PARTICULAR JURISDICTION.

BUT WE HAVE ABOUT ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE, 6 TO 7 SESSIONS A WEEK.

SO AT THAT AMOUNT, I THOUGHT IT WOULD BE EXORBITANT, BUT I THOUGHT 300 PER SESSION FOR REGULAR CALENDAR WOULD BE APPROPRIATE, WITH 200 FOR THE JAIL CALENDARS, WHICH ARE SIMILARLY NORMALLY MUCH SMALLER THAN THE OTHER CALENDARS.

AND OF COURSE, TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE FACT THAT OUR JUDGES ACTUALLY HANDLE WARRANT CALLS AS WELL, BECAUSE WE STILL, EVEN THOUGH WE HAVE ELECTRONIC WARRANTS, WE STILL MAN OUR WARRANTS FOR THE CITY, FOR OUR LOCAL ORDINANCES AND THINGS WHERE THEY HAVE EMERGENCIES FOR 24 HOURS A DAY.

SO WE ARE GETTING CALLS 24 HOURS A DAY ON SOME OF THOSE THINGS.

AND SO WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE PROPER COVERAGE.

SO I PRESENTED IT TO YOU IN THAT FORM TO DETERMINE WHICH DIRECTION YOU ALL MIGHT WANT TO GO IN AS FAR AS COMPENSATION, BEFORE WE EVEN LOOKED AT WHETHER WE WERE POSTING FOR POSITIONS FOR THE ASSOCIATE JUDGES, SINCE THEY TERMED WHEN I TERMED.

SO WHAT'S YOUR RECOMMENDATION? MY RECOMMENDATION IS 300 PER SESSION, AND I THINK PER SESSION WILL ALLOW ME TO BE ABLE TO SPREAD THAT OUT EVEN DURING THE WEEK WITH CALLS. SO YOU MAY LOOK AND YOU SEE WHERE IT SAYS 800.

THAT IS BECAUSE I'M LOOKING AT, WELL, HOW MANY SESSIONS WOULD IT NORMALLY TAKE TO COVER THIS DURING THE WEEK.

AND I THINK THAT 300 PER SESSION WILL ALLOW ME THE LATITUDE TO KIND OF LOOK AND SEE WHAT THAT SESSION IS GOING TO LOOK LIKE.

AND TO BE ABLE TO COMPENSATE APPROPRIATELY. THAT WOULD PUT THEIR COMPENSATION FOR A DAY SLIGHTLY ABOVE WHAT I WOULD EARN A DAY.

BUT THAT, OF COURSE, THEY HAVE NO BENEFITS. THEY HAVE NONE OF THE OTHER ISSUES THAT YOU WOULD HAVE WITH HIRING SOMEBODY FULL TIME OR EVEN PART TIME IN THAT REGARD, BECAUSE THEY ONLY GET PAID WHEN THEY ACTUALLY WORK.

I DO THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE TO DO A A STIPEND, THE SAME AS WHAT THEY HAVE IN COLLEGE PARK, BECAUSE IT BASICALLY SAYS, WE APPRECIATE YOUR SERVICE.

WE THANK YOU FOR BEING ON CALL, AND WE THANK YOU FOR BACKING UP THE JUDGE IN THE EVENT THAT SHE'S IN COURT AND CAN'T GET TO SOMETHING, THAT YOU ARE BACK UP FOR THAT PURPOSE.

AND THE JUDGES THAT WE HAVE HAVE BEEN DOING THAT EVEN AT THE COMPENSATION THAT WE HAVE BEEN PAYING THEM, IT DOES MAKE IT A LITTLE BIT MORE DIFFICULT, BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY IF THEY HAVE OTHER OPTIONS, THEY TAKE THOSE OTHER OPTIONS FIRST. AND THEN WE CERTAINLY ARE ON THE BACK BURNER FOR THAT.

I THINK THIS WOULD MAKE US A LOT MORE COMPETITIVE IN THAT REGARD, BECAUSE THEY KNOW WE HAVE MORE THAN ONE SESSION PER DAY, SO IT WOULDN'T BE TREATED AS IT WOULD BE IN COLLEGE PARK OR SOME OF THE OTHER CITIES WHERE THEY ONLY HAVE ONE SESSION PER DAY WHEN WE HAVE 2 TO 3.

THE STIPEND. WHAT DO YOU MEAN? IS THAT DIFFERENT THAN THE WHEN YOU SAID YOU THINK THEY SHOULD HAVE A STIPEND, ARE YOU REFERRING TO THAT AS A 300 PER SESSION? SO RIGHT NOW WE HAVE A STIPEND. IT'S 150, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN.

[03:50:04]

WHEN I STARTED, IT WAS $75. THAT BACKUP, THAT 150 IS BASICALLY JUST SAYING THAT YOU'LL BE THERE TO BE SUPPORTIVE.

IT'S I DON'T KNOW WHY THEY STARTED IT, BUT IT'S ALWAYS BEEN THERE AS A STIPEND.

SO IF THE CITY DECIDES TO CONTINUE WITH THE STIPEND, I'M SUGGESTING THAT IT BE MORE THAN THE 175 OR 150 TO THE 300, WHICH BASICALLY SAYS, I AM HERE WORKING FOR YOU, I'M COMMITTED TO YOU, AND I'M COMMITTED TO RESPONDING IN THE EVENT THAT THERE'S AN EMERGENCY BECAUSE OFTENTIMES IF I'M IN COURT AND SOMEONE NEEDS SOMETHING THAT'S EMERGENT AND THEY CAN'T GET TO ME, THEY CAN GET TO ONE OF THE ASSOCIATE JUDGES. THEY'RE NOT GETTING PAID PER SESSION FOR THAT.

THERE'S NO ADDITIONAL INCOME THAT COMES TO THEM FOR PICKING UP THE PHONE AND ANSWERING THE CALL OF AN OFFICER AT THIS STAGE THAT WE DON'T PAY PER CALL, WE DON'T DO THAT. SO YOU'RE RECOMMENDING $300 STIPEND PER MONTH? THAT'S CORRECT. $300 PER SESSION? THAT'S CORRECT.

YOU SAID $200 FOR JAIL OR SOMETHING. BECAUSE WE HAVE A CALENDAR THAT IS AN INMATE CALENDAR THAT DOES NOT TAKE UP NEARLY AS MUCH TIME AS THE OTHER CALENDARS TAKE UP, BUT THEY ARE STILL SETTING ASIDE THAT DAY. SO I NORMALLY WOULD.

WE NORMALLY WOULD DO IS PAY LESS FOR THAT SESSION THAN WE WOULD FOR THE OTHERS, SO IT WOULD BE UP TO COUNCIL TO DECIDE IF YOU WANT TO DO JUST A FLAT ACROSS THE BOARD PER SESSION, IT WOULD MAKE IT EASIER, I'M SURE, ON HUMAN RESOURCES NOT TO HAVE TO ADD AN ADDITIONAL CODE.

WHEN I INITIALLY STARTED, WE WERE PAID $75 FOR INMATE CALENDARS AND $150 FOR ALL THE REST OF THE CALENDARS PER SESSION.

AND SO I WAS TRENDING TOWARDS WHAT IS TRADITIONALLY ALREADY BEEN DONE.

BUT WE ARE HERE AT THIS TIME CERTAINLY CAN MAKE CHANGES IN WHATEVER THE COUNCIL DESIRES, I THINK WOULD BE APPROPRIATE.

THE EASIEST THING, I THINK FOR THE COURT AS WELL AS FOR HUMAN RESOURCES, WOULD PROBABLY BE THE FLAT 300 STIPEND, 300 PER SESSION. AND THEN ALLOW ME TO MAKE THOSE DAYS WHAT THE SESSIONS ARE.

DOES THE INMATE CALENDAR, IS THERE A MORNING OR AFTERNOON SESSION OR JUST ONE SESSION FOR IT'S NORMALLY ONE SESSION.

IT CAN GO TO AN AFTERNOON, BUT RIGHT NOW WE'RE AVERAGING ANYWHERE FROM 5 TO 10 INMATES.

AND SO IT JUST DEPENDS ON HOW LONG THE NEGOTIATIONS TAKE WHEN THEY'RE GETTING INFORMED OF WHAT THEIR RIGHTS ARE, SPEAKING TO THE PUBLIC DEFENDER AND TRYING TO GET THOSE ISSUES RESOLVED.

BUT GENERALLY SPEAKING, IT IS ONLY GOING TO BE ONE SESSION PER DAY.

COUNCIL MEMBER REALLY? COUNCIL MEMBER MARTIN ROGERS.

THANK YOU. JUDGE. I JUST HAD A COUPLE QUESTIONS IN WHAT YOU PROVIDED TO US.

THERE'S ALSO A SECTION ON CALL OF 600 PER WEEK AND SO ON.

CAN YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT WHAT THAT. CERTAINLY. SO THE ON CALL, NORMALLY WHEN SOMEONE'S ON CALL THEY'RE ON CALL FROM 6 A.M., I MEAN 6 P.M. TO 6 A.M., 6 P.M. TO 11 WITH AUTOMATIC CALLS.

ANYTHING AFTER THAT IS NORMALLY GOING TO BE A DETECTIVE WITH AN EMERGENCY.

SO WHEN WE GET CALLS THAT SOMEONE'S OUT ON OUR LIVE ACTIVE SCENE, THEY DON'T HAVE TIME TO GO AND WAIT IN LINE BEHIND ELECTRONIC WARRANTS FOR A JUDGE TO GET TO THEM. AFTER THEY GET BEHIND 4 OR 5 OTHER PEOPLE, THEY'RE GOING TO IMMEDIATELY CALL ONE OF US.

SO AT THIS TIME, WHAT NORMALLY HAPPENS IS THEY'RE BEING PAID 175 PER SESSION, AND I COUNT THAT WEEK AS TWO SESSIONS.

SO THREE, WHATEVER THAT IS. AND THEN, OF COURSE, IF IT'S DURING THE DAY, IT'S FROM 6 A.M.

TO 6 P.M.. SO I'M ON CALL IN COURT AND ON CALL FROM 6 A.M.

TO 6 P.M.. AND SO I COVER EVERYTHING THAT'S IN THERE.

SO WHEN YOU SEE THE 800 THAT'S ASSUMING I'M ON VACATION AND IT'S SOMEBODY'S GOING TO HAVE TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CALLS, NOT JUST FROM THE OFFICER BUT FROM ANYTHING THAT HAPPENS.

ANY QUESTIONS THAT COME UP, ANY LEGAL ISSUES THAT COME UP.

IF I'M NOT AVAILABLE, THEY'LL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR HANDLING ALL OF THAT.

SO THE EASIEST WAY WOULD BE IF YOU HAVE A SET 300, IS TO SAY, OKAY, THIS WILL COVER HOW MANY SESSIONS WILL YOU GET PAID FOR THIS PARTICULAR INCREMENT. BECAUSE IT'S EASIER TO DO THAT THAN TO DO PER HOUR.

BECAUSE THERE'S NO WAY FOR ME TO COUNT HOW MANY HOURS YOU ACTUALLY WORKED WHEN YOU'RE ANSWERING CALLS, WARRANTS, AND SITTING IN COURT AND DOING ALL OF THAT.

SO THE PER SESSION WOULD GIVE ME THE LATITUDE TO LOOK AT WHAT'S HAPPENING ON A PARTICULAR DAY AND SAY, THIS IS WHAT THIS IS WORTH. THIS IS TWO SESSIONS VERSUS ONE SESSION.

AND SO THAT'S THE HARD PART ABOUT HOW WE DO THINGS THAT THE OTHER COURTS DON'T DO AT ALL.

THOSE JUDGES DON'T NORMALLY SIGN WARRANTS. THOSE THEY'RE NORMALLY JUST EITHER WAITING FOR THE COUNSEL OR WAITING FOR THE NEXT DAY BEFORE A JUDGE IS AVAILABLE.

SO WE WE, YOU KNOW, WE ARE AVAILABLE FOR THEM 24 HOURS A DAY.

OKAY. SO I GUESS MY QUESTION IS THE 600 FOR THE WEEK ON CALL.

[03:55:03]

THEY MAY OR MAY NOT. SO THERE MAY BE A DAY WHEN I HAVE TEN CALLS.

THEY SAY IF I'M ON FROM MONDAY TO FRIDAY, I MAY HAVE TEN CALLS.

I MAY HAVE NONE. THE ISSUE IS WE CAN'T PAY PER, WE CAN'T PAY PER WARRANT.

AND WE DON'T KNOW WHEN THAT AVAILABILITY IS GOING TO BE THERE.

SO THAT WOULD BE THE DIFFICULTY IN DOING LIKE HOW DO WE DO THAT? THE COUNTY PAYS THEIR ON CALL WHETHER THEY GET A CALL OR NOT, BUT THEY'RE ALWAYS GOING TO GET A CALL.

THEY GET PAID $83 AN HOUR AND THEY'RE ON FOR 6 TO 6 HOURS.

AND SO THAT'S GUARANTEED THAT THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE GETTING PAID JUST FOR THAT ONE SIX HOUR PERIOD.

THEY'RE GETTING $83 AN HOUR. NO. SO THE THING WAS TO SPREAD THAT TIME AWAY THROUGHOUT THE WEEK, REGARDLESS OF HOW MANY CALLS THEY GET. THERE'S NOT BEEN A TIME WHEN I'VE NOT GOTTEN CALLS, BUT I CERTAINLY DON'T HAVE A DAY WHEN I'VE GOTTEN 10 TO 15.

SO THAT'S THE DIFFICULTY IN MAKING A DETERMINATION ON HOW YOU WANT TO HANDLE ON CALL.

THE VAST MAJORITY OF ON CALL, YOU KNOW, MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY, OBVIOUSLY FROM 6 TO 6.

I HANDLE MYSELF. UNLESS I'M NOT, I'M ON VACATION OR I'M OUT.

AND THEN OF COURSE, THE CALL RIGHT NOW, 90% OF THAT I DO MYSELF UNTIL WE GET THINGS IN ORDER AND SITUATED ON HOW WE WANT TO MOVE FORWARD.

SO AGAIN, IT'S IT'S A RECOMMENDATION. AND THE RECOMMENDATION FOR THAT DOWN THERE IS JUST ME GIVING YOU SOME EXAMPLES OF WHAT CAN HAPPEN.

MY RECOMMENDATION IS TO 300 PER SESSION. BECAUSE THAT GIVES ME ROOM AND LATITUDE TO WORK ON WHAT A SESSION IS.

LIKE WE HAVE AN INMATE CALENDAR, WE HAVE A MORNING CALENDAR, WE HAVE AN AFTERNOON CALENDAR.

THOSE ARE SESSIONS IN MY MIND. THAT'S HOW I COUNT THEM.

SO ANYTIME THAT THERE'S A COURT SESSION GOING ON, THAT IS A SESSION.

THE QUESTION IS, WHAT DOES THAT SESSION LOOK LIKE WHEN YOU'RE ASKING SOMEONE TO SIGN WARRANTS? AND THERE'S NO GUARANTEE THAT THEY'RE GOING TO GET A CALL? I HOPE THAT ANSWERED THE QUESTION. KIND OF. I THINK IT'S ANSWERING THAT PART.

WHAT WOULD IT LOOK LIKE IF YOU'RE ON CALL IN TERMS OF WHAT I THINK IT SHOULD LOOK LIKE IS IF IT'S A WEEKEND.

I DON'T THINK IT SHOULD BE MORE THAN 300 FOR THE WEEKEND.

I JUST AVERAGED OUT WITH THE CALLS NORMALLY ARE.

I THINK THAT'S APPROPRIATE. THAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED A SESSION.

BUT IF I'M ASKING SOMEONE TO BE ON CALL FROM £0.06 TO 6 A.M.

ON A MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY, I WOULD LIKELY CALL THAT TWO SESSIONS AND IT WOULD BE 600.

BUT EACH ONE OF THOSE WOULD BE CONSIDERED HOW YOU WOULD COUNT THOSE SESSIONS, JUST BECAUSE OF THE LENGTH OF TIME THAT THEY WOULD BE ON CALL, THEY'D HAVE TO BE AVAILABLE. AND I'M OPEN FOR IF YOU HAVE SOME OTHER SUGGESTIONS ON HOW YOU THINK THAT MIGHT WORK, BECAUSE IT IS A VERY DIFFICULT ONE TO LOOK AT WHEN YOU'RE PAYING SOMEONE WHO MAY OR MAY NOT GET A CALL.

AND THEN JUST ONE LAST QUESTION ON THE MONTHLY STIPEND, IT LOOKS LIKE IN THE METRO AREA, ONLY COLLEGE PARK AND EASTPOINTE DO THIS PROVIDE A STIPEND. FROM WHAT I SAW, YES, THEY ARE THE ONLY TWO.

SO IT'S NOT THE NORM. IT'S NOT THE NORM. IT'S THE NORM FOR EACH POINT BECAUSE THEY'VE ALWAYS DONE IT, BUT IT'S NOT THE NORM ACCORDING TO WHAT OUR RESEARCH HAS METED OUT.

OKAY. BUT IT'S YOUR FEELING THAT DESPITE THAT, WE SHOULD CONTINUE THE PRACTICE.

I THINK IT WOULD BE A GOOD SUGGESTION ONLY BECAUSE I KNOW THAT THEY BACK UP WHEN THINGS ARE HAPPENING.

IF YOU CAN'T REACH ONE, YOU CAN REACH SOMEONE ELSE.

BUT INCREASING THE AMOUNT THAT THEY ARE RECEIVING, I THINK WOULD BE MORE BENEFICIAL THAN THE STIPEND.

SO WE COULD SWITCH ONE FOR THE OTHER? I THINK SO.

I THINK IT WOULD BE MORE BENEFICIAL THAN THE STIPEND IF YOU IF YOU WERE TO ASK ME.

THAT'S WHAT I THINK. THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER.

THANK YOU. AND I GUESS MY QUESTION WAS JUST MAKING SURE THAT WHAT YOU PROVIDED IS COMPARABLE TO OTHER JURISDICTIONS LIKE OURS OR MUNICIPALITY OR COURT SYSTEMS LIKE OURS.

YES IT WAS. AND IN FACT, WE WENT A LITTLE FURTHER OUT JUST TO MAKE SURE.

OKAY. MOST OF THE COURTS AND THE REASON WHY YOU SEE THAT I CAME DOWN A LITTLE BIT LOWER IS THAT I TOOK INTO CONSIDERATION THAT WE HAVE MORE CALENDARS THAN THEY HAVE.

OKAY. RIGHT. AND SO AT $500 PER SESSION, I THINK IT WOULD JUST BE VERY DIFFICULT FOR US TO MAINTAIN THAT ECONOMICALLY WHEN WE HAVE AS MANY CALENDARS AS WE HAVE DURING THE WEEK VERSUS SOMEBODY WHO ONLY HAS 1 OR 2.

AND WE HAVE ACTUALLY 5 TO 7. OKAY. AND THEN MY FOLLOW UP QUESTION IS DID YOU LEAVE ROOM MORE FOR CONSIDERATION FOR ADDITION.

DID YOU LEAVE ROOM OR CONSIDERATIONS FOR ADDITIONAL STIPENDS.

[04:00:02]

SO IN THE BUDGET, UNEXPECTED THINGS CERTAINLY OCCUR.

NO WORRIES. I APOLOGIZE FOR INTERRUPTING. I'M HAVING A HARD TIME HEARING YOU.

IN THE BUDGET, THERE IS ALREADY SOME ROOM FOR IF WE HAVE CONFLICTS FOR JUDGES THAT ARE NOT NECESSARILY ON OUR ROSTER, BUT WE NEED TO CALL SOMEONE IN BECAUSE WE CAN'T HEAR THE CASE.

YOU KNOW, GOD FORBID IT'S ONE OF YOU ALL. WE CAN'T HEAR THAT CASE. WE HAVE TO GET SOMEONE ELSE TO HEAR THAT.

OR IF IT'S A CONFLICT AND I PERSONALLY CAN'T HEAR IT, AND EVERYBODY ELSE IS KIND OF RECUSED FROM IT.

THERE IS SOMETHING IN PLACE FOR EMERGENCIES LIKE THAT THAT IS TOTALLY SEPARATE AND THAT IS BY VENDORS.

SO BASICALLY THAT MEANS THAT WE HAD TO CALL SOMEBODY IT'S AN EMERGENCY AND THEY HAVE TO ACTUALLY SEND IN AN INVOICE TO BE PAID THAT'S NOT OUT OF PAYROLL. SO WE HAVE THAT SET ASIDE ALREADY IN THE BUDGET.

WHEN I LOOKED AT THIS BUDGET FOR THIS PARTICULAR INCREASE, I LOOKED AT HOW MANY DAYS I NORMALLY HAVE THAT I'M LEGALLY SCHEDULED OFF. AND WHEN I SAY LEGALLY, I MEAN HOW MUCH I EARN WITH THE PERSONAL DAYS ARE.

AND I ADDED THOSE DAYS UP AND I MADE SURE, OKAY, ARE THESE DAYS COVERED? AND THEN I LOOKED AT IT AND SAID, OKAY, HOW MANY DAYS DO WE NEED COVERAGE IN? PARTICULARLY IF SOMETHING HAPPENED TO ME AND I WAS GONE FOR THE WHOLE YEAR, WHAT WOULD IT TAKE TO RUN THE COURT? AND SO THAT IS HOW I WAS ABLE TO COME UP WITH THAT AMOUNT AND KNOW THAT THIS SHOULD BE ENOUGH FOR YOU ALL TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT IN THE EVENT THAT SOMETHING WERE TO HAPPEN AND THERE WAS AN EMERGENCY.

AND SO I TOOK ALL OF THAT INTO CONSIDERATION.

I THINK FROM WHERE WE ARE AND WHERE WE STAND RIGHT NOW, WHAT WE HAVE BUDGETED IS SUFFICIENT FOR THAT IF WE MAINTAIN THREE ASSOCIATE JUDGES, IF YOU WANTED MORE THAN THREE ASSOCIATE JUDGES, THEN OF COURSE WE'D HAVE TO ADJUST THE BUDGET BECAUSE I DID THIS, NOT THESE NUMBERS TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT THAT THINGS ARE AS THEY ARE NOW.

SO WHEN WE SAY ASSOCIATE JUDGES, THOSE ARE PEOPLE THAT WE HAVE IN OUR SYSTEM THAT ARE BEING PAID FOR THIS SERVICE, AND THEN YOU ALSO WILL HAVE THOSE THAT MAY BE PRO HAC WHO ARE ONLY WORKING IN THE EVENT THAT THEY ARE NEEDED, WHICH IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT. THOSE ARE YOUR EMERGENCIES.

LIKE, I WOULD ALWAYS WANT TO KEEP SOMEONE ON THIS, A MAGISTRATE, BECAUSE IF YOU HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THE POLICE AND THEY NEED A MAGISTRATE, IF ONE OF OUR ASSOCIATES IS A MAGISTRATE, THEY CAN SIGN MAGISTRATE WARRANTS, WHEREAS A MUNICIPAL COURT JUDGE CAN'T SIGN CERTAIN WARRANTS, CERTAIN SEARCH WARRANTS, MUNICIPAL JUDGE CAN'T DO IT. SO IT KIND OF GIVES US ROOM FOR THAT.

AND I THINK AND YOU ASKED ABOUT THE TRAINING COMPONENT WHEN WE DID THE BUDGET FOR THE TRAINING.

WE, WE WE PUT IN TRAINING AND TRAVEL. WE PUT ALL OF THAT ALREADY IN THE BUDGET TO ACCOUNT FOR THE NEED FOR THE TRAINING, FOR THE JUDGES FOR THEIR TRAVEL. AND ALL OF THAT IS ALREADY IN THE BUDGET.

SO IT'S NOT A CHANGE IN ANYTHING OR BUDGETARY FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE.

COUNCIL MEMBER. YES. CHIEF JUDGE I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT MOST OF MY QUESTIONS, IF NOT ALL, THEY'VE BEEN ANSWERED BY THE QUESTIONS OF MY COLLEAGUES.

AND SO I'LL JUST SAY THAT I APPRECIATE YOUR THOUGHT LEADERSHIP ON THIS.

IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU'VE THOUGHT ABOUT THE MAGISTRATES, YOU'VE THOUGHT ABOUT THE AD HOC, THE ASSOCIATES AND ALL OF THAT AND WHAT IT WOULD COST.

SO I THINK ALL OF MY QUESTIONS HAVE BEEN ANSWERED.

AND YOUR RECOMMENDATION IN TERMS OF THE FLAT FEE, I THINK I HEAR YOU LOUD AND CLEAR ON THAT, AND IT WILL GIVE YOU LATITUDE TO BE ABLE TO RUN THE COURT EFFICIENTLY. SO THANK YOU.

THANK YOU SO MUCH. SO THE THERE WAS DISCUSSION ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THE 300 PROCESSION, BECAUSE THERE'S AN INCREASE ON THAT WOULD TAKE AWAY THE STIPEND OR THE $300 PER MONTH STIPEND WITH THE 300 PROCESSION.

SO WHICH DOES COUNCIL WANT TO DO? AND I THINK WE CAN DO THIS IF COUNCIL AGREES OR THERE'S CONSENSUS TONIGHT, WE CAN PUT IT ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, RIGHT. MADAM ATTORNEY WIGGINS.

SO DO WE WANT TO DO THE. 300, INCREASE THE STIPEND FROM ONE 5175 TO 300 PER MONTH, PLUS THE 300 PER SESSION. THAT'S OPTION ONE.

THE 300 PER SESSION. SO STIPEND AND SESSION. ANY OBJECTION TO STIPEND, 300 STIPEND AND 300 PER SESSION. COUNCILOR. I WOULD, AS IT'S NOT DOES NOT SEEM TO BE THE NORM.

I MEAN, I WOULD PREFER THAT WE PROVIDE COMPETITIVE, YOU KNOW, WAGES, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT WE NECESSARILY NEED TO BE AN OUTLIER.

[04:05:02]

THREE. MAINTAIN STIPEND AS IS AND 300 PER SESSION, OR JUST 300 PER SESSION. SO. COUNCIL MEMBER ZIEGLER. YEAH.

I'M GONNA GO DOWN THE LINE BECAUSE WE GOT THREE OPTIONS.

I COULD EITHER STRAW POLL ALL THREE, OR I JUST GO DOWN THE LINE AND GET EVERYBODY'S THOUGHTS AND FIGURE IT OUT.

I, I HEAR COUNCILPERSON RIDLEY'S POINT IN THAT WE'RE THE OUTLIER, KIND OF, YOU KNOW, WITH THE WITH THE ADDITIONAL AND SO MAYBE IT WOULD MAKE SENSE TO NOT HAVE THAT.

DO YOU? OH, I HAVE THE STIPEND AND JUST 300 PER SESSION.

YEAH, OKAY. COUNCIL MEMBER MARTIN ROGERS. $300 STIPEND PER MONTH AND $300 SESSION, $175 STIPEND PER MONTH AND $300 PER SESSION. OR JUST $300 PER SESSION. WHAT DO YOU SUGGEST? SO, IF YOU ASK ME, WHAT I SUGGEST IS THAT HEARING COUNCIL MEMBERS FREELY, FREELY SAY LEAVE IT AS IS, I WOULD SAY, BECAUSE YOU HAVE AT LEAST TWO JUDGES WHO ARE ALREADY RECEIVING THAT.

MAYBE LEAVE IT AS IS AND JUST ADD THE 300. I THINK THAT MIGHT BE.

UNLESS, OF COURSE, REMEMBER, YOU ALL ARE SUBJECT AT THIS TIME TO REAPPOINT.

AND SO YOU'RE STARTING FROM SCRATCH AT THIS POINT WITH NEW JUDGES WHEN YOU DECIDE WHO YOU WANT TO REAPPOINT TO THE BENCH.

SO JUDGE'S RECOMMENDATION IS KEEP THE STIPEND AS IT IS IN 300 PER SESSION.

ANY OBJECTION TO THAT? COUNCIL MEMBER MITCHELL.

SO I THOUGHT THE ORIGINAL QUESTION WAS WAS THIS GOING ON CONSENT AGENDA? SO I'M DOING A POLL NOW TO SEE IF WE CAN GET TO CONSENT.

IF WE CAN'T GET TO CONSENT, IT'LL GO ON THE AGENDA AND THE DECISION WILL BE MADE.

OKAY. SO I THINK WE ALREADY HAVE TWO OTHER OPTIONS IN PLAY RIGHT NOW.

OR IS IT ONE OTHER OPTION? SO THERE WERE THREE, BUT JUDGE OLIVER JUST MADE A RECOMMENDATION OF KEEPING THE STIPEND THE SAME AT LIKE 175 AND $300 PER SESSION. SO NOW WE'RE CONSIDERING THAT ONE.

OKAY. SO I JUST THINK IT WOULD JUST BE IT SOUNDS LIKE IT'S GOING TO BE A HEARTY DISCUSSION ONCE IT IS PUT ON THE AGENDA, OR PEOPLE CAN HAVE TIME IN BETWEEN TO SEE IF WE CAN GET SOME TYPE OF CONSENSUS.

THAT'S FINE. IF WE DON'T GET TO FIVE TONIGHT, IT WILL GO TO THE REGULAR AGENDA VERSUS CONSENSUS.

SO COUNCIL AND MAYOR, I THINK. I'M SORRY. THE ONLY REASON I SAY THAT IS BECAUSE YOU DO HAVE TWO THAT ARE ALREADY RECEIVING SUCH. AND SO IF YOU DECIDED TO KEEP THOSE TWO, YOU WOULD BE TAKING AWAY THE STIPEND WHICH YOU'VE BEEN DOING NOW FOR THE PAST TEN YEARS FOR THOSE TWO. BUT KNOWING AND RECOGNIZING THAT IF YOU BRING ON ANOTHER OR DECIDE THAT YOU WANT TO CHANGE THAT, YOU WOULD THEN BE LOCKED INTO THAT. SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU ALL KNEW THAT YOU STILL, AT THIS TIME, CURRENTLY HAVE TWO THAT ARE RECEIVING THE STIPEND OF THE 175 COUNCIL MEMBER SHROPSHIRE.

THANK YOU. SO, JUST SO I CAN GET CLARITY ON WHAT WE'RE DOING.

SO WE HAVE THE JUDGES. WE WE ARE TRYING TO COMPENSATE THEM FOR THEIR TIME AND THE AMOUNT.

SO YOU WANT TO LEAVE IT AT 150? I THOUGHT IT WAS 300 FOR AND THEN THREE.

NO. NO, MA'AM, I THINK YOU MAY HAVE STEPPED OUT WHEN WE WERE TALKING ABOUT IT.

RIGHT NOW, THE CITY PAYS 175 PER JUDGE PER MONTH AS A JUST A STIPEND.

I DON'T KNOW WHERE IT STARTED. IT JUST HAS BEEN THERE FOREVER, BASICALLY.

AND SO WHAT I'M ASKING YOU TO CHANGE IS WHAT THEY MAKE.

PROCESSION, WHICH IS THE 300. AND SO COUNCIL MEMBER FREELY.

AND I WERE HAVING A DISCUSSION HERE ABOUT WHETHER IT SHOULD BE A FLAT, BECAUSE WE IN COLLEGE PARK ARE THE ONLY ONES THAT PAY A STIPEND.

AND SO THE QUESTION BECAME, WELL, SHOULD WE JUST DO FLAT AND STOP PAYING THE STIPEND, SINCE THERE ARE ONLY TWO OF ALL OF THESE CITIES THAT ACTUALLY DO THAT? SHOULD WE KEEP THE STIPEND AS IS, OR SHOULD WE MAKE IT 300 ACROSS THE BOARD? AND SO THAT WAS A DISCUSSION THAT WAS BEING HAD.

SO IT'LL BE 300 PER SESSION INSTEAD OF 175 PER MONTH.

YES, MA'AM. SO IT'S THREE. NO, NO, NO, THE STIPEND IS THE STIPEND.

LET'S JUST ASSUME THAT I SAY SO. THEY'LL STILL GET THE.

TO. THEY'LL STILL GET THE 175. YES. THAT'S CORRECT.

AND THEN THEY'LL GET THE AND THEN $300 PER SESSION.

[04:10:03]

AND I WAS EXPLAINING THAT, YOU KNOW, THEY ARE THE ONES THAT WILL PICK UP AND CALL, CALL BACK OR EMERGENCY IF I'M NOT AVAILABLE.

AND THAT'S NOT CONSIDERED A SESSION. OKAY. BUT WITH RESPECT WITH, WITH COUNCIL MEMBER FREELY INDICATED.

IS THAT, WELL, ARE WE PAYING PEOPLE TO DO NOTHING? AND I WAS EXPLAINING WHAT THEY ACTUALLY DO. AND SO THE QUESTION BECAME, DO WE WANT TO RAISE THAT? AND I BELIEVE AT THIS TIME THAT IT'S NOT GOING TO BE RAISED.

SO THE QUESTION REALLY IS ARE WE GOING TO CONTINUE TO PAY THE 175 STIPEND PLUS $300 PER SESSION, OR ARE WE ONLY GOING TO PAY 300 PER SESSION? THAT SOUNDS LIKE WHAT IT CAME TO.

I WOULD RATHER PAY THEM 175 STIPEND PLUS THE 300, BECAUSE IF YOU LOOK AT IT, THEY'RE NOT.

THEY'RE NOT GETTING PAID TO DO NOTHING. THEY'RE STILL ON CALL.

AND THIS WOULD BE IF THEY'RE ON CALL, THAT WOULD BE IN THE EVENT THAT I AM NOT AVAILABLE, WHICH IS DIFFERENT THAN AN ON CALL.

EXACTLY. SO IF YOU'RE NOT AVAILABLE, THEN THEY WOULD STILL GET THE 175 STIPEND.

AND THAT'S JUST MONTHLY. SO FOR EXAMPLE, LET'S SAY I'M IN COURT AND I'M ON A TRIAL AND THERE'S SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO BE HANDLED IMMEDIATELY.

THEN THEY'RE AVAILABLE TO TAKE CARE OF THAT. EXACTLY.

BUT IT'S NOT GOING TO BE YOU'RE GOING TO GET $300 FOR THIS.

NO. THAT IS ENCOMPASSED IN THAT 175 THAT SAYS YOU'RE HERE.

AND SO I UNDERSTAND ALL OF THE POSITIONS. I JUST SO HAVE TO LEAVE IT WITH YOU ALL.

IS IT IS THE 175 THE STIPEND THAT IS THE STIPEND THAT YOU ALL PAY.

THAT'S IF THEY'RE ON CALL. THAT'S PERIOD. SO THEY GET PAID 175 PERIOD.

PERIOD. OKAY. THAT'S THE WAY YOU ALL HAVE IT SET UP NOW.

AND IT'S BEEN LIKE THAT. IT HAS. IT WENT FROM $75 TO 175.

SO THAT'S WHERE YOU ALL HAVE BEEN. YEAH. OKAY.

IT'S 150. IT'S 150. OKAY. SO IT'S 150. OKAY. PLUS $300 PER SESSION.

PER SESSION. AND THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE RECOMMENDING.

I'M RECOMMENDING THAT WE PAY THE $300 FOR THE PER SESSION.

AND THAT THE 150. IF YOU'RE INCLINED TO KEEP A STIPEND, THAT THAT IS WHAT YOU KEEP.

BECAUSE WE HAVE JUDGES WHO ARE ALREADY RECEIVING IT.

OKAY. THAT IS MY ONLY RATIONALE FOR IT. BECAUSE HERE'S WHAT WHAT WHAT WOULD HAPPEN? WE WILL STILL BE IN THE SITUATION WHERE WE ARE IN, IN TRYING TO GET SOMEONE.

AND IF THEY'RE ALREADY IF THEY ALREADY HAVE SOMETHING IN PLACE, THEN YOU NEED THEM.

WE'RE THE LAST CHOICE. I THINK THAT GOING TO THE 300 HELPS US WITH THAT.

AT. OKAY. I THINK THAT THAT THAT HELPS US TREMENDOUSLY.

WITH THAT, TO BE VERY HONEST WITH YOU. OKAY. WHETHER YOU DO THE STIPEND OR NOT, THAT WILL HELP.

RIGHT? BECAUSE WE'RE AT 175 AND EVERYBODY ELSE IS AT 400 TO 500.

SO I THINK THE 300 WILL HELP US TREMENDOUSLY IN MAKING SURE THAT WE HAVE COVERAGE SESSIONS.

NORMALLY WE HAVE 2 TO 3 SESSIONS A DAY. SO THAT THREE SESSIONS.

SO THAT'S ABOUT A THOUSAND. YEAH. SO I THINK THERE'S I DON'T THINK ANYBODY'S GOING TO RUN AWAY FROM US WITH THAT.

OKAY. OKAY I SEE IT OKAY. WELL, WHATEVER YOU SUGGEST I'M FINE WITH.

ALRIGHT. YES. THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. YES, CHIEF JUDGE, I, I ALSO WILL AGREE TO THE $300 PER SESSION AND THE THE STIPEND AS IT STANDS TODAY. AND ALTHOUGH IT SOUNDS LIKE EAST POINT AND COLLEGE PARK ARE DOING THAT AS OUTLIERS, BUT WE'VE ALSO BEEN AN OUTLIER FOR SO LONG. WE'VE PAID SO LITTLE FOR SO LONG.

AND SO I THINK WE DEFINITELY NEED TO BE COMPETITIVE.

AND I THINK TO TAKE THE STIPEND AWAY, EVEN IF WE INCREASE THE AMOUNT PER SESSION, IT REALLY JUST BRINGS THE PRICE DOWN THAT WE'RE PAYING OR THE RATE THAT WE'RE PAYING THE JUDGES. AGAIN. SO I CAN AGREE WITH THE 300 PER SESSION AND KEEP THE STIPEND AT 150.

ALL RIGHT. AND THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER, FREELY.

THAT'S THE ONE PART OF THE BUDGET THAT I DON'T SEE.

IT'S IN THE PAYROLL. SO IT DOESN'T IT'S NEVER BEEN SEEN ON OUR SIDE.

THE 150 HASN'T. OKAY. ANY OBJECTION TO THIS GOING ON? CONSENT AT 150. STIPEND PER MONTH AND $300 PER SESSION.

BUT CAN WE JUST VERIFY IT IS 150 AND THAT 175? BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO BE WHERE WE HAVE TO MAKE AN AMENDMENT.

I THOUGHT IT JUST OKAY, LET'S PUT IT ON THE AGENDA.

MR. ABBOTT SAYS IT'S ONE THING TO SAY SOMETIME ON MONDAY BECAUSE WE ARE SPENDING, SHE CONFIRMED.

SHE SAID IT'S 150. I'M GOOD. IT'S CONSENT. I'M GOOD.

COUNCIL MEMBER. MITCHELL, ARE YOU OBJECTING TO IT GOING ON? CONSENT. OKAY. AGENDA. AGENDA. AGENDA. MADAM.

DEPUTY CITY CLERK. WHAT NUMBER ARE WE ON? TEN.

PLACE IT ON THE AGENDA, PLEASE. THANK YOU. JUDGE. THANK YOU.

[04:15:03]

COUNCIL DISCUSSION AND APPROVAL OF ASSOCIATED ASSOCIATE JUDGES.

COMPENSATION OF 150 PER MONTH AND $300 PER SESSION.

IF WE CAN HAVE THAT WRITTEN OUT. JUST SO WE'RE CLEAR.

LET'S GO TO. THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. THANK YOU.

MR. DOHRMANN, ARE YOU HERE FOR 11 OR 12? FLEET SERVICES.

[Item IV.11. Surplus Auction Auction And/Or Salvage of Surplus Vehicles]

YES, MA'AM. OKAY, COME ON UP.

ITEM NUMBER 11. SURPLUS AUCTION. AUCTION AND SALVAGE OF SURPLUS VEHICLES.

YES, MA'AM. CAN YOU EXPLAIN THIS ITEM? WELL, WE HAVE ABOUT 51 VEHICLES THAT NEED TO BE AUCTIONED AND OR SALVAGED.

WE'VE GOT A FEW WRECKED VEHICLES, AND SOME OF THE VEHICLES ARE JUST PAST THEIR TIME OF BEING SERVICEABLE IN THE FLEET.

SO THEY NEED TO BE AUCTIONED OFF OR THEY NEED TO BE SALVAGED.

WHAT TYPES OF VEHICLES? PASSENGER VEHICLES AND MOSTLY PASSENGER VEHICLES AND OR WORK TRUCKS.

AND WE HAVE A LOT OF WRECKED POLICE CARS. WRECKED POLICE CARS? WHEN YOU SAY PASSENGER VEHICLES, WHAT DO YOU MEAN, LIKE CARS? JUST CARS. YEAH, IT'S A FEW FOUR DOOR SEDANS, AND IT'S REALLY MOSTLY WORK TRUCKS AND POLICE SEDANS.

I PROVIDED A LIST ON THE MINUTE TRACK AS WELL OF THE VEHICLES THAT ARE UP FOR AUCTION.

DO WE HAVE ANY FIRE TRUCKS THAT ARE PART OF SURPLUS? NOT. NO. NOT CURRENTLY. NOT THIS TIME. TRUCKS? IT'S A FEW SANITATION TRUCKS. YES. SO THE REASON I'VE ASKED IN DISCUSSIONS THAT I'VE HAD WITH PEOPLE FROM VARIOUS COUNTRIES, SURPLUS VEHICLES MIGHT BE A WAY TO HELP SUPPORT OTHER MUNICIPALITIES THAT ARE IN OTHER COUNTRIES WHO HAVE NEED OF CERTAIN TYPES OF VEHICLES.

SO WHAT'S OUR SURPLUS PROCESS? AS OF RIGHT NOW, WE'RE WE'RE USING GOV DEALS.COM.

SO IT IS AVAILABLE PUBLIC PUBLIC OPTION BUT IT IS GOV DEALS.COM.

SO IT'S PRETTY MUCH NATIONWIDE. THAT WE AUCTION THE VEHICLES OFF.

SO IT'S JUST MORE THAN LOCAL SO ANYBODY CAN GO TO.

WE'VE HAD A FEW PEOPLE FROM NORTHERN NEW YORK AS FAR AS CALIFORNIA PURCHASED VEHICLES FROM THE CITY.

AND IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN THE FIRE DEPARTMENT DID HAVE A GENTLEMAN COME OUT LAST MONTH TO LOOK AT AN OLDER TOWER THAT WE HAVE.

SO INSTEAD OF AUCTIONING IT OFF, I THINK THEY WERE TRYING TO WORK IT OUT WHERE THEY COULD DONATE IT TO THEIR CITY FOR A DOLLAR, I THINK, OR SOMETHING. THEY WERE WORKING ON SOMETHING LIKE THAT BECAUSE WE DO HAVE A FEW, LET ME JUST SAY TWO PARTICULAR UNITS THAT NEED THAT HAVE BEEN SITTING AND HAVING AUCTIONED OFF, AND INSTEAD OF REALLY AUCTION THEM OFF AND GETTING RID OF THEM, WE FEEL THEY COULD SERVICE ANOTHER MUNICIPALITY.

SO FIRE. YES. THAT'S CORRECT.

SO. YOU'RE ASKING ME TO APPROVE THIS LIST FOR SERVER PLUS VEHICLES? APPROVE THE LIST THAT'S ATTACHED TO THE AGENDA? YES, MA'AM. IT HAS TO GO BEFORE YOU ALL TO APPROVE IT.

BEFORE I PUT IT ON THE GOV DEALS AND THEY OPEN IT UP TO THE PUBLIC FOR SALE.

ANY OBJECTIONS? CONSENT. THE NEXT ITEM IS A CHANGE ORDER FOR

[Item IV.12. Council Approval of Change Order, in the Amount of $180,000, for Campbell Oil Fuel Contract (Change Order #1), to Cover Fuel Cost, for the Remainder of the Fiscal Year.]

THE CONTRACT? WELL, NOT THE CONTRACT. OUR LINE ITEM IS PRETTY MUCH DEPLETED, AND WE JUST NEED TO ADD THIS MONEY TO TAKE CARE OF SOME PAST DUE INVOICES AND FINISH UP THE THIS FISCAL YEAR. THE. WHEN YOU SAY A CHANGE ORDER, WE DO A SOLICITATION TO BID OUT.

BID THIS OUT. YES, MA'AM. THIS CAMPBELL OIL HAD A CONTRACT SINCE 2020.

[04:20:02]

SO WHEN DOES THE CONTRACT EXPIRE? SEPTEMBER OF THIS YEAR.

SEPTEMBER OF THIS YEAR. IT'S ABOUT TO GO OUT.

BACK OUT FOR SOLICITATION. YES, MA'AM. IT IS.

AND. AND SINCE THEN IT'S IT'S BEEN ABOUT FIVE OIL COMPANIES THAT HAVE BEEN ON THE STATE CONTRACT FOR FUEL.

DURING THE TIME THAT WE STARTED THIS CONTRACT, THEY WERE NOT THERE.

AND WHEN YOU LOOK ON THE THE STATE CONTRACT WEBSITE, THEY ARE ONLY LISTED AS 2024 IN STARTING FOR THE FUEL CONTRACT, SO WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO FIND SOMEONE ON STATE CONTRACT FOR FUEL BID.

ANY QUESTIONS? COUNCIL MEMBER YES, THANK YOU SO MUCH.

SO THIS INCREASE FOR $180,000, THAT'S FOR THE FLEET JUST FUELING THE FLEET FOR THE REST OF THE FISCAL YEAR.

YES, SIR. THAT SHOULD THAT SHOULD GET US THROUGH THE END OF JUNE.

OKAY, SO WE'RE SPENDING ALMOST $100,000. OH, NO.

WE'RE SPENDING WAY MORE THAN $100,000. BUT THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GOING FOR.

BECAUSE IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ALL OF JUNE AND NOT QUITE OR A LITTLE MORE THAN HALF OF MAY, SO THE FLEET SIZE IS INCREASED AND THE TAKE HOME PROGRAM AND WITH THE SIZE OF THE FLEET INCREASING AND THE TAKE HOME PROGRAM, OUR FUEL CONSUMPTION HAS RISEN AND THE FEW AND THE PRICE OF FUEL HAS RISEN.

SO OUR CONSUMPTION AND THE WHAT WE PAY FOR FUEL HAS CAUSED OUR PRICES TO GO UP.

SO WE WE HAVE THREE 10,000 GALLON TANKS IN THE CITY.

WE'RE LOOKING AT $20,000, 19 TO $20,000 PER TANK AND FILLING IT UP AT 7500 GALLONS EVERY TIME I ORDER.

THAT'S MAYBE THAT'S JUST GASOLINE. DIESEL IS A LITTLE CHEAPER, BUT THAT'S GASOLINE.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. BUT I THINK YOU ALSO ANSWERED THE QUESTION IS THE INCREASE IN FLEET, THE INCREASE IN PETROLEUM, AND THEN THE TAKE HOME? YES. SO THOSE THREE THINGS ARE IMPACTING THIS.

YES, SIR. IT REDUCED MAINTENANCE, BUT IT INCREASED THE FUEL.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. PLANNING AND ZONING. THE FINAL PLAT FOR CREEKSIDE SUBDIVISION

[Item IV.13. Ratification of Final Plat for Creekside Subdivision CONSENT AGENDA]

GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. JEFFRIES, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS.

AND KIM WITH SMITH, WITH OUR PLANNING AND ZONING.

WE'RE PARTNERING ON THIS ONE. WE WERE DOING A FINAL PLAT FOR THIS BASED ON THE FACT THAT THE SUBDIVISION ONCE THEY DO, THEY SUBDIVIDE OTHER LOTS. THEY'RE ABLE TO GET PERMITS TO DO, BUILDING ON.

BUT IN THIS CASE, WE WOULD WE WOULD BRING IN THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL.

BUT AS OF TODAY, THERE WERE A COUPLE LITTLE SMALLER ITEMS THAT THIS DEVELOPER DIDN'T TAKE CARE OF.

ONE BASED ON A NEIGHBORING SUBDIVISION WHERE THEY DID SOME DAMAGE.

THEY HADN'T DONE THE REPAIRS, SO WE'RE NOT LOOKING TO HAVE IT GO TO CONSENT.

SO ARE YOU LOOKING TO HAVE IT NOT GO TO THE AGENDA? YES, MA'AM. DO YOU WANT TO PULL IT UNTIL LATER? YES, MA'AM. AND DID IT? WAS IT INDICATES CONSENT? IS THIS SOMETHING THAT HAS TO GO TO CONSENT? WHY DOES IT SAY CONSENT AGENDA? WELL, I THINK THAT'S JUST A PROCESS THAT THEY WERE IN THE PROCESS OF TRYING TO GET PERMITS GOING ON.

I DON'T KNOW WHY IT'S A CONSENT THING. THE THE CODE OF ORDINANCES REQUIRES THAT IT GOES TO CONSENT IF THE CONSENT AGENDA.

I'M SORRY. IF ALL CONDITIONS ARE MET. CORRECT.

BUT ALL CONDITIONS HAVE NOT BEEN MET. THAT'S CORRECT.

ALL RIGHT. SO WE'RE GOING TO REMOVE THIS AND Y'ALL WILL PUT IT BACK ON LATER. YES MA'AM. ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU MAYOR. YOU SHOULD HAVE TOLD ME THAT EARLIER. I COULD HAVE GOT YOU OUT OF HERE. SORRY. I DIDN'T WANT TO BE THE NEXT WARD.

I'M TRYING TO GET STAFF OUT HERE. WATER AND SEWER, ITEM NUMBER 15.

OH, MR. REEVES, I'M SORRY. COME BACK. YOU HAD ITEM NUMBER? 20 AND 21. ITEM NUMBER 20 IS 207,000 FOR T PLUS

[Item IV.20. Emergency Procurement Construction Administration and Materials Testing for TSPLOST Project EP-2012 Janice Dr Improvements Benchmark Management is the Vendor for an Amount Not to Exceed $$207,825.00.]

OKAY. SO YOU WANT TO REMOVE THIS TO THE AND JUST PUT IT BACK ON WHEN YOU NEED TO.

[04:25:03]

WE HAVE A CONTRACT WITH THEM. WE WANT TO TRY TO EXTEND THE CONTRACT THEY HAVE.

THIS COMPANY DOES WILL BE MONITORING OUR PROJECTS, KIND OF GIVING US SOME, SOME MORE EYES ON THE PROJECTS TO MAKE SURE THE PROJECTS MEET THE TIMELINES, MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE DOING THE PROPER INSPECTIONS ON THOSE AND PREPARING INFORMATION FOR US TO BRING TO COUNCIL, BUT WE MAY NEED TO BRING IT BACK. OKAY. WHAT ABOUT ITEM NUMBER 21?

[Item IV.21. Council Review and Possible Approval of ITB 2025-1891 Hot-In-Place Asphalt Recylcling and Microsurfacing (Group C) to the Lowest Apparent Bidder Asphalt Paving Systems Inc. Not to Exceed $4,889,560.15. TSPLOST Funded.]

GOOD EVENING. THIS ITEM WAS FOR OUR WE CALL HIDING PLACE AND MICRO SURFACING OF STREETS FOR THE CITY OF EASTPOINTE.

I HAVE A LIST OF ALL THE STREETS I CAN PASS AROUND.

OKAY. SO WE WENT WITH THIS CURRENT METHOD OF PAVEMENT REMEDIATION BECAUSE OF THE COST SAVINGS WE HAD IN PLACE COST AROUND 30 TO 40% LESS THAN OUR TYPICAL MILLING AND PAVING. SO WE'RE KIND OF STRETCHING OUT OUR DOLLARS AND DOING A NEW METHOD OF RESURFACING FOR STREETS THAT HAVE LIGHTER DAMAGE THAN SOME OF OUR OTHER WORST STREETS IN THE CITY.

SO WE PUT THE BID OUT. WE RECEIVED A SINGLE VENDOR FOR THE BID.

IT'S KIND OF A PROPRIETARY TYPE OF OPERATION, SO THERE WEREN'T A LOT OF COMPANIES WHO DID IT.

SO WE GOT THE ONE BID. AND WE WANT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH GETTING APPROVAL FOR THIS CONTRACT.

I TALK ABOUT ONE OF THE BENEFITS AS WELL WITH THIS METHOD IS LESS IMPACT ON THE COMMUNITIES.

WHEN YOU'RE DOING HIDING PLACE AND MICRO RESURFACING, YOU DON'T HAVE ALL THE TRUCKS IN THE COMMUNITIES.

IT'S A METHOD WHERE THEY REJUVENATE THE EXISTING ASPHALT AND ADD SOME MORE MATERIALS TO IT IN PLACE.

SO TRAFFIC IS OPEN A LOT SOONER. THERE'S A LOT LESS TRUCKS, A LOT LESS DEBRIS FROM THE TYPICAL MILLING.

SO WE'RE TRYING THIS METHOD OUT IN THE CITY. WE HAD A LOT OF SUCCESS IN SOME OTHER MUNICIPALITIES.

CITY OF ATLANTA FAYETTE COUNTY, COWETA COUNTY.

SOME OTHERS HAVE DONE IT. OKAY. ANY QUESTIONS? COUNCIL MEMBER, SHROPSHIRE. THANK YOU. THIS LIST THAT I'M LOOKING AT, THIS IS BASICALLY WARD D.

YES. SO WE HAVE THREE PROJECTS THAT WE PUT OUT AT ONCE.

THE OTHER TWO WEREN'T READY TO BRING TO YOU ALL FOR THE REST OF THE CITY.

SO WE. THIS ONE WAS THE ONE THAT WE WERE ALREADY REVIEWED AND APPROVED OF.

SO THE REST OF THE CITY WIDE STREETS ARE GOING TO BE ON TWO MORE CONTRACTS THAT WE'LL BE BRINGING BACK NEXT MONTH. OKAY. BECAUSE I WAS GOING TO ASK BECAUSE I DIDN'T SEE ANY STREETS FROM OVER THERE. NO. SO WE PUT OUT THREE SIMULTANEOUS PROJECTS AT ONCE.

AND THIS IS JUST THE FIRST ONE TO COME BACK FOR APPROVAL. OKAY.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER BUTLER. SO COULD YOU TELL US EXACTLY HOW IS IT DIFFERENT? WE UNDERSTOOD THE BENEFITS, BUT HOW IS IT DIFFERENT FROM WHAT NORMALLY HAPPENS? SO THIS METHOD, WHICH YOU USE ON STREETS THAT ARE IN MEDIUM TO LOW RANGE CONDITION, IS A METHOD THAT HEATS UP THE ASPHALT AND KIND OF MILLS IT IN PLACE, AND THEN ADDS NEW MATERIAL TO IT IN PLACE INSTEAD OF HAULING OFF THE MATERIAL AND BRINGING IN NEW ASPHALT.

SO IT'S A LOT MORE GREEN PROCESS, A LOT MORE COST EFFECTIVE.

AND IT'S A WAY TO KIND OF RECYCLE SOME OF THE GOOD MATERIAL THAT'S ON THE STREET.

SO INSTEAD OF MILLING UP ALL THE OLD PAVEMENT, HAULING IT OFF, BRINGING IN NEW, YOU'RE BRINGING IN KIND OF YOU'RE HEATING UP THE ASPHALT AND REJUVENATING IT. AND WE CHOSE THE STREETS THAT WE CHOSE BECAUSE THESE ARE LOCATIONS THAT ALREADY HAVE CURBS.

THERE'S NOT A LOT OF EXTRA WORK THAT WE HAD TO DO TO PREPARE THESE STREETS FOR THIS METHOD.

SO SOME OF THE ROADS THAT ARE IN WORSE CONDITION, THEY WOULDN'T BE A CANDIDATE FOR THIS.

BUT A LOT OF THE STREETS IN WARD OR SOME OF OUR NEWER ROADS ARE WERE GOOD FITS.

SO WE CHOSE THOSE. DO WE HAVE A TIMETABLE OF THESE STREETS THAT YOU PRESENTED HERE? AFTER WE GET ON THE CONTRACT, WE'VE BEEN IN A LOT OF DISCUSSION WITH THE COMPANY.

WHO DOES IT? GALLAGHER, WHO'S THE SUB? AND THEY'RE READY TO MOVE IN OPERATION.

THEY'RE ALREADY WORKING IN SOME AREAS IN THE CITY, IN THE AREA, METRO ATLANTA.

SO THEY'RE READY TO MOBILIZE IN EASTPOINTE ONCE WE GET A CONTRACT. OKAY.

THANK YOU. ANY OBJECTION TO CONSENT? ALRIGHTY. 23 FIREWORKS, MISTER. ROGERS.

[04:30:08]

TRI-CITIES HIGH SCHOOL CHAMPIONSHIP SIGNAGE. YOU ARE SUPPOSED TO BE WORKING WITH THEM IN PARKS AND REC AND THE SCHOOL ABOUT THAT.

[Item IV.24 Council Discussion and Possible Action on Tri-Cites High School Champions Signage]

Y'ALL HAVEN'T HAD ANY DISCUSSIONS. SO, MR. JONES, WHEN DO WE DO THE PARADE? WHEN DID THEY COME BEFORE US? THEY WON IN MARCH, I THINK.

AND MAYOR AND COUNCIL APPROVED DOING SIGNAGE.

THERE WAS A REQUEST FROM THE COACH AND THE PRINCIPAL THAT WE ERECT SOME TYPE OF SIGNAGE IN THE CITY, SIMILAR TO WHAT THEY HAVE IN COLLEGE PARK OR OTHER PLACES TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE CHAMP, OUR CITY OF CHAMPIONS, OUR BOYS BASKETBALL CHAMPIONSHIP. AND AT THAT MEETING, IT WAS DISCUSSED THAT PUBLIC WORKS, PARKS AND REC AND THE SCHOOL WOULD WORK TOGETHER TO FIGURE OUT THE TYPE OF SIGNAGE AND BRING IT BACK TO COUNCIL FOR CONSIDERATION.

AND SO I'M GOING TO MOVE THIS TO THE JUNE WORK SESSION.

BUT IF WE COULD, MR. JONES, GET AN UPDATE ON THAT.

AND I MEAN, THEY'RE GOING TO BE OUT OF SCHOOL NEXT WEEK SOON.

SCHOOL ENDS. SO PROBABLY NEED TO BE REACHING OUT TO THEM SOONER RATHER THAN LATER SO THAT WE CAN MAKE SURE WE'RE HAVING THOSE CONVERSATIONS AND MOVING.

I KNOW THE PRINCIPALS ARE STILL HERE GENERALLY DURING THE SUMMER, BUT I'M NOT SURE ABOUT THE COACH, SO WE COULD FOLLOW UP WITH THEM. I'M NOT SURE IF PARKS AND RECREATION MAY HAVE BEEN IN CONVERSATION WITH THEM, BUT IT WAS SUPPOSED TO COME BACK TO US FOR US TO REVIEW THOSE.

SO. JUNE JUNE WORK SESSION. MADAM CITY CLERK FOR 24.

MR.. YES, MA'AM. THANK YOU. WE WILL WORK WITH THAT ON THAT PARK AND RECREATION.

BUT DID YOU HAVE 22? WAS THAT MOVED TO. OH, I THOUGHT IT WAS CITY ATTORNEY, BUT YEAH.

SO WAIT JUST A MOMENT, BECAUSE I KEEP CALLING.

I'VE CALLED MR. ROGERS AND I'VE CALLED MISS ECHEVARRIA, AND I WAS TRYING TO GET ALL OF YOURS, MR. REEVES. BUT THEN I REALIZED THAT YOU HAVE ONE MORE.

I'M SORRY. I'M SORRY. COUNCIL MEMBER MARK ROGERS WAS IN FOR THE SIGN.

YES. AND MR. JONES IT WAS SUGGESTED THAT WE HAVE SIGNAGES OR NEAR THE SCHOOL, CAMP CREEK AND AREAS OF DOWNTOWN EAST POINT. AND THERE WAS ONE OTHER AREA, BUT I DON'T HAVE MY NOTES WITH ME.

AND IF WE COULD HAVE A DRAFT OF WHAT THOSE WILL LOOK LIKE, A LOT OF CITIES ARE MOVING TOWARDS PUTTING HIGHLIGHTING THEIR CITIES WITH THOSE LIGHT POST SIGNAGE. THE LIGHT POST SIGNAGE.

INCH, BUT THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO ADD TO THE CONVERSATION.

I'LL EMAIL YOU MY NOTES THOUGH. THANK YOU, MR.

[Item IV.23. Council Discussion and Possible Action on Munnerlyn Pyrotechnics as the Selected Vendor to Provide the 4Th of July Fireworks Celebration from ITB 2025-1888 NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT OF $25,075.00 FUNDING SOURCE: 100-7522-521.12-26]

BEFORE YOU IN YOUR PACKETS IS ITEM 23 FOR COUNCIL DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON MERLIN PYROTECHNICS AS THE VENDOR TO PROVIDE THE 4TH OF JULY FIREWORKS CELEBRATION FROM ITEM TO BID.

2020 5-1888 NOT TO EXCEED THE AMOUNT OF $25,075.

FUNDING SOURCE IS 175 20 2-5 21.12 DASH 26.

AND THIS IS THE VENDOR THAT WE'VE USED FOR THE THE LAST TWO YEARS.

AND THEY CAME IN ALSO AS THE THE LOWEST BIDDER.

SO I DON'T SEE ANYONE ELSE'S LIGHT ON. I JUST WANTED TO ASK WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS IN ADDITION TO THE $103,833.46 BEING PROVIDED TO THE EAST POINT MAIN STREET ASSOCIATION WITH THE LUMP SUM PAYMENT OF $85,000 IN IN-KIND SERVICES OF $18,833.46. SO IS THIS 25,000 BEING PAID OUT OF THE 85,000, OR IS THIS IN ADDITION TO THAT? NO, THIS IS BEING PAID OUT OF OUR BUDGET. AND SO THE TOTAL FOR THE 4TH OF JULY FIREWORKS WOULD BE

[04:35:02]

SO THAT'S THE $25,075 FOR FIREWORKS, FOR A TOTAL OF $128,908.46 FOR THE 4TH OF JULY EVENT. THAT THAT WOULD BE THE TOTAL.

BUT THE 103 GOES TO MAIN STREET. CORRECT. WHAT THEY DO AND OF COURSE THE 25 COMES OUT OF OUR BUDGET.

YEAH. AND I WAS JUST GETTING MAKING SURE I WAS CLEAR ABOUT THE TOTAL AMOUNT.

THAT'S CORRECT. AND WHETHER OR NOT THE FIREWORKS WAS COMING OUT OF THEIR BUCKET OR IF THIS WAS ADDITIONAL FUNDS.

SO THAT WOULD AGAIN BE A TOTAL OF $128,908.46.

THAT'S TRUE IN THIS EVENT. YES, MA'AM. ANY QUESTIONS FROM ANYONE ELSE? ANY TO CONSENT. ALRIGHTY. MISS ECHEVARRIA. I KNOW I'VE CALLED YOU A COUPLE TIMES.

[Item IV.15. Council Review and Approval of Emergency Storm Line Replacement on Norman Berry Drive Due to Failures in Multiple Areas Causing Dangerous Sinkhole Formation. Immediate Replacement Needed to Protect Public Safety. This is an Emergency Due to Life, Health or Safety Risk to the Public, According to City Ordinance Section. 4-3306 Emergency Procurement. Per RFQ#2024-1857 the Selected Vendor for the Emergency Repair is Metals & Materials Engineers in the Amount Not to Exceed $865,462.00.]

AND THEN I THINK THAT'LL TAKE CARE OF ALL OF STAFF'S ITEMS. AND THE REST WILL BE COUNCIL.

GOOD EVENING, MADAM MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS.

MELISSA ECHEVARRIA OF EASTPOINT WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT.

SO, ITEM NUMBER 15. IS COUNCIL REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF EMERGENCY STORM LINE REPLACEMENT ON NORMAN BERRY DRIVE DUE TO FAILURES IN MULTIPLE AREAS CAUSING DANGEROUS SINKHOLE FORMATION.

IMMEDIATE REPLACEMENT IS NEEDED TO PROTECT PUBLIC SAFETY.

THIS MEETS THE CRITERIA OF EMERGENCY. DUE TO LIFE, HEALTH AND SAFETY.

SO ON THE INITIAL PHOTO, YOU SEE THAT EASTPOINT HAS FOUR WATERSHEDS.

WE HAVE THE FLINT, THE SOUTH RIVER, CAMP CREEK, AND UTOY.

AND ALONG NORMAN BERRY DRIVE IN WARD B IS THE SOUTH RIVER.

SO PARALLEL TO NORMAN BERRY LINBURY DRIVE IS A CORRUGATED METAL PIPE THAT GOES UNDER SOUTH MARTIN STREET AND ALSO UNDER MARIA HIT TERRACE. RIGHT AT PAST FIRE STATION TWO, AT THE INTERSECTION OF NORMAN BERRY AND SOUTH MARTIN, THERE IS A BRICK MONUMENT SIGN THAT SAYS AIRPORT FULFILLMENT CENTER.

THERE IS A LARGE ORANGE FENCE AROUND THAT PLACE BY THE WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT.

THE PICTURES THAT YOU SEE ON THE SCREEN BEHIND YOU IS WHAT IS ACTUALLY PRESENT.

AND IT IS DIRE. IT IS DIRE FOR ONE, BECAUSE IF FIRE STATION TWO CANNOT ACCESS SOUTH MARTIN OR MARIA TERRACE, THIS IMPACTS THE ABILITY FOR EMERGENCY SERVICES.

NOW, IN TERMS OF THIS PROJECT, WE APPLY FOR CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING LAST YEAR OF A TOTAL OF $1.1 MILLION.

I HELD OUT THIS PROJECT AS MUCH AS I CAN, BECAUSE I DID NOT WANT RESIDENTS TO HAVE TO PAY FOR THIS DIRECTLY.

THE UNFORTUNATE THING IS, TWO MONTHS AGO THAT WE WERE NOTIFIED THAT THE CURRENT ADMINISTRATION DID NOT AWARD ANY CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING.

AND SO THIS IS WHY I'M HERE TODAY. NOW EVERY DAY WE GO OUT THERE AND IT KEEPS FALLING AND CAVING IN.

WE ARE 1 TO 2FT FROM NORMAN BERRY DRIVE. A FAILURE OF THE ROAD ITSELF AND 1 TO 2FT OFF OF SOUTH MARTIN STREET.

AND SO THIS IS A BIG PROJECT. AND AGAIN, WE'RE AT WE CAME UNDER THE ORIGINAL QUOTE, BUT IT IS DIRE AT THIS POINT BECAUSE I'M NOT SURE IF IT RAINS OR IF WE GET A FLASH FLOOD EVENT.

THE CAPACITY AT THIS POINT IN TIME. YOU SAID IT CAME UNDER THE ORIGINAL QUOTE.

YES. SO WHEN WE APPLY FOR CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING, WE GET ENGINEER PROPOSALS.

AND THAT PROPOSAL CAME IN AT $1.1 MILLION. AND SO ME PROVIDED US A COMPETITIVE QUOTE OF $865,000.

[04:40:08]

A LOT OF TREES HAVE TO BE REPLACED. A JUNCTION BOX, WHICH IS A CONCRETE BOX THAT MERGES MULTIPLE STORMWATER PIPES TOGETHER, WOULD HAVE TO BE REPLACED. AS YOU CAN SEE HERE, A 48 INCH CORRUGATED METAL PIPE, A 60 INCH CORRUGATED AND A 72 CORRUGATED METAL PIPE WOULD HAVE TO BE ENTIRELY REPLACED. SO THIS IS A LARGE BENEFIT TO NOT ONLY THE COMMUNITY, BUT ESPECIALLY FOR WARD B IF WE HAVE A ROAD FAILURE.

HOW LONG IS IT GOING TO TAKE? I WAS TOLD 3 TO 4 WEEKS, BECAUSE WE WERE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO CLOSE THE ROAD ENTIRELY DOWN, SO WE'RE GOING TO PROBABLY DO ONE SECTION AT A TIME TO KEEP THE ROADWAY OPEN FOR SCHOOL BUS DRIVERS, FIRE AND POLICE SERVICES. COUNCIL MEMBER, SHROPSHIRE.

SO WHEN DO YOU DO YOU KNOW THE ESTIMATED TIME WHEN THE PROJECT WILL START? AS SOON AS. WELL, NORMALLY PROJECTS OF THIS MAGNITUDE.

I LIKE TO COME TO COUNCIL BECAUSE IT'S ALMOST $1 MILLION.

BUT NORMALLY, IF IT'S JUST 100 OR $200,000, I WILL GO AHEAD AND JUST COMPLETE AN EMERGENCY FORM.

AND THEN WE START, BECAUSE OF THE SIGNIFICANT DOLLAR AMOUNT, I WANTED TO BRING THAT TO YOU ALL TO PROCEED WITH THE REPAIR.

SO ONCE IT'S IF IT'S APPROVED, THEN YOU'LL PROCEED WITH THE REPAIRS.

YES, WE CAN WE CAN MOBILIZE WITHIN FIVE DAYS.

SO HERE'S MY NEXT QUESTION. WILL STORMWATER FEES BE UTILIZED FOR THE PROJECT AS WELL? YES. NOW, I DID FOR THIS FISCAL YEAR, WE RESUBMITTED THIS SAME PROJECT.

BUT AS YOU CAN SEE, I DON'T THINK WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO WAIT.

RIGHT. BUT WHEN WE CONTACTED THE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IF IT MEETS THE CRITERIA OF LIFE, HEALTH, SAFETY. AND AGAIN, THIS PROJECT HAS ALREADY BEEN BUILT OUT THROUGH OUR ON CALL SERVICES.

THEY WILL CONSIDER IT IF WE GET IT FOR REIMBURSEMENT, AND I WOULD APPROACH THAT AS SUCH.

USE THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN VETTED. YES. THIS IS ON CALL CONTRACTORS.

OH YES. YOU HAVE AN RFQ FOR THAT. YES. ANY OBJECTION TO CONSENT? ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. ITEM NUMBER. 22.

[Item IV.22. Intergovernmental Agreement with City of Atlanta for Welcome All Rd Bridge Project for Right-Of-Way, Construction, and Maintenance.]

AND THE AGREEMENT OUTLINES ALL THE DETAILS BETWEEN THE CITY OF EASTPOINTE AND THE CITY OF ATLANTA, AS FAR AS FROM RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITION AND EASEMENTS TO CONSTRUCTION, AND ALSO OUTLINES THE MAINTENANCE AFTER THE PROJECT IS OVER WITH.

THIS IS NECESSARY SINCE THE PROJECT TRAVERSES BOTH JURISDICTIONS.

THE CITY OF EASTPOINTE IS LISTED AS THE SPONSOR FOR THE PROJECT, ALONG WITH THE AIR TRAFFIC KID WHO'S BEEN MANAGING THE PROJECT UP TO THIS POINT.

AND WE ARE REQUIRED TO HAVE A INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT DUE TO THE JURISDICTIONAL BOUNDARIES THAT ARE BEING CROSSED IN THE PROJECT.

SO BRINGING THE AGREEMENT FORTH TONIGHT FOR AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TWO CITIES TO CONTINUE ACQUISITION AND CONSTRUCTION FOR THE PROJECT.

SO I DON'T SEE ANY LIGHTS ON THIS. THIS HAS BEEN IN THE WORKS FOR QUITE SOME TIME, AND EVERY TIME IT COMES UP, THE MAJORITY OF THIS PROJECT IS IN ATLANTA. LIKE THERE'S VERY LITTLE IN EAST POINT AND EVERY TIME IT COMES UP, I'M ASKING, WHY ARE WE SPONSORING WITH THE SID TO LEAD THIS? WHEN? LET ME SEE. WHO ARE THE SIGNATORIES ON THERE.

SO THIS IS BETWEEN EASTPOINTE AND THE CITY OF ATLANTA.

WE'RE TAKING ON THE RESPONSIBILITY OF A PROJECT WHERE THE MAJORITY IS IN EASTPOINTE.

I MEAN, IN ATLANTA. SO WE'RE LISTED AS A SPONSOR? YES. WE CITY OF EASTPOINTE SIGNED UP TO BE THE SPONSOR FOR THE PROJECT.

BASICALLY THE ONES WHO WERE IN CHARGE OF DIRECTING THE PROJECT.

WE WE HAVEN'T ALLOCATED ANY FUNDING TO THE POINT FORWARD THE CITY HAS, BUT YES, WE ARE LISTED AS A SPONSOR.

MADAM CITY ATTORNEY, IF YOU CAN COME UP, PLEASE.

BECAUSE THIS HAS BEEN. AND ONE OF THE THINGS I WAS TOLD PREVIOUSLY IS THAT IT'S EASIER TO GO THROUGH EAST POINT.

THE CONCERN IS, IS THE OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OF THIS PROPERTY IS IN ATLANTA.

SO HOW MUCH OF THIS ARE WE ASSUMING FOR A PROJECT WHERE I BELIEVE LIKE 60 PLUS PERCENT OF IT IS IN ATLANTA,

[04:45:07]

I ASKED THE SAME QUESTION, AND IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THE CITY COMMITTED TO PRE ME.

SO NO, THE CITY IS NEVER COMMITTED TO THIS. THIS HAS ALWAYS BEEN A DISCUSSION.

AND I'M SAYING THIS I'M SORRY TO CUT YOU OFF, BUT THE REASON WHY I'M SAYING THIS IS BECAUSE WE HAD THIS CONVERSATION EVERY TIME IT COMES UP. THE CID WANTS THE CITY TO COMMIT TO IT BECAUSE THEY THINK IT'S EASIER TO GET THROUGH OUR CHANNELS THAN ATLANTA'S.

BUT THAT WAS NEVER THE AGREEMENT OF THE CITY.

LIKE, DO YOU ALL HAVE THE MINUTES ON A VOTE OF COUNCIL FOR THAT? CAN YOU REPEAT THAT? I'M SORRY. WHAT WAS THE QUESTION? DO WE HAVE MINUTES ON THE VOTE OF COUNCIL, WHERE THE CITY AGREED TO ASSUME THIS PROJECT AND TAKE THE LEAD? EVERY TIME IT COMES UP? WE HAVE THIS DISCUSSION AND IT HAS NOT MOVED FORWARD TO MY RECOLLECTION.

AND I APOLOGIZE, MADAM CITY ATTORNEY, BECAUSE I KNOW THIS PRECEDES YOU, BUT NOT NECESSARILY OUR STAFF.

WHAT IS IT THAT WE ARE TAKING ON OF A PROJECT OF THIS MAGNITUDE, WHERE THE OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OF THE PROPERTY IS IN THE CITY OF ATLANTA, AND I WON'T BE ASKING FOR CONSENT ON THIS. I'LL ASK THIS TO BE PLACED ON THE AGENDA BECAUSE I'M LIKELY GOING TO OBJECT.

WE, LIKE YOU SAID, THIS IS A PREDATES A LOT OF US HERE.

I WAS HERE WHEN IT ORIGINATED ON PREVIOUS ADMINISTRATIONS.

DID I SIGN US UP TO BE THE SPONSOR SO I CAN MAKE SURE WE PRESENT THE DOCUMENTATION? WHEN WE BRING IT BACK TO NEXT AGENDA, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT BECAUSE I DON'T.

I WAS A COUNCIL MEMBER AND IN MY ROLE, AND HAVE HAD THE CONVERSATION IN BOTH ROLES AS IT RELATES TO THIS PROJECT.

SO MR. REEVES, IF YOU WANTED TO ADD SOMETHING ELSE TONIGHT, BUT, MADAM CITY CLERK, IF YOU COULD PLACE THIS ON THE AGENDA.

YES, MA'AM. I JUST WHAT YOU WERE ASKING, I THINK, TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, WAS THIS PART THIS PART IS, HAS BEEN PRESENTED US MORE RECENT THAN THE FIRST MOU THAT WE DID, WHICH STARTED ABOUT TWO YEARS AGO.

THIS CAME ACROSS OUR TABLE WE WERE UNAWARE OF.

IT KIND OF CAME UP ON US AND SAYING THAT THIS IS WHAT THEY WERE ASKING.

I HAD SOME OF THE SAME QUESTIONS THAT YOU ASK IN REFERENCE TO THIS.

SO THERE'S A PART OF THE CITY OF ATLANTA THAT NEEDS THAT HAS TO BE UTILIZED IN THIS PROJECT, AND IN ORDER TO BE UTILIZED, THEY ASKED US TO TAKE A CITY ATTORNEY, MAKE SURE HE CLEAR ME IF I'M RIGHT.

THEY ASK US TO TAKE ON THE ACQUISITION OF THAT LAND SO IT COULD BE USED FOR THIS PROJECT AND THEN TURN BACK AROUND AND TURN IT BACK OVER TO THE CITY OF ATLANTA. AM I CORRECT IN SAYING THAT CITY ATTORNEY? YES, MA'AM. I'M SORRY, MADAM. MADAM CITY ATTORNEY.

I KNOW I APOLOGIZE FOR INTERRUPTING YOU. THIS PRECEDES YOU, BUT THIS IS THE SAME CONCERN.

WHY ARE WE DOING WORK FOR ATLANTA? WHY ARE WE GETTING SOMETHING, DEALING, DOING, DEALING WITH IT, AND GIVING IT BACK TO ATLANTA AFTER WE'VE DONE THE WORK WHEN THE MAJORITY OF THIS PROPERTY IS IN ATLANTA.

SO I'M NOT SURE IF YOU'VE HAD THAT DETAILED CONVERSATION.

GERALD MCDOWELL IS VERY, VERY, VERY AWARE OF ALL OF THIS.

LIKE MADAM CITY ATTORNEY. SO I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT.

THAT WAS WHAT I WAS STARTING TO SAY, THAT THIS CAME TO ME AS IF THIS HAD BEEN DISCUSSED AND RESOLVED PRIOR TO ME COMING.

AND SO, JUST AS YOU HAVE SAID, MR. REEVES HAVE SAID I'M NOT SURE.

SO IF THIS HAS NOT BEEN COMMITTED TO. AND I HAVE BAD INFORMATION FROM THE CID, THE CITY OF ATLANTA, THEN I'M NOT MARRIED TO THIS PROJECT AS IF I'M PRESENTING THIS AS A SUPPORTER OR PROPONENT.

I UNDERSTAND BUT I DID COMMIT TO BRINGING IT TO COUNCIL FOR YOU GUYS'S DETERMINATION, DISCUSSION, CONSIDERATION, AND THAT'S THE EXTENT OF IT. BUT I SHARE THE SAME CONCERNS.

BUT AGAIN, I WAS PRESENTED WITH THIS IDEA HAD ALREADY BEEN VETTED AND DETERMINED PRIOR TO MY ARRIVAL.

THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER REBUTTAL. SO WHEN IS THE TIMELINE FOR THIS PROJECT TO BE STARTED AND COMPLETED? WELL, WE DON'T WE DON'T HAVE A TIMELINE. COUNCILMAN BUTLER AND.

JUST TO KIND OF BRING THIS BACK AROUND FULL CIRCLE.

LIKE THE MAYOR WAS SAYING WHEN WE WERE FIRST APPROACHED ABOUT THIS PROJECT, THE FUNDING FROM GDOT TO THE CID, WHICH IS THE THE LEADER OF THIS PROJECT, AS I PUT IT IN THOSE TERMS, CAME TO US AND SAID, HEY, WE NEED TO DO AN MOU WITH THE CITY TO DO THIS.

[04:50:02]

SO THE FUNDING COULD GO TO THE CID SO THEY COULD DO THIS INTERCHANGE, INTERCHANGE PROJECT AT WELCOME MALL AND CAMP CREEK CONNECTOR.

THIS INFORMATION JUST WAS BROUGHT TO US, WHAT, A MONTH AGO ABOUT THIS LAND ACQUISITION? AND I'M GOING TO BE HONEST, I HAD SOME OF THE SAME PROBLEMS WITH WHY ARE WE DOING THIS WHEN ATLANTA IS PART OF THIS PROJECT WHERE THEY COULD EASILY DO WHAT THEY'RE ASKING US TO DO, AND WE BASICALLY WERE TOLD, WELL, YOU GUYS ARE THE MOU, EVEN THOUGH NO MONEY'S COMING OUT OF OUR POCKET.

BUT I DID HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT. THEY ASKED FOR US TO DO SOME TITLE SEARCH WORK.

AND WHAT WAS THE OTHER THING? THE PROPERTY SEARCHES IN THE LIKE I SAID, THE TITLES FOR THE ACTUAL GET THE EASEMENTS.

SO. RIGHT. SO AND SO MY QUESTION WAS, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE I ASKED THE SAME QUESTION LIKE, IS THIS FREE? RIGHT. LIKE, ARE WE JUST PARTICIPATORY? WITH NO COST AND NO, I WAS TOLD THAT THEY'RE ASKING US TO DO THE TITLE SEARCHES AND GET THE NECESSARY EASEMENTS.

AND AFTER HAVING A CONVERSATION WITH MR. HALL, HE INDICATED THAT THERE WAS SOME MONEY ALREADY SET ASIDE FOR THIS WOULD FURTHER LEAD ME TO BELIEVE THAT THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT HAD ALREADY BEEN VETTED.

SECOND QUESTION. WHERE DOES THE BRIDGE, WHAT JURISDICTION DOES THE BRIDGE RESIDE? SO I HAD TO GET THAT. THEY HAVE AN ACTUAL BREAKDOWN OF THE PERCENTAGES OF WHAT THE PROJECT IS. BUT TO EVERYONE'S POINT, THE MAJORITY OF THE CONSTRUCTION IS THE CITY OF ATLANTA.

EASTPOINT IS A SMALLER JURISDICTION. SO BUT YOU'RE SAYING THAT THE MAJORITY OF THE WORK IS THAT PART WHERE THE KEMP CREEK AND WELCOME MALL CONNECTOR CONNECTS? THAT'S ATLANTA. CORRECT? YES. BUT WHAT ABOUT THE BRIDGE? BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT IT'S SAYING HERE. IS THAT THE REASON WHY IS BECAUSE PEOPLE JUST WANT TO DUMP ON US.

THE INTERSECTION ITSELF IS EASTPOINT, I'M NOT MISTAKEN.

LIKE I SAID, LOOK AT THE EXACT PLANS OF WHERE THE JURISDICTIONAL BOUNDARIES CROSS FOR THE NEW ALIGNMENT. BUT, I MEAN, THE BRIDGE IS THAT EAST POINT OF ATLANTA, THE EXISTING BRIDGE OVER KENT CREEK? NO. THAT'S ATLANTA. ATLANTA. OKAY. THANK YOU.

WHERE DOES IT BECOME? EAST POINT? WE PICK UP ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE BRIDGE.

OKAY. THANK YOU. THE BRIDGE THAT GOES OVER THE CREEK. I'M SORRY.

YES, MA'AM. COUNCIL MEMBER ROGERS. IT'S A SIGN THAT SAYS EAST POINT RIGHT THERE AT THE BRIDGE.

IT'S THE OTHER SIDE. BUT MY QUESTION IS, IS THERE ANY WAY, I GUESS, THAT OUR CITY ATTORNEY COULD MAKE CONTACT TO I GUESS JUST SAY THAT. I MEAN, MY MY SUGGESTION WOULD BE. NO, I KNOW WHERE IT IS.

IT'S RIGHT THERE. WHEN YOU'RE LEAVING CAMP CREEK, YOU TURN LEFT.

YOU COME TO THE STOP SIGN. AS SOON AS YOU CROSS OVER THE BRIDGE, YOU HIT EAST POINT.

ALL OF THE REST OF THAT IS THE CITY OF ATLANTA.

SO I DON'T KNOW WHY WE WOULD BE TAKING OWNERSHIP OF THAT, I DON'T.

SO SO WHAT WHAT I THINK I HEARD IS THAT THEY WANT US TO DO TITLE SEARCH ON EASTPOINT PROPERTY.

THAT'S EASTPOINT OR ATLANTA. PRIVATE PROPERTY THAT TOUCHES THIS INTERSECTION.

THAT'S TO BE IMPROVED, AND THAT'S THE PORTION FOR WHICH THEY'RE ASKING FOR THE TITLE SEARCH ON US SO THAT THEY CAN THEN PURCHASE US OR CONDEMN OR WHATEVER THEY'RE GOING TO DO THAT PORTION THAT'S PRIVATELY OWNED TO INCLUDE IN THE UP IMPROVEMENT OF THE INTERSECTION. WHO'S GOING TO PURCHASE IT? ATLANTA. ATLANTA WOULD WE WOULDN'T DO ANY PROPERTY ACQUISITION.

WE WERE JUST ASKED TO DO THE TITLE SEARCH. SO WHY WOULD WE DO TITLE SEARCH ON PROPERTY THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO BUY? SO I THINK THE SO THE CID STANCE IS, WELL, THEY'RE NOT AN ACTUAL MUNICIPALITY THAT OWNS PROPERTY OR ANYTHING.

SO THEY CAN'T ACTUALLY DO. YEAH. THE CID WANTS TO GO TO THE PATH OF LEAST RESISTANCE.

I'LL BE TALKING TO MR. MCDOWELL LIKE THIS IS I THINK I HAD THIS CONVERSATION AS A COUNCIL MEMBER, AND I'VE HAD A COUPLE TIMES AS A MAYOR. I'M IN YEAR 12, SO I DON'T UNDERSTAND.

I UNDERSTAND WHEN WE DO TITLE SEARCHES ON PROPERTY THAT WE OWN OUR TITLE SEARCH ON PROPERTY THAT WE ARE GOING TO ACQUIRE, BUT IF WE ARE NOT GOING TO ACQUIRE THE PROPERTY, WHY WERE WE DOING A TITLE SEARCH ON PROPERTY THAT ATLANTA IS GOING TO PURCHASE?

[04:55:03]

I'M PROBABLY ASKING QUESTIONS THAT YOU CAN'T ANSWER, BUT LIKE THIS HAS BEEN A REPEATED EFFORT BY NOW.

HE COULD HAVE GOTTEN IT THROUGH ATLANTA, BUT THE CONSTANT COMING BACK TO EAST POINT, AND THEY'RE BASICALLY ASKING US TO SPEND EAST POINT TAXPAYER DOLLARS TO DO TITLE SEARCH ON PROPERTY WE KNOW WE'RE NOT GOING TO BUY.

THAT'S ACTUALLY GOING TO GO TO THE CITY OF ATLANTA. AND I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S A GRATUITY OR WHATEVER, I DON'T KNOW. BUT THAT JUST DOESN'T SOUND LIKE WE'D BE SPENDING MONEY ON PROPERTY THAT WE KNOW WE'RE NOT GOING TO PURCHASE.

SO, MADAM CITY CLERK, DEPUTY CITY CLERK, IF YOU COULD PLACE THIS ON THE AGENDA I APPRECIATE YOU ALL THE ATTORNEY. I KNOW THIS PREDATES YOU, BUT YOU SAID YOU REACHED OUT TO ATLANTA AND TALKED WITH THEM.

SOUNDS LIKE STAFF HAS AS WELL, BUT LIKE, THIS DOESN'T.

TO ME, ONE PLUS TWO IS NOT EQUALING THREE BECAUSE WE'RE NOT BUYING THE PROPERTY.

AND AND MAYOR, I HATE TO KEEP, BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE FOR CLARIFICATION BECAUSE IT IS RECORDS IS THAT MY UNDERSTANDING IS, IS THAT THEY THIS WHOLE INTERSECTION OF CAMP CREEK, IF YOU JUST GIVE EVERYBODY AN IDEA, IS TO CAMP CREEK PARKWAY UNDERNEATH THE BRIDGE THAT GOES GOING TOWARDS BUCKNER IN THAT AREA RIGHT IN THERE.

MY UNDERSTANDING AND READING THE INFORMATION, IT WAS IT WAS DETAILED TO ME AS IF THEY THAT THE PROPERTY IS IN ATLANTA.

AND IN ORDER FOR THEM TO GET THIS LAND IN ATLANTA INSTEAD OF ATLANTA GOING TO GET THE LAND, THEY WERE ASKING US TO GO GET IT. THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING AND THE TERMINOLOGY.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S GOING TO ACQUIRE THE LAND, OR ARE WE GOING TO ACQUIRE IT AND GIVE IT BACK TO ATLANTA? LIKE, WHY? WHY WOULD WE DO THAT? THAT'S WHY I SAID SO.

IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THEY'RE THE THE IMPROVEMENT OF THE INTERSECTION WOULD SOME WAY BENEFIT THE CITY.

RIGHT. AND SO I THINK THAT'S THE REASON THAT THEY ARE SEEKING THIS PARTNERSHIP BECAUSE THE IMPROVEMENT OF THIS PROJECT BENEFITS THE CITY IN SOME KIND OF WAY.

BECAUSE OF THE CLOSE PROXIMITY, OBVIOUSLY, OF THE TWO JURISDICTIONS AT THIS INTERSECTION, WHETHER THAT'S BELIEVABLE BY THIS BOARD OR NOT.

AND IF THE ANSWER YOU GUYS ARE TELLING US IS, NO, WE'RE NOT DOING IT, I AM HAPPY TO CARRY THAT MESSAGE BACK.

YEAH. I'M NOT SPEAKING FOR EVERYONE. I'M JUST SAYING WHAT MY QUESTIONS AND CONCERNS ARE.

THIS IS NOT NEW. I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. THERE IS MUTUAL BENEFIT.

BUT WHY WOULD WE DO TITLE SEARCH, BUY PROPERTY AND THEN GIVE IT TO ATLANTA? LIKE, IS IT THAT MUCH OF A BENEFIT WHEN THEY OWN OVER 60% OF THE LAND ALREADY? THIS IS GOING TO IF WE TALK ABOUT PERCENTAGE OF BENEFITS ATLANTA WILL BENEFIT GREATLY GREATLY GREATER FROM THIS OR MORE FROM THIS BECAUSE THE OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OF THE PROPERTY IS ALREADY IN ATLANTA.

SO IF WE COULD JUST GET SOME MORE INFORMATION LIKE AND HELP IT MAKE SENSE IF IT CAN MAKE SENSE.

BUT RIGHT NOW TO DO A TITLE SEARCH ON PROPERTY ACQUIRED PROPERTY AND THEN GET A PROPERTY IN ATLANTA.

WHY DO WHY DO WE NEED TO GO THROUGH THAT? AND HOW MUCH PROPERTY ARE WE TALKING ABOUT ACQUIRING? LIKE AND THIS HAS BEEN GERALD MCDOWELL'S PROPOSAL REPEATEDLY.

AND EACH TIME WE COME TO THIS SAME POINT, THIS DOES NOT MAKE SENSE.

WHERE IS ATLANTA? WHAT IS ATLANTA'S POSITION? THAT'S JUST LIKE IF ANOTHER A COLLEGE PARK WAS DOING A PROJECT AND 60 PLUS PERCENT IS IN EASTPOINT AND WE'RE LIKE, OH, Y'ALL GOING TO HANDLE THIS FOR US AND GET THIS BACK TO US.

YEAH, WE BOTH GOING TO BENEFIT, RIGHT? BUT WE'LL GET THE MAJORITY OF THE BENEFIT BECAUSE WE HAVE THE HAD A MAJORITY OF THE PROPERTY, BUT Y'ALL GOING TO HANDLE THIS FOR US. SO IF Y'ALL CAN GET SOME ANSWERS BY MONDAY.

BUT AGAIN, THIS IS PROBABLY THE FIFTH TIME AND I'M NOT EXAGGERATING.

AND WE'LL GET WITH OUR CITY MANAGER, AND THEN WE'LL KIND OF FILL HIM IN AND GET HIM IN THE GAPS, AND THEN WE'LL GO AHEAD AND ADDRESS THE ISSUE AND MAYBE HAVE SOME ANSWERS FOR YOU ON MONDAY.

THANK YOU. YES, MA'AM. HAVE A GOOD EVENING. I HAVE A AGENDA ITEM NUMBER SIX.

BECAUSE OF THE TIME. CAN CAN WE JUST MOVE THIS TO THE PRESENTATION NEXT MONDAY?

[05:00:01]

AND THEN WE CAN ALL YOU KNOW, BE HERE AND. YEAH.

ALL RIGHT. THANKS. PRESENTATION.

COUNCILMAN. THANK YOU. MAYOR. YEAH. IT'S SUPER LATE.

AND I HATE TO KEEP PUSHING THIS ITEM DOWN THE ROAD.

BUT ONE THING I WANTED TO BRING UP. BOTH OF THESE POLICIES IMPACT NOT JUST THE ELECTED OFFICIALS, BUT STAFF. SO, MR. JONES, HAVE YOU HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW THESE POLICIES AND WEIGH IN OR DISCUSS THEM WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY? I HAVE NOT. OKAY. I THINK THAT WOULD MAKE SENSE.

YOU WANT TO PUSH IT ONE LAST TIME TO THE JUNE WORK SESSION? YES. SO THAT THE CITY MANAGER WOULD HAVE A CHANCE TO TO DO THAT.

I THINK I'LL HAVE TO GET ATTORNEY FREEMAN UP TO DATE ON THEM.

THE JUNE WORK SESSION, I THINK, IS JUNE 9TH. OH, NO.

I'LL BE HERE. AND I. DEPARTMENT OF AGENCY. COUNCIL.

[Item III.4. Departmental Vacancies Discussion]

I APOLOGIZE FOR THE SMALL PRINT. I DID EMAIL THIS TO EACH OF YOU.

SO IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS YOU CAN CONTACT CITY MANAGER AND HE WILL INSTRUCT ME TO RESPOND TO YOU. WHAT IS YOUR.

PERSONAL PREFERENCE? OH. I'M SORRY. THAT'S ONE OF OUR FORMS. PERSONNEL. IT'S IT'S A FORM THAT WE USE TO FILL POSITIONS.

I'M SORRY. ACRONYMS STAND FOR. IT'S FOR PERSONNEL REQUEST FORM.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. WHERE DO YOU WANT THIS TO GO? COUNCIL MEMBER ROGERS, MISS JESSIE IS SAYING THEY ARE SENDING THIS TO US MONTHLY.

AND WE CAN ASK ANY QUESTIONS, AND SHE'LL RESPOND AS DIRECTED BY THE CITY MANAGER.

IT'S LATE TONIGHT, SO. AND WE PUT IT ON JUNE WORK SESSION.

BUT. YOU WANT TO DO JUNE? ALL RIGHT. JUNE WORK SESSION NEXT ONE

[Item III.5. Council Discussion and Possible Action on City of East Point Board/Commission on Aging]

AND NUMBER FIVE IS I WOULD LIKE FOR COUNCIL TO SUPPORT A COMMISSION ON AGING.

THE PURPOSE OF THIS INITIATIVE IS TO ASSIST OUR GOLDEN AGERS WITH OPPORTUNITIES THAT THEY MAY OR MAY NOT BE INFORMED ABOUT.

THE FIRST PART OF THIS INITIATIVE WAS TO MAKE SURE A TAB WAS ON OUR CITY'S WEBSITE FOR THOSE FOR THOSE GOLDEN AGERS. AND THE SECOND PART IS TO DEVELOP A COMMISSION.

I WAS CONTACTED BY A RESIDENT EARLIER LAST YEAR WHO DISCUSSED THE IMPORTANCE OF HAVING A TAB ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE SPECIFICALLY FOR THE GOLDEN AGERS, SO THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN COMPLETED AND ACCOUNTED FOR.

AND IN THAT DISCUSSION, I MENTIONED THAT THIS WOULD BE THE PROCESS IN A TWO PART WOULD HAVE TO DEAL WITH EASTPOINTE'S COMMISSION ON AGING TO FURTHER ASSIST WITH OPPORTUNITIES FOR OUR GOLDEN AGERS.

SECTION 4-107 BOARDS, COMMISSIONS AND AUTHORITIES ALLOW CITY COUNCIL TO CREATE, BY ORDINANCE BOARDS, COMMISSIONS AND AUTHORITIES TO FULFILL ANY INVESTIGATIVE, QUASI JUDICIAL, OR QUASI LEGISLATIVE FUNCTION THE CITY COUNCIL DEEMS

[05:05:01]

AS IT RELATES TO THE BYLAWS OF THE COMMISSION ON AGING.

I THINK THE MORE APPROPRIATE SECTION IS ACTUALLY RULE 32 AND COUNCIL RULES AND THE COUNCIL ORDINANCE THAT DEALS WITH ESTABLISHMENT AND APPOINTMENT OF COMMITTEES, COMMISSIONS, CITY AUTHORITIES, BOARDS AND TASK FORCE.

AND THERE IS A PROCESS SAYS THE CREATION OF ANY COMMITTEE COMPOSED EXCLUSIVELY OF COUNCIL MEMBERS, COMMISSION OR ANY CITY AUTHORITY OR BOARD BY THE MAYOR OR COUNCIL SHALL REQUIRE APPROVAL BY COUNCIL APPOINTMENT TO SUCH COMMITTEES COMPOSED EXCLUSIVELY OF COUNCIL MEMBERS, COMMISSIONS, CITY AUTHORITIES OR ARE BOARDS WILL BE MADE BY MAYOR AND CONFIRMED BY THE MAJORITY OF COUNCIL. MAYOR AND COUNCIL MAY CREATE TASK FORCE TO ANALYZE AND RECOMMEND SOLUTIONS FOR SPECIFIC ISSUES.

I DON'T KNOW IF WE'RE TRYING TO GIVE THIS BECAUSE THIS SAYS TASK FORCE SHALL HAVE NO QUASI JUDICIAL OR QUASI LEGISLATIVE FUNCTIONS. AND I DON'T KNOW THAT THE GOAL IS TO GIVE IF THIS HAPPENS, THIS COMMISSION, A QUASI JUDICIAL OR QUASI LEGISLATIVE FUNCTION, AND IF NOT, THIS RULE 32 WOULD APPLY MORE AND IT WOULD BE MORE, PROBABLY MORE OF A TASK FORCE VERSUS LIKE A BOARD OR COMMISSION, LIKE THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD OR THE BUILDING AUTHORITY? I DON'T THINK SO, I DON'T THINK. I SEE COUNCILWOMAN MARTIN ROGERS SHAKING HER HEAD THAT THAT IS HER GOAL IS TO GIVE THEM QUASI JUDICIAL, BUT MORE OF OUR RECOMMENDING BODY FOR IDEAS. MAYBE PROGRAMING, I WOULD ASSUME, FOR THIS COUNCIL ON AGING. BUT CERTAINLY I WOULDN'T RECOMMEND THEY HAVE ANY QUASI JUDICIAL AUTHORITY.

I MEAN, THAT WOULD LEAD TO BELIEVE THAT THERE IS GOING TO BE SOME TYPE OF CONTROVERSY OR SOMETHING THAT THEY WOULD NEED TO WEIGH IN ON, AND I DON'T I DON'T THINK THAT'S THE GOAL. YEAH.

WE ALSO WERE NOT SURE IF WE STILL ARE A PART OF AARP NETWORK OF AGE FRIENDLY CITIES.

HAD TO SUBMIT A PLAN WITH THAT. REGARDING OUR SENIORS AND THAT WAS DONE PREVIOUSLY.

THERE WERE A COUPLE PEOPLE WHO SERVED AROUND THAT, SO I CAN SHARE THAT INFORMATION WITH YOU, BUT I CAN'T REMEMBER WHAT YEAR. THAT WE JOINED THE AARP.

AGE FRIENDLY CITIES NETWORK AND DEVELOPED A PLAN WITH SOME SENIORS PEOPLE FROM THE BOWLING CENTER, SOME OTHER SENIORS, AND LOOKED AT THE EIGHT AREAS.

I THINK IT IS THAT IS A PART OF THAT INITIATIVE AS IT RELATES TO OUR SENIORS AND PEOPLE AGING WITHIN THE COMMUNITY.

13 AND ITEM 20 WERE REMOVED. YOU HAVE THOSE BOTH AS REMOVED BY STAFF.

OKAY. I THINK THE LAST ONE IS DISCUSSION ON RULE 28.

[Item IV.25. Council Discussion and Possible Action on Rule #28]

I MEAN, IN ORDER TO GIVE TIME, I THINK THAT'S A AFFIRMATIVE ACT.

[05:10:06]

AND SO IF THERE'S THAT DESIRE. BUT AGAIN, I DON'T RECALL EVEN PRIOR TO ME GETTING ON COUNCIL THAT THAT HAS EVER BEEN THE INTERPRETATION OR PRACTICE OR IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS RULE.

THE PEOPLE HAVE ALWAYS BEEN PRESENT. WE SAW IT AT THE LAST MEETING.

WE SEE IT AT EVERY MEETING. THEY SAY I GIVE MY TIME TO SO AND SO AND SO.

THAT'S WHY I'M AT THAT COUNCIL MEETING. I INDICATED THAT I WAS GOING TO PUT THIS ON THE AGENDA FOR COUNCIL TO DISCUSS, AND WHETHER YOU ALL WANT TO MAKE A DECISION ABOUT IT TONIGHT OR PUT IT ON THE JUNE WORK SESSION.

I THINK AN AD HOC APPROACH TO INTERPRETING THIS RULE IS NOT GOING TO BE BEST AS WE MOVE FORWARD, BECAUSE WE'LL DEFINITELY NEED TO MAKE SURE WE'RE CONSISTENT.

AND IF THAT'S WHAT YOU ALL WANT TO DO EVERY TIME IT HAPPENS, SO BE IT.

BUT THEN WE'RE ALSO TELLING OTHER OTHER PEOPLE OR OTHER PEOPLE ARE HERE TO ACTUALLY GIVE THEIR TIME.

SO THAT'S WHY THIS IS HERE. COUNCIL MEMBER SHROPSHIRE.

THANK YOU. AND I'M GOING TO SAY THIS BECAUSE I.

KNOW AND I'M GOING TO GIVE SOME HISTORICAL KNOWLEDGE OR INFORMATION.

IN THE PAST, EVEN WHEN WE WERE OVER IN THE CITY AUDITORIUM.

EVEN WHEN BRENDA JAMES WAS THE CITY CLERK AND AGNES WAS THE CITY CLERK, AND DIANE WHITE WAS THE CITY CLERK.

IN ORDER TO GIVE YOUR TIME, YOU HAD TO BE PRESENT.

WE WERE ALWAYS TOLD THAT. AND YOU PHYSICALLY HAVE TO STAND UP AND SAY, I GIVE MY TIME TO SO AND SO.

THAT HAS ALWAYS BEEN THE PRACTICE FROM EVEN WHEN MAYOR HILLIARD WAS MAYOR JOE MACON.

MISS PITTMAN, THAT HAS ALWAYS BEEN THE PRACTICE, BECAUSE WHEN THEY'RE NOT HERE, THEY WOULD ALWAYS TELL US THEY HAVE TO BE HERE.

THEY CANNOT GIVE THEIR TIME UNLESS THAT PERSON IS HERE TO GO ON RECORD AND SAY, I GIVE MY TIME TO SO AND SO.

AND THAT HAS ALWAYS BEEN THE PRACTICE. AND YOU CAN GO CHECK THE MINUTES.

YOU CAN. GO ALL THE WAY BACK TO THE 90S. IT'S THERE.

AND IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN THAT PRACTICE. I MEAN, I THINK WE COULD CHECK OUR MINUTES PRIOR TO THE LAST MEETING, RIGHT? LIKE, I MEAN, WE COULD GO BACK 20, 30 YEARS OR WE COULD JUST LOOK AT OUR PRACTICE.

IF COUNCIL DOES NOT WANT TO ADDRESS THIS TONIGHT, THAT'S FINE. I HAVE NO DESIRE TO JUST SIT HERE AND WAIT FOR SOMEONE TO CHIME IN.

IF PEOPLE WANT TO THINK ABOUT IT, WE CAN PUT IT ON THE JUNE WORK SESSION. BUT IT IS A SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE IN THE INTERPRETATION OF THIS RULE.

AND THE CITY ATTORNEY SUGGESTED AT THE WHILE WE WERE DEALING WITH THIS, SHE MENTIONED THAT COUNCIL MAY WANT TO LOOK AT AMENDING THIS RULE SO THAT IT IS CLEAR AS TO WHAT COUNCIL WILL REQUIRE MOVING FORWARD.

COUNCIL MEMBER MARTIN ROGERS. YEAH. I WOULD LIKE FOR US TO HAVE FURTHER DISCUSSION ON AMENDING THE RULE BECAUSE, AS I STATED IN THE PREVIOUS MEETING ON JULY 21ST, YOU HAD MEMBERS OF COUNCIL THAT PRETTY MUCH SHUT DOWN AN ENTIRE GROUP OF PEOPLE AND WOULD NOT EXTEND THE TIME OR ALLOW THEM TO SPEAK.

BUT THEN LAST WEEK, WE HAD A PERSON WHO SIGNED IN TO SPEAK AND HAD GIVEN HER MINUTES AWAY, BUT WAS NOT PRESENT. I TOO, FOR THE HISTORICAL REFERENCE, CAN STATE, BEING MY PREVIOUS TIME ON COUNCIL, BEING SOMEONE WHO ATTENDED THE COUNCIL MEETINGS AND SPOKE OUT, I ALWAYS BROUGHT SOMEONE WITH ME IF I KNEW I NEEDED AN ADDITIONAL THREE MINUTES AND THEY ALWAYS SAID OR THEY WERE HERE TO SAY, I GIVE MY ADDITIONAL THREE MINUTES TO WHOEVER WAS GIVING THE THREE MINUTES.

SO I WOULD LIKE FOR US TO LOOK AT THE RULE AND JUST PROBABLY CHANGE IT, BECAUSE IT DOES SPEAK TO HOWEVER YOU WANT TO INTERPRET IT.

SPEAKERS THAT HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK MAY GIVE ALL OR PART OF THEIR TIME, UP TO THREE MINUTES TO ANOTHER SPEAKER FOR A NOTE FOR A TOTAL OF SIX MINUTES SPEAKING

[05:15:04]

ABSOLUTELY. YES. THANK YOU. SO I DO AGREE THAT THE RULE NEEDS TO BE MORE CLEAR.

I ALSO THINK THAT AS SOMEONE THAT HAS COME TO COUNCIL FOR FIVE YEARS IN PUBLIC COMMENT, I HAVE SEEN THIS RULE AND OTHER RULES BE ENFORCED NOT VERY CONSISTENTLY.

SO I DO BELIEVE THAT WE NEED TO MAKE THIS RULE MORE CLEAR, BUT ALSO WE DON'T HAVE ANY THERE'S NOT ANY INSTRUCTION TO HAND THAT CARD OR THAT PIECE OF PAPER TO THE CLERK OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

OR WHERE SHE'S GOING TO SIT. THERE'S NOTHING LIKE THAT EITHER.

SO I THINK THAT IF WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT YOU KNOW, MAKING THIS RULE MORE CLEAR, I THINK THAT'D BE BEST TO ALSO LOOK AT THE, THE INSTRUCTION, ALL THE INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO SIGN UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.

BECAUSE THERE, THERE ARE OTHER AREAS THAT NEED TO BE IMPROVED AS WELL.

COUNCIL MEMBER MITCHELL THANK YOU. SO AS I READ THROUGH THE RULE I UNDERSTAND THAT THAT MAY HAVE BEEN THE PRACTICE OF COUNCIL GOING BACK. HOW HOW, YOU KNOW, HOW MANY DECADES OR WHATNOT.

BUT TECHNICALLY IT DOESN'T MENTION ANYTHING ABOUT BEING PRESENT OR ANYTHING OF THAT NATURE.

AND I THINK THERE IS A DIFFERENCE WHEN SOMEBODY DOESN'T SIGN IN AT ALL AND WANTS TO SPEAK, AND WE HAVE TO SUSPEND THE RULES. I THINK THAT'S A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THAN THE SITUATION THAT HAPPENED LAST TIME.

BUT IF WE ARE GOING TO MAKE THIS CLEAR, YOU MIGHT WANT TO AMEND THE TEXT WHAT'S ACTUALLY WRITTEN IN THE PRACTICE OF COUNCIL? AND LIKE I SAID, IT HASN'T BEEN PEOPLE HAVEN'T BEEN ADHERING TO CERTAIN RULES OR THEY MAY DO IT ONE TIME, OR THEY MIGHT OR MIGHT NOT DO IT THE NEXT TIME.

I JUST THINK THAT'S A DISCUSSION TO HAVE. I GUESS WITH EVERYONE, HOW WE PLAN ON MAKING THIS A LITTLE BIT MORE STRAIGHTFORWARD BUT IT DOESN'T SAY ANYWHERE IN HERE THAT YOU HAVE TO BE HERE.

OR DOES IT ALLUDE TO A PERSON NOT BEING THERE? SO IT MAY BE TIME TO UPDATE THIS RULE OR OR NOT, BUT I.

COUNCIL MEMBER. SHROPSHIRE. THANK YOU. I COULD BARELY HEAR WHAT WHAT WAS BEING SAID, BUT I THINK WE WE DO NEED TO ADD THAT THE PERSON HAS TO BE HERE TO GIVE THEIR TIME AND TO TO SAY HOW YOUR FORM WILL BE COLLECTED, WHETHER THE CITY CLERK WILL COME IN AND MAKE AN ANNOUNCEMENT TO TURN IN YOUR FORM OR YOU PUT IT UP HERE. I KNOW IN THE I KNOW IN THE PAST WE WOULD PUT IT UP HERE ON THE DESK, THE CITY CLERK WOULD BE THERE, AND WE WOULD GIVE HER THE FORM BEFORE 620, BECAUSE YOU GOT UNTIL 620 TO SIGN UP.

SO I DO THINK IT NEEDS TO STAY. YOU HAVE TO BE HERE IN ORDER TO GIVE YOUR TIME AND TO AND AS TO HOW THE CITY CLERK WOULD COLLECT THE PAPERS. COUNCIL MEMBER MARTIN ROGERS.

YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. SHROPSHIRE. AT ONE POINT.

DIDN'T THE CLERK ANNOUNCE SHE MADE AN ANNOUNCEMENT? MAYBE BEFORE OR RIGHT WHEN PUBLIC COMMENT FORMS WERE DUE, AND WHERE TO FIND THEM AT SOME POINT IN TIME? YEAH. BRENDA JAMES DID AS WELL AS AGNES, AND I BELIEVE DIANE, THEY WOULD IN THE PAST.

THEY, THEY THEY WOULD MAKE AN ANNOUNCEMENT THAT YOU WILL HAVE TO TURN IN YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT FORMS. THAT WAS ANNOUNCED. SO, I MEAN, I THINK IF WE'RE LOOKING AT THE RULE, I MEAN, DEFINITELY IF THERE ARE OTHER AREAS THAT NEED TO BE AMENDED. BUT LET'S BE CLEAR IN MY 11 YEARS PLUS PREVIOUS THIS ISSUE OF WHETHER OR NOT A PERSON HAS TO BE HERE TO GIVE TIME HAS NOT BEEN AN ISSUE. THERE HAVE BEEN CONCERNS OR QUESTIONS THAT HAVE COME UP FROM THE PUBLIC ABOUT THE RULES, ABOUT SIGNING UP. WE GOT A LOT OF THAT DEFINITELY DURING COVID WHEN WE WERE HAVING MEETINGS VIRTUALLY.

NEEDING TO MAKE SURE THAT PEOPLE ARE CLEAR ABOUT HOW TO GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS.

SO I THINK WE DEFINITELY CAN LOOK AT WHAT OTHER THINGS NEED TO BE MADE CLEAR.

[05:20:05]

AND SO IF THAT'S WHAT OPENS THE DOOR TO HAVE THIS BROADER DISCUSSION, THEN SO BE IT.

I ALSO THINK WE SHOULD NOT CONFLATE THE ISSUE OF SUSPENDING RULES AND GIVING MORE TIME, BECAUSE I THINK WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TWO DIFFERENT THINGS.

THERE'S AN ISSUE IN PUBLIC HEARINGS WHERE THE RULES SPECIFICALLY SAYS HOW MORE TIME IS GIVEN, EVEN. AND THAT IS WHERE THERE WAS A VOTE TO NOT ALLOW ADDITIONAL PEOPLE TO SPEAK AND EXTEND THAT TIME VERSUS THE SUSPENDING RULES IN PUBLIC COMMENTS. OR MAYBE I CAN'T REMEMBER WHAT WAS IT, THE PUBLIC COMMENTS.

AND WE HAD MORE THAN WE HAD. BECAUSE I THINK IT SAYS IT'S AN HOUR.

WHERE'S THE PUBLIC COMMENT RULE? I THINK IT SAYS 60 MINUTES.

SO I COULD BE WRONG. I COULD BE CONFLATING THE TWO BECAUSE IT DOES SAY THERE WILL NOT BE MORE THAN A TOTAL OF 60 MINUTES.

BUT WHENEVER THAT VOTE WAS TAKEN ABOUT GIVING PEOPLE ADDITIONAL TIME, WHETHER IT WAS PUBLIC COMMENTS OR PUBLIC HEARING, THERE WAS A DECISION TO NOT ALLOW ADDITIONAL PEOPLE WHO WERE PRESENT WHO WERE ABLE TO SPEAK.

AND IF IT WERE PUBLIC COMMENTS, PROBABLY HAD SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.

THAT'S WHY I THINK IT PROBABLY WAS PUBLIC HEARING, NOT DECIDING TO SAY NO TO THEM AND NOT GIVE THEM ADDITIONAL TIME.

SO IF WE CAN PUT THIS ON THE JUNE WORK SESSION IT SOUNDS LIKE THE PROCESS OF SIGNING UP TO SPEAK.

AND SO I KNOW WHEN WE HAD AGAIN, WHEN WE WERE VIRTUAL, WE WERE DOING VIRTUAL MEETINGS, THERE WAS A NOTICE, I THINK, MADAM DEPUTY CITY CLERK THAT WENT OUT WITH THE MINUTES.

I MEANT WITH THE MEETING THAT TOLD PEOPLE HOW TO SIGN UP.

I DON'T KNOW IF MAYBE WE LOOK AT THAT AND YOU ALL TWEAK THAT FOR WHAT THAT WOULD BE FOR IN PERSON, BECAUSE THAT'S WHEN WE SHARED IT. BUT IT'S NOT IN RULE 28 OR IT'S NOT A PART OF OUR COUNCIL RULES SAYING HOW THAT PROCESS SHOULD BE DONE.

AND SO HAVING THAT BE A PART OF DISCUSSION, AND I DON'T KNOW IF BECAUSE I GENERALLY READ THE PUBLIC COMMENT RULE DURING THE MEETING, I THINK THE PROCESS TO SIGN UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS MIGHT BE ABLE TO BE A SEPARATE RULE OR SOMETHING, BECAUSE IT'S PROCEDURAL, OR WE COULD TALK WITH LEGAL ABOUT THAT. BUT I THINK THAT'S WHERE WE START WITH THAT LANGUAGE THAT WE USE DURING COVID.

SHARING HOW PEOPLE COULD SIGN UP TO SPEAK AND TWEAKING THAT FOR IN-PERSON MEETINGS.

OOPS. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? JUNE WORK SESSION. DO WE HAVE ANY EXECUTIVE SESSION ITEMS? I JUST HAD ONE. ONE PERSONNEL. ONE REAL ESTATE.

ONE LEGAL. ONE PERSONNEL. ONE REAL ESTATE. ANY OTHER ITEMS FROM COUNCIL? I'M SORRY. I CAN'T HEAR YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER. REAL ESTATE OR REAL ESTATE? SO, TWO REAL ESTATE. LOOK AT MY NOTES. DO BETTER.

I'M GONNA SAY THREE JUST IN CASE. MINE IS. REAL ESTATE IS NOT.

IT MIGHT BE ONE OF YOURS, BUT I'M NOT SURE. THREE REAL ESTATE, ONE PERSONNEL AND ONE LEGAL.

THREE REAL ESTATE. MADAM MAYOR, I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ADJOURN INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR THREE REAL ESTATES,

[V. EXECUTIVE SESSION]

WE'RE IN RECESS. I GET A MOTION TO RECONVENE.

SECOND MOVED AND PROPERLY. SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE. OUCH. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? ALL THOSE OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. MADAM CITY CLERK, MAKE SURE THE MINUTES REFLECT WHO'S IN ATTENDANCE RIGHT NOW.

IN THE MATTER OF. WE NEED A MOTION TO PROCEED.

AS DISCUSSED IN EXECUTIVE SESSION IN THE MATTER OF WAYNE JONES.

WAYNE JONES VERSUS CITY OF EAST POINT. IS THERE A SECOND?

[05:25:01]

MEETING MINUTES. SECOND. BEEN MOVED AND PROPERLY SECONDED.

ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE. ALL THOSE OPPOSED.

MOTION CARRIES. NEED A MOTION TO ADJOURN. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND PROPERLY SECONDED.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? ALL THOSE OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.

GOOD NIGHT. EAST PORTERS.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.