[00:00:02]
ALL RIGHT. GOOD EVENING, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.
[1. Call to Order]
WE WILL GO AHEAD AND GET STARTED THIS EVENING.THIS IS THE CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING WORK SESSION FOR JULY THE 16TH.
THE CLERK WILL CALL THE ROLL. MAYOR BRIAN MOCK.
HERE. MAYOR PRO TEM PAUL STOVALL. HERE. COUNCIL MEMBER JIMMY FURST.
HERE. COUNCIL MEMBER JOHN MESA. COUNCIL MEMBER LESLIE ROBSON.
MOTION. MOTION TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS SUBMITTED.
SECOND. MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? THAT IS UNANIMOUS. ALL RIGHT. FIRST UP ON THE AGENDA THIS EVENING, WE HAVE PUBLIC HEARINGS AND I WILL READ THE RULES OF ORDER FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING.
[3. Public Hearings]
THIS IS A ZONING MATTER, HEARING ORDER. THE HEARING SHALL BE PRESIDED OVER BY THE MAYOR.PROPONENTS OF EACH PROPOSED ZONING DECISION SHALL THEN BE ALLOWED A TOTAL OF TEN MINUTES FOR PRESENTATION OF DATA, EVIDENCE AND OPINION CONCERNING THE ZONING DECISION.
IF ALL TEN MINUTES ARE NOT USED, THE PROPONENTS REMAINING TIME MAY BE RESERVED FOR REBUTTAL.
OPPONENTS OF EACH PROPOSED ZONING DECISION SHALL THEN BE ALLOWED A TOTAL OF TEN MINUTES FOR PRESENTATION OF DATA, EVIDENCE AND OPINION CONCERNING EACH ZONING DECISION.
PLEASE DO NOT SPEAK UNLESS YOU HAVE THE MICROPHONE AND HAVE BEEN RECOGNIZED.
AND WITH THAT, WE WILL MOVE INTO THE ONLY PUBLIC HEARING ON THE AGENDA THIS EVENING.
THIS IS PZ 2026 1726. THIS IS 2700 NORTHEAST EXPRESSWAY.
THANK YOU MAYOR AND COUNCIL. MATT ADAMS, PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR FOR THE CITY OF CHAMBLEE.
SO 2700 NORTHEAST EXPRESSWAY. THIS IS A 9.97 ACRE PROPERTY OVER ON THE EASTERN SIDE OF THE CITY.
SO THE WAIVERS THAT ARE BEING PROPOSED TONIGHT WOULD ALLOW A PROJECT TO MOVE FORWARD WITHOUT INSTALLING THE REQUIRED STREETSCAPES ALONG JOHNSON ROAD AND I-85 FRONTAGE ROAD, WHICH IS ALSO KNOWN AS NORTHEAST EXPRESSWAY.
THOSE WERE TRIGGERED BY INTERIOR IMPROVEMENTS IN THE REDEVELOPMENT THRESHOLDS.
SO THE WAIVERS THERE ARE SIX OF THEM. THE FIRST ONE IS TO REDUCE THE LANDSCAPE ZONE FROM 5FT TO 0FT TO REDUCE THE SIDEWALK CLEAR ZONE FROM 5FT TO 0FT, AND TO REDUCE THE SUPPLEMENTAL ZONE FROM 5 TO 10FT TO ZERO FEET ON THE NORTHEAST EXPRESSWAY, AKA I-85 FRONTAGE ROAD. AND THEN THE SAME REQUESTS ALSO APPLY INDEPENDENTLY TO THE JOHNSON ROAD FRONTAGE.
THE SITE ITSELF IS LOCATED SOUTH OF DRESDEN PARK AND SOUTHWEST OF THE SAINT PIUS, THE 10TH CATHOLIC HIGH SCHOOL, AND IS LOCATED WITHIN THE I 85 DISTRICT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHARACTER AREA.
I WOULD NOTE THAT WHILE THE SITE DOES CONTAIN CONSTRAINTS THAT APPEAR TO PREVENT FULL COMPLIANCE WITH THE STREETSCAPE REQUIREMENTS STAFF'S OPINION IS THAT THERE ARE OPPORTUNITIES FOR PARTIAL COMPLIANCE THAT CONSISTING OF A LANDSCAPE ZONE AND A SIDEWALK.
AGAIN, THIS SITE DOES HAVE SOME TOPOGRAPHICAL CONSTRAINTS, THOUGH AGAIN, STAFF'S OPINION IS THAT THERE ARE OPPORTUNITIES FOR PARTIAL COMPLIANCE WITH THE STREETSCAPE REQUIREMENTS. SO THE SITE ITSELF CONTAINS THREE COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS.
THOSE ARE HIGHLIGHTED ON THE SITE PLAN ON THIS SLIDE.
AS COUNCIL IS AWARE, ANY PROJECT TO AN EXISTING BUILDING CONSTRUCTED BEFORE THE ADOPTION OF THE UDO IS REVIEWED TO DETERMINE IF THE CUMULATIVE VALUE OF ALL IMPROVEMENT TO THE PROPERTY COMPLETED WITHIN THE PREVIOUS 36 MONTHS AS A PERCENTAGE OF THE APPRAISED VALUE OF THE PROPERTY SET BY THE DEKALB TAX ASSESSOR'S WEBSITE BASICALLY DETERMINING THE PERCENTAGE OF IMPROVEMENT THERE.
[00:05:03]
I'D NOTE THAT THIS TYPE OF PHASED COMPLIANCE FOR ZONING REGULATIONS AND REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS IS RECOGNIZED AS A BEST PRACTICE FOR MANAGING REDEVELOPMENT IN URBAN AREAS AND IS EVEN IN THE MOST RECENT ZONING PRACTICE ISSUED BY THE AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION AS OF JUNE 2026 MENTIONED AS A BEST PRACTICE IN THAT DOCUMENT.SO AFTER REVIEWING THE PROPOSED WORK COMPLETED IN THE PRECEDING 36 MONTHS, STAFF DETERMINED THAT THE PROJECTS WOULD EXCEED THE 30% REDEVELOPMENT THRESHOLD, TRIGGERING THE NEED FOR THE SITE TO COMPLY WITH THE STREETSCAPE REQUIREMENTS AS A CONDITION FOR APPROVING A BUILDING PERMIT ON THE SITE.
SO BECAUSE OF STAFF'S ANALYSIS, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF WAIVERS ONE, TWO, FOUR AND FIVE.
THOSE BEING THE REDUCTION OF THE LANDSCAPE ZONE AND SIDEWALK CLEAR ZONE ON THE I-85 FRONTAGE AND THE JOHNSON ROAD FRONTAGE AND APPROVAL OF WAIVERS THREE AND SIX FOR THE SUPPLEMENTAL ZONE ALONG I-85 FRONTAGE AND JOHNSON ROAD.
SHOULD COUNCIL APPROVE THE WAIVER, STAFF WOULD ASK THAT A CONDITION BE ADDING CLARIFYING THAT THE ISSUANCE OF THESE WAIVERS IS FOR THE SPECIFIC BUILDING PERMIT SOUGHT BY THE PROJECT TEAM. THIS WOULD REQUIRE FUTURE REDEVELOPMENT TO COMPLY WITH THE STREETSCAPE REGULATIONS WHEN THEY ARE TRIGGERED BY THOSE REDEVELOPMENT THRESHOLDS DURING SUCH TIME AS THEY DO. IT WOULD EXEMPT THE CURRENT PROJECT FROM COMPLIANCE WITH THESE REQUIREMENTS.
HOWEVER I WOULD ALSO NOTE THAT UNLIKE VARIANCES, WAIVERS DO NOT RUN WITH THE LAND.
AND THEREFORE THIS CONDITION IS MORE OF A CLARIFICATION SO THAT THERE'S NO CONFUSION WHEN STAFF APPLIES THE STREETSCAPE REQUIREMENTS TO A PROJECT THAT TRIGGERS THE 30% REDEVELOPMENT THRESHOLDS ON THIS SITE. WITH THAT, I WILL YIELD THE REMAINDER OF MY TIME.
AND TELL US WHO YOU ARE AND HOW YOU REPRESENT THE PROJECT.
MY NAME IS BAXTER RUSSELL. I'M A ZONING AND LAND USE ATTORNEY WITH DILLARD SELLERS, 1776 PEACHTREE STREET, ATLANTA, FOR THE RECORD. IT'S AN HONOR TO BE BACK HERE TONIGHT, NOT JUST REPRESENTING PRUITTHEALTH, BUT IN THIS CASE, REPRESENTING MY CLIENT, PARAMOUNT, CBS ATLANTA, REQUESTING YOUR APPROVAL OF OUR STREETSCAPE WAIVER.
IT'S A MULTI-PART REQUEST, BUT REQUESTING ALL OF THOSE PARTS BE APPROVED TO ALLOW MY CLIENT TO CONTINUE AND COMPLETE INTERIOR RENOVATIONS FOR LEASE SPACE IN BUILDINGS ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. I DO HAVE A SHORT PRESENTATION, BUT JUST AT THE BEGINNING I WANT TO PROVIDE A SUMMARY THAT OF OUR SITUATION THAT JUST GETS TO THE HEART OF THE MATTER. BEFORE WE GET INTO THE FULL PRESENTATION AND ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.
CBS ATLANTA IS A TENANT OF THIS PROPERTY. CBS ATLANTA IS SEEKING TO RENOVATE ITS STUDIO AND OFFICE SPACE, ALL BEING INTERIOR RENOVATIONS. PERMITS THAT CBS ATLANTA FILED FOR THAT INTERIOR WORK HAVE TRIGGERED REDEVELOPMENT THRESHOLDS REQUIRING STREETSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS, BUT THIS TRIGGER IS FROM THE COMBINED VALUE OF OUR WORK WITH OTHER TENANTS ON THE PROPERTY, NOT JUST CBS ATLANTA WORK. WE ARE REQUESTING A WAIVER FROM THE APPLICATION OF THESE STREETSCAPE REQUIREMENTS BECAUSE WE BELIEVE WE SATISFY THE WAIVER CRITERIA. THERE ARE ACTUAL SITE CONDITIONS DEMONSTRATING THE NEED FOR RELIEF FROM STEEP TOPOGRAPHY TO TREES AND INTERFERING UTILITIES. ADDITIONALLY, I ASK THAT YOU CONSIDER THIS REQUEST AS A REQUEST OF EQUITY, WHETHER IT IS APPROPRIATE TO APPLY THESE REQUIREMENTS TO A SINGLE TENANT PERFORMING RENOVATIONS.
THIS IS AN EXACT SCENARIO FOR WHICH YOU HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO GRANT WAIVERS ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS.
SO CONSIDERING MORE OF THE FULL PRESENTATION, CBS ATLANTA, WE HAVE A WHOLE TEAM HERE TONIGHT.
SO THERE'S A WHOLE GROUP THAT CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE.
JOINING ME FROM THE LOCAL CBS ATLANTA OFFICE, WE HAVE MEMBERS OF THAT TEAM, MR. TOM CANEDO PRESIDENT AND GENERAL MANAGER, CBS STATIONS.
KIM KEFFER DIRECTOR OF FINANCIAL PLANNING AND OPS AT PARAMOUNT TELEVISION STATIONS.
WE ALSO HAVE MR. DAVID MILLER, DIRECTOR OF BROADCAST OPERATIONS AND ENGINEERING.
SO AGAIN, ALL AVAILABLE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE.
LOOKING AT THIS PROPERTY AND JUST AS AN INTRODUCTION TO WHERE WE ARE AND WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
WE'RE LOOKING AT THE PHOENIX BUSINESS PARK LOCATED THE SOUTH END OF THE CITY, JUST SOUTH OF SAINT PIUS, AGAIN ALONG HIGHWAY 85. THERE'S BEEN A TV STATION AT THIS PROPERTY SINCE 1981.
A CBS RELATED ENTITY HAS HAD A LEASE HERE SINCE 1986.
[00:10:10]
STUDIO UP TO DATE WITH ITS TECHNOLOGY, PROVIDE ADDITIONAL OFFICE SPACE, AND REALLY BRING IT INTO THE 2030S ROARING STRONG, WORKING HARD AND PROVIDING LOCAL STORIES AND COVERAGE FOR THIS COMMUNITY AS WE'RE AS WELL AS THE WHOLE METRO AREA.AGAIN, THE, AS MATT OUTLINED, THE PROPERTY CONSISTS OF THREE BUILDINGS, BUILDINGS A, B, AND C.
WE ARE CURRENTLY TAKING SPACE IN BUILDING B, WHICH IS THAT LARGEST BUILDING, U-SHAPED BUILDING AND BUILDING A ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY. THERE ARE TWO FRONTAGES AS WERE DISCUSSED THE I-85 FRONTAGE, OUR PRIMARY ENTRANCE UP AGAINST THE INTERSTATE AND THEN AS WELL THE JOHNSON ROAD FRONTAGE RUNNING ALONG THE BACK. SO REALLY TWO POINTS OF IMPACT AND TWO REASONS FOR REQUESTING THE STREETSCAPE MODIFICATION AND REQUEST.
AGAIN YOU'VE SEEN THIS AGAIN SOME OF THE INTERIOR RENOVATIONS.
HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY SPECIFIC QUESTIONS ABOUT THOSE OR A MEMBER OF OUR TEAM CAN AS WELL.
CBS SET OUT TO BEGIN WORK AND FILED PERMITS AT THE END OF LAST YEAR BEGINNING OF THIS YEAR.
WE WERE INFORMED BY STAFF THAT THE PERMITS TRIGGERED THE REDEVELOPMENT THRESHOLDS, THAT FIRST THRESHOLD BEING THE 30% FAIR MARKET VALUE, THUS TRIGGERING THE SIDEWALK REQUIRED IMPROVEMENTS.
THE ISSUE IS THE APPLICATION OF THE CODE TO A MULTI-TENANT PROPERTY LIKE THIS, BECAUSE AGAIN, THE 30% THRESHOLD WAS NOT MET BY CBS ALONE, AS OVER THE PAST FEW YEARS, DIFFERENT TENANTS HAVE PERFORMED A NUMBER OF COSTLY RENOVATIONS THAT HAVE ADDED TO THAT VALUE ON THIS PROPERTY. SO WITH THE COMBINED VALUE OF OUR RENOVATIONS, AS WELL AS THOSE PERFORMED BY OTHER TENANTS, THE PROPERTY NOW CROSSES THAT 30% THRESHOLD. IT'S NOT DONE BY CBS ALONE.
AND AGAIN, JUST TO EMPHASIZE THAT THESE ARE INTERIOR RENOVATIONS, NOT A COMPLETE SITE OVERHAUL.
AND OF COURSE, AS MATT EXPLAINED, OR DIRECTOR ADAMS EXPLAINED, THE ENFORCEMENT MECHANISM THAT THE CITY HAS TO PURSUE THIS CODE REQUIREMENT IS WITHHOLDING OUR PERMIT. AND THAT'S WHAT WE SEEK TO OVERCOME, IS TO GET OUR PERMIT AND DO OUR WORK.
MATT DESCRIBED THE SIX LEVELS OF REQUESTS THAT WE PROVIDED.
IT'S REALLY JUST BASED ON HOW YOUR CODE IS DESIGNED WITH THE DIFFERENT LEVELS OF THE STREETSCAPE, BUT WE'RE ESSENTIALLY ASKING FOR A WAIVER FROM THE STREETSCAPE REQUIREMENTS ON BOTH OF OUR FRONTAGES. WE FILED THIS APPLICATION AND BELIEVE THAT OUR WAIVER APPROVAL IS JUSTIFIED BASED ON TWO THINGS. AS I'VE OUTLINED, IT'S NOT FEASIBLE, MEANING THAT WE MEET THE WAIVER REQUEST CRITERIA.
THERE ARE CURRENT SITE CONDITIONS THAT LIMIT THE AVAILABLE AREA FOR STREETSCAPING, INCLUDING THE STREET STEEP TOPOGRAPHY, BOTH ON THE FRONT SIDE OF OUR PROPERTY AS WELL AS THE REAR AND THE TREE CANOPY ALONG ESPECIALLY THE REAR, BUT ALSO TREES ALONG THE FRONT AND UTILITY INFRASTRUCTURE ALONG BOTH SIDES OF THE PROPERTY.
ADDITIONALLY, AS I'VE MENTIONED BEFORE, OUTLINING THAT IT'S NOT FAIR TO THE SINGLE TENANT TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE TOTALITY OF THESE REQUIREMENTS AND NOT AN EQUITABLE APPLICATION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT THRESHOLDS. I HAVE SOME PICTURES THAT ARE FROM STAFF'S OWN STAFF REPORT.
THIS, OF COURSE, IS THE FRONTAGE OF THE PROPERTY ALONG I 85.
YOU CAN SEE SOME OF THAT UTILITY INFRASTRUCTURE. IT MAY BE A LITTLE BIT DIFFICULT TO GAUGE THE TOPOGRAPHY CHANGE, BUT THIS PROPERTY SITS UP ON A HILL ON BOTH SIDES OF THE FRONTAGES.
SO THERE IS A STEEP CHANGE GOING FROM THE ROADWAYS UP TO THE PROPERTY.
AND ALONG THE FRONTAGE OF THE PROPERTY. HERE'S THE REAR.
YOU CAN SEE THAT TOPOGRAPHY CHANGE MORE PRONOUNCED.
IF YOU'RE STANDING IN THAT ROADWAY ABOUT WHERE THOSE TREES BEGIN, YOU CANNOT SEE THE PARKING LOT.
SO PRETTY STEEP DROP THERE. AND ADDITIONALLY TREES LINING THIS AREA AS WELL.
SO AGAIN, WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST APPROVAL OF THE STREETSCAPE WAIVERS TO ALLOW US TO RECEIVE OUR PERMITS TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE BUSINESS IMPROVEMENTS OF OUR STUDIO AND OUR STATION AND INSTALL NEW MODERN STATION FACILITIES.
AND WE DISAGREE, OF COURSE, ABOUT THE RECOMMENDATION THAT WAS MADE.
AND I FEEL MY CLIENT FEELS THAT THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS PUNITIVE TO BUSINESS OWNER INVESTMENT.
ADDITIONALLY, I HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THE DRAFTING OF THE PROPOSED CONDITION.
[00:15:05]
I THINK THAT WE COULD POTENTIALLY COME UP WITH SOME ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE, BUT AS IT'S WORDED RIGHT NOW, ANY ADDITIONAL PERMITTING OR ANY ADDITIONAL IMPROVEMENTS WE SEEK TO PERFORM WOULD JUST COME RIGHT BACK AROUND TO REQUIRING THE STREETSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS.AGAIN, IF THIS WAIVERS, IF THIS WAIVER IS APPROVED.
SO WE'RE ASKING FOR MAYBE SOME MODIFICATION OF THAT LANGUAGE TO BETTER CLARIFY PERHAPS THAT WE RECEIVE RELIEF UP TO THE NEXT THRESHOLD LEVEL, WHICH IS 60% OR SOME OTHER COMPROMISE THERE.
THANK YOU ALL. ALL RIGHT ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS ITEM? ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION. ALRIGHT.
SEEING NONE WE WILL MOVE ON DOWN. AS A REMINDER, IF THIS COMES BACK UP IN THE AGENDA.
COUNCIL MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE QUESTIONS AT THAT TIME.
WE HAVE UNDER APPROVAL OF MINUTES THIS EVENING.
[6. Old Business]
WE HAVE FIVE SETS OF MINUTES. DID ANYBODY SEE ANYTHING THAT NEEDED TO BE CHANGED? EVERYTHING GOOD. GOOD JOB [INAUDIBLE]. UNDER SECOND READING THIS EVENING.[7. Ordinances - 2nd Read]
I UNDERSTAND THAT WE HAVE ONE MODIFICATION TO THAT, AND THAT IS YOU WANT TO TELL US WHAT THAT IS.MAYOR WE WON'T NEED TO DO THAT UNTIL TUESDAY.
I MEAN, I KNOW WE'LL DO THAT ON TUESDAY. I KNOW WE'RE NOT VOTING ON ANYTHING TONIGHT, BUT ON TUESDAY YOU WILL VOTE ON IT BECAUSE IT WILL BE UNDER SECOND READ. BUT IT IS FOR I'M SORRY, 3392 CHAMBLEE DUNWOODY ROAD.
THEY, I GUESS, ARE NOT MOVING FORWARD WITH THEIR PROJECT AND THEY HAVE REQUESTED WITHDRAWAL OF THEIR APPLICATION, SO NO NEED TO PURSUE THE REZONING. THANK YOU.
I JUST WANTED TO GET THAT OUT THERE. AND THEN WE'LL MOVE ON DOWN TO STAFF ACTION ITEMS.
[8. New Business ]
THIS EVENING WE HAVE THE Q FOUR BUDGET AMENDMENT.WHAT'S THAT? NOT TILL TUESDAY. OH, OKAY. RIGHT.
GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. JULIE PERO, FINANCE DIRECTOR FOR CITY OF CHAMBLEE.
I'M HERE TO PRESENT THE LAST AMENDMENT FOR THE FY 2025 CALENDAR YEAR.
DURING OUR EXTERNAL AUDIT, THE AUDITORS IDENTIFIED A BUDGET VARIANCE WITHIN OUR REAL, EXCUSE ME, RENTAL MOTOR VEHICLE FUND. TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH GEORGIA BUDGETING REQUIREMENTS THE AUDITORS RECOMMENDED THAT WE BRING THIS ITEM BACK TO YOU TO AMEND BEFORE WE SUBMITTED OUR AUDIT TO THE STATE FOR SUBMISSION.
THEY ACCEPTED THAT. SO WE HAVE UNTIL AUGUST 1ST TO GET THIS AMENDED AND THEN SENT TO THE STATE.
IT IS ONE ITEM, AS I MENTIONED FUND 280, WHICH IS THE EXCUSE ME, RENTAL MOTOR VEHICLE FUND. WE NEEDED TO REDUCE THE TRANSFER AS IT RELATED TO THE USE OF FUND BALANCE BY $50,000 TO REFLECT ACTUAL ACTIVITY. AND THAT IS IT. ANY QUESTIONS FOR JULIE ON THIS ITEM? SEEING NONE, WE'LL MOVE ON DOWN TO THE MID-YEAR BUDGET REVIEW.
GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS DARIA CHRYSSOCHOOS, I'M THE BUDGET AND STRATEGY MANAGER.
AND TONIGHT I'M GOING TO BE GIVING THE FY 2026 MID-YEAR BUDGET REVIEW.
SO STARTING OUT, THIS IS A JUST OVERVIEW OF THE BUDGET THAT WAS ADOPTED FOR 2026.
IT WAS A $97 MILLION BUDGET, OR JUST SHY OF $97 MILLION.
[00:20:01]
THAT INCLUDED A $35.9 MILLION GENERAL FUND, WHICH WAS FLAT FROM THE YEAR PRIOR.WE DID NOT CHANGE THE AMOUNT THAT WE WERE SPENDING FROM 2025.
THE SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS THAT INCLUDES A PRETTY SIGNIFICANT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM, WHICH IS THE 32 MILLION PARK BOND AND 13 MILLION FROM SPLOST.
AND THEN THE ENTERPRISE FUNDS, WHICH INCLUDES SORRY, STORM WATER AND THE SANITATION FUND.
WE'VE COLLECTED $9.9 MILLION THAT'S ABOUT 28%.
AND THAT'S PRETTY STANDARD. IT'S USUALLY 25 TO 30%.
WE COLLECT MOST OF THE REVENUE AT THE END OF THE YEAR WHEN PROPERTY TAXES ARE COLLECTED. SO THAT IS TYPICALLY ABOUT SEPTEMBER, OCTOBER, AND THE EXPENDITURES $17 MILLION. AND I'LL SHOW YOU SOME MORE INFORMATION ON THIS IN SUBSEQUENT SLIDES.
BUT OUR EXPENDITURES ARE TYPICALLY HIGHLY REGULAR.
SO THE SAME AMOUNT EVERY MONTH PRETTY MUCH. OH, SORRY.
VIVIAN, CAN YOU GO BACK? OH, SORRY. I THINK I'M DOING IT.
SORRY, GUYS. OKAY, SO FOR THIS ONE AGAIN, GOING TO BE FOCUSING MORE ON THE GENERAL FUND FOR THE REST OF THIS PRESENTATION.
AND AGAIN, JUST REALLY THE MAIN THING I WANT TO POINT OUT IS THAT WITH THE TAXES THAT MAKES UP THE VAST MAJORITY OF OUR BUDGET, WE DON'T COLLECT THE VAST MAJORITY OF THOSE UNTIL THE END OF THE YEAR. SO THEREFORE, IT'S TYPICAL FOR US TO FIND OURSELVES WITH ABOUT 28% AT THIS POINT.
AND THIS IS A VISUAL OF THE SAME INFORMATION THAT YOU SAW IN THAT TABLE.
AND YOU CAN SEE IT IS HIGHLY PREDICTABLE WITH A LARGE INFLUX IN SEPTEMBER AND OCTOBER.
SO JUST REALLY DRIVING IT HOME. THEN MOVING INTO EXPENDITURES TO WRAP THINGS UP.
THIS IS A BREAKDOWN OF EXPENDITURES BY DEPARTMENT.
THE THING I WANT TO REALLY JUST SAY HERE IS THAT EARLIER THIS YEAR, PRETTY MUCH AT THE VERY BEGINNING OF THIS YEAR, THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE INCORPORATED A SPENDING FREEZE ON ANYTHING THAT WAS ABSOLUTELY UNLESS IT WAS ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL FOR OPERATIONS, IT WAS NOT ALLOWED. WHAT THAT REALLY PRIMARILY IMPACTED WAS THINGS LIKE EMPLOYEE DEVELOPMENT, TRAINING, THINGS LIKE THAT. AND SO YOU'LL SEE THAT AS A RESULT OF THAT, WE ARE A LITTLE WE STILL HAVE A LITTLE MORE THAN HALF OF BUDGETS AVAILABLE IN, IN MOST CASES. AND THAT'S, YOU KNOW, ONE TIME SAVINGS THAT WE WERE ABLE TO REALIZE AS A RESULT OF THE SPENDING FREEZE.
ONCE AGAIN, VERY, VERY REGULAR PATTERN OF SPENDING.
IT'S TYPICALLY THE SAME EVERY MONTH AS IT ACCUMULATES AND.
SO YOU CAN SEE THAT AS THE YEARS GO ON, IT JUST CREEPS UP AND UP AND UP BECAUSE LIKE MANY BUSINESSES AND HOUSEHOLDS, WE'VE SEEN THAT WE'RE NOT IMMUNE TO THOSE EFFECTS.
ALL RIGHT. AND THEN THE LAST PIECE OF THIS IS THE BUDGET AMENDMENT.
SO THE FIRST PART OF THIS AMENDMENT, AND I APOLOGIZE, IT'S NOT VERY CLEAR, BUT THESE ARE ALL ONE TIME CUTS, PRETTY MUCH THAT WE WERE ABLE TO REALIZE BECAUSE OF SAVINGS THAT WE HAD FROM NOT DOING THINGS SUCH AS EMPLOYEE TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT.
BUT THE TOTAL EXPENDITURES TO BE CUT IS $476,000 OR $474,697. AND I'VE ALSO INCORPORATED A REVENUE ADJUSTMENT AS A RESULT OF TRYING TO GET THAT BALANCE AND THE REAL REASON TO OR THAT WE'RE PROPOSING THIS AMENDMENT IS TO HELP SHORE UP OUR RESERVES.
AS YOU ARE WELL AWARE, AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS YEAR, WE FOUND OURSELVES HAVING EXPERIENCED A HUGE REVENUE ISSUE WITH WITH APPEALS ON OUR PROPERTY TAXES. SO I THOUGHT IT WAS IMPORTANT THAT WE LOOK AT WAYS TO SHORE THAT UP AND CONTINUE TO BUILD OUR RESERVES BACK OVER THE NEXT FEW YEARS. AND THE OTHER PART OF THIS AMENDMENT IS $500,000 FROM A GRANT FOR THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT.
THEY ARE PURCHASING A REAR LOADER AND GRAPPLE TRUCK FOR PUBLIC WORKS.
[00:25:04]
AND THERE'S NO MATCH REQUIRED FOR THAT. BUT THEY'RE, PLANNING TO MOVE FORWARD.SO WE'RE GETTING THAT AMENDED IN. OH, AND I'M SORRY I MISSED ONE MORE THING THAT I WANTED TO SAY, WHICH IS $228,000 INCLUDED IN THOSE CUTS FOR A SUSTAINABILITY RENEWABLES PROJECT, BECAUSE STAFF IS WORKING ON SOME ALTERNATIVE WAYS TO WORK ON THAT INITIATIVE. AND THAT'S EVERYTHING. SO I'M NOT SURE IF KRISTEN WANTS TO SAY ANYTHING ADDITIONAL OR OTHERWISE.
I'LL. I'M DONE. ONE QUESTION IS THE MILLION PLUS THAT WE RECEIVED FROM COUNTY FROM STORMWATER IN THESE NUMBERS? BECAUSE I DIDN'T SEE THAT IT'S IN THERE.
YEAH. BECAUSE WE BUDGET FOR IT ANNUALLY. IT'S THE REVENUE WE ALWAYS ANTICIPATE RECEIVING IT.
OKAY. ALL RIGHT. I JUST DIDN'T SEE THAT IN THERE.
AND I WOULD BE REMISS IF I DIDN'T THANK EVERYBODY FOR TIGHTENING THEIR BELTS.
I KNOW STAFF HAD TO GO BACK AND MAKE SOME TOUGH CHOICES.
THIS IS AS WE, AS WE KEEP REPEATING OURSELVES, IT'S A TOUGH ECONOMY THAT WE'RE IN.
SO THANK YOU ALL FOR GOING BACK AND CUTTING THROUGH AND DOING WHAT YOU WHAT YOU HAD TO DO.
I KNOW IT WASN'T FUN, BUT THAT'S WHERE WE ARE RIGHT NOW.
EVERYTHING'S MORE EXPENSIVE AND DOING THE BEST WE CAN TO GET THROUGH THE YEAR.
SO WE'RE LOOKING AT THINGS ON A DAILY BASIS OR NOT DAILY, I'M SORRY, BIWEEKLY BASIS.
SO I SEE WHAT PEOPLE ARE SPENDING AND I PAY CLOSE ATTENTION TO WHAT'S GOING OUT AND I JUST WANT TO COMMEND ALL THE DEPARTMENTS FOR THEY'VE DONE A REALLY GOOD JOB INCORPORATING THESE INSTRUCTIONS, EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT BEEN EASY AND THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF DIFFICULT MOMENTS OF HOLDING THE LINE ON CERTAIN THINGS, BUT I'VE REALLY APPRECIATED.
SOME OF THEM FEAR THAT SHE WILL. SOME OF THEM PROBABLY DO.
QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL ON THIS ITEM. I ALSO JUST WANTED TO MENTION ON THE STORMWATER.
THE ONLY REASON I WANTED TO MENTION THAT IS THAT THIS IS PRIMARILY REFLECTIVE OF GENERAL FUND, WHICH IS WHERE WE DID HAVE THE BUDGET CHALLENGES. STORMWATER WOULD NOT BE INCLUDED IN THIS.
SO THAT'S ALSO WHY YOU WOULDN'T SEE IT. UNDERSTOOD.
UNDERSTOOD. ALL RIGHT. THANKS, DARIA. ALL RIGHT.
WE HAVE A RECLASSIFICATION OF A POSITION. THANK YOU MAYOR AND COUNCIL.
THE RESPONSIBILITIES FOR THE REVENUE AND LICENSING OFFICER POSITION HAS EXPANDED SIGNIFICANTLY SINCE WE BROUGHT BUSINESS LICENSE BACK IN HOUSE FROM OUR THIRD PARTY VENDOR. UNDER THE PREVIOUS MODEL, MUCH OF THE WORK WAS FOCUSED ON PROCESSING THE LICENSES THROUGH TRANSACTIONS.
VERIFIES BUSINESS CLASSIFICATIONS, IDENTIFIES DISCREPANCIES PURSUES CORRECTIVE ACTION, AND AND ENSURES THAT THE COLLECTION OF CITY REVENUE IS APPLIED TO ALL FEES AND REVENUES.
THESE EXPANDED RESPONSIBILITIES REQUIRE GREATER ANALYSIS, PROFESSIONAL JUDGMENT, AND INDEPENDENT DECISION MAKING WHILE STRENGTHENING OUR REVENUE PROTECTION, REGULATORY COMPLIANCE AND AUDIT READINESS.
SO HUMAN RESOURCES CONDUCTED A BENCHMARK ANALYSIS AND INDEPENDENT MARKET COMPARISON COMPENSATION STUDY, WHICH SUPPORTS THE RECLASSIFYING OF THIS POSITION FROM PAY GRADE 310 TO 312.
SO WE'RE ASKING FOR COUNCIL'S APPROVAL OF THE REQUESTED RECLASSIFICATION.
QUESTIONS FOR JULIE ON THIS ITEM. GOOD JOB. HAVE THE 2026 ROADWAY RESURFACING PROJECT BID. THANK YOU MAYOR. I AM EXCITED TO ANNOUNCE THAT WE HAVE COMPLETED THE BIDDING PROCESS FOR OUR 2026 PAVING PROJECTS. AS YOU KNOW, WE REPAVE ON A TWO YEAR SCHEDULE WITH OUR SPLOST PROGRAM.
SO EVERY OTHER YEAR WE DID A GROUP OF PAVING IN 2024.
AND WE RECEIVED BACK THAT DATA JUST A FEW MONTHS AGO.
AND SO WE ARE REQUESTING APPROVAL OF THE AWARD TO BLOUNT CONSTRUCTION COMPANY FOR A COST NOT
[00:30:05]
TO EXCEED $2.6 MILLION. AND BRIEFLY, I WILL RUN THROUGH I DON'T HAVE THERE WE GO.JUST SOME INFORMATION ABOUT THE BIDS THAT CAME IN.
AND THEN I DID WANT TO NOTE ON THE NEXT SLIDE, VIVIAN THAT WE WILL ALSO BE WHEN WE PAVE HILDON CIRCLE, WE WILL BE INCLUDING FOR THERE'S TEMPORARY SPEED BUMPS ON THAT ROAD RIGHT NOW.
RIGHT NOW WE THOUGHT IT MADE THE MOST SENSE TO TRY TO GROUP THAT IN WITH THE PAVING PROJECT.
SO WE WILL BE INSTALLING FOUR SPEED TABLES AS PART OF THAT $2.6 MILLION.
ALSO, WE WILL BE ADDING THE DON'T BLOCK THE BOX INSTALLATION ON CHAMBLEE TUCKER ROAD OVER BY OUR MEADOWMERE NEIGHBORS AND SOME OF THE OTHER STREETS THAT, THAT PULL ON TO CHAMBLEE TUCKER ROAD. QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL ON THIS ITEM.
JUST A QUICK COMMENT FROM ME THAT I GET CONSTANTLY EMAILS AND CALLS AND TEXTS ABOUT, HEY, CAN YOU PAVE OUR ROAD? AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYBODY OUT THERE KNOWS THIS IS NOT A POLITICAL PROCESS.
AND IF YOU'RE OUT THERE THINKING, MY ROAD IS IN BAD SHAPE, THINK ABOUT IF YOU'RE NOT GETTING PAVED, THAT'S MY CUE, RIGHT? THAT'S RIGHT. STOP TALKING, AMBER ALERT.
I DON'T KNOW IF WE'VE GOT F5 COMING THROUGH OR NOT, BUT IF YOU'RE THINKING ABOUT WHY IS MY ROAD NOT GETTING PAVED THIS CYCLE, TAKE A DRIVE OUT TO THE ROADS THAT ARE GETTING PAVED. TAKE A LOOK AT THEM AND UNDERSTAND HOW BAD OF A SHAPE THEY ARE IN CURRENTLY.
ANYTHING ELSE? ALL RIGHT. ANY MORE AMBER ALERTS? GOOD. ALL RIGHT. I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY BAD WEATHER.
I GOT A FEELING IT'S BAD WEATHER COMING. YEAH.
ALL RIGHT. NEXT ITEM UP IS THE FISHBOLT PARK.
MAXIMUM PRICE. YES. AND I WILL CLARIFY THAT THE SLIDE ON THIS SCREEN SHOULD SAY FISHBOLT PARK, NOT FIZZ HOLT PARK. SO GOOD. THERE'S A COUPLE.
AND I JUST WANT TO NOTE THAT THERE'S A COUPLE OF TYPOS HERE. THIS IS ALSO NOT A $44 MILLION PROJECT.
BUT WE HAVE PUT THIS PROJECT OUT TO BID FOR CONSTRUCTION.
WE DID IT LAST YEAR. IT CAME BACK SUBSTANTIALLY HIGHER THAN ANTICIPATED.
SO WE REBID IT. WE CLEARED THE PROPERTY. SO MANY OF THE FOLKS WHO LIVE AROUND THAT COMMUNITY AROUND THE PARK SPACE SAW THE, THE PROPERTY CLEARED OUT LAST YEAR WHEN WE REBID THE CONSTRUCTION THAT HELPED SUBSTANTIALLY WITH BRINGING THE COST DOWN.
AND WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH REEVES YOUNG WHO YOU ALL APPROVED THE CONTRACT WITH A FEW MONTHS AGO TO VALUE ENGINEER AND GET TO A COST THAT IS WITHIN OUR BUDGET AND WE'RE EXCITED TO ANNOUNCE THAT WE HAVE DONE THAT NOT FOR $44.5 MILLION, BUT FOR $4.5 MILLION.
SO THAT IS AN ALL IN COST WITH CONSTRUCTION AND CONTINGENCY AND FEES TO REEVES YOUNG.
VERY GOOD. AND TO REPEAT, THAT'S 4.5 MILLION, NOT 44 POINT FIVE.
[LAUGHTER] RIGHT. AFTER THAT LONG TALK ABOUT CUTTING BUDGET. ANY QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL ON THAT ITEM? I'M SLIGHTLY CONFUSED. THE REEVES YOUNG DOCUMENTS HAVE A DIFFERENT BUDGET TOTAL THAN WE'RE APPROVING BY ABOUT $100,000 VERSUS 4.63. WE'RE SAYING 4.59. SO SORRY. NOT QUITE.
I'M SORRY. SO I GOT THE FINAL AMOUNT FROM MATT DUNAGIN WITH KIMLEY-HORN.
AND SO I'LL CONFIRM WITH HIM, BUT THEY'VE BEEN GOING BACK AND FORTH ALL WEEK.
AND THAT WAS THE FINAL NUMBER THAT HE GAVE ME. SO I'LL CONFIRM.
ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. HAVE THAT READY FOR TUESDAY.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? KRISTEN WHEN SHOULD WE EXPECT CONSTRUCTION TO START? WE WILL BE BREAKING GROUND IN AUGUST TO CLEAR THE PROPERTY AGAIN.
AND WE HAVE A GROUNDBREAKING SCHEDULE FOR THAT, RIGHT? THAT'S CORRECT. ON AUGUST 12TH. AUGUST 12TH. I INVITE EVERYBODY TO COME OUT AND BE A PART OF THAT GROUNDBREAKING. IN THE MORNING. RIGHT.
[00:35:04]
10 A.M. AUGUST 12TH. I GOT YOU. THANK YOU PAUL.NOBODY ELSE WE HAVE ANYTHING ON THAT? 1105 WEST PEACHTREE STREET, ATLANTA, GEORGIA.
30309 HERE ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT ALLIANCE RESIDENTIAL, I'LL BE VERY BRIEF.
I'LL JUST UPDATE YOU FROM LAST TIME WE WERE HERE TILL TODAY.
HIGHWOODS HAS SINCE SENT A LETTER TO YOU GUYS, WHICH WE ALSO HAVE A COPY OF, THAT LAYS OUT A ROADMAP OF THE PROCESS THEY WOULD LIKE TO FOLLOW. AND WE ALSO, AFTER RECEIVING THAT LETTER, HAD A MEETING WITH HIGHWOODS IN THE GREENWAY TO KIND OF TALK THAT THROUGH TO MAKE SURE THEY UNDERSTOOD HOW THIS WOULD WORK AND SET EXPECTATIONS AS A TIMING AND WHATNOT. SO WE FEEL LIKE THAT ISSUE IS AS SETTLED AS IT CAN BE, AND WE FEEL GOOD ABOUT IT AT THIS PARTICULAR TIME.
SO NEXT WEEK, OUR REQUEST IS FOR APPROVAL OF THE APPLICATION WITH ALL WAIVERS AND VARIANCES.
I BELIEVE THAT THEY SUPPORT THAT SHOULD BE A PART OF YOUR PACKET AS WELL.
AND WE WOULD ASK THAT IF WE ARE APPROVED NEXT WEEK, THAT IT BE APPROVED, SUBJECT TO OUR CONDITIONS.
THANK YOU. THAT'LL TAKE US DOWN TO 2700 NORTHEAST EXPRESSWAY. QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL ON THIS ITEM? YES, I DO HAVE SOME QUESTIONS. I THINK THESE ARE FROM MATT.
HOW DO YOU EVEN ASK THIS? IF YOU LOOK AT THE SITE PLAN.
WHAT PART OF THE STREETSCAPE REQUIREMENTS IS THIS BUILDING? WHAT ARE WE LOOKING TO MAKE THEM DO? JUST LIKE THE WITHIN THE PROFILE OF THE PROFILE OF THEIR BUILDING? NO. SO THIS WOULD BE ALONG BOTH FRONTAGES ALONG THE NORTHERN FRONTAGE.
CORRECT. THAT IS THE WAY THOSE REGULATIONS WOULD APPLY.
IT REFERS TO THE SITE AS A WHOLE.
THE HOW MUCH OF THE 30% THRESHOLD IS BEING MET BY THIS PROJECT VERSUS WHAT WAS ATTRIBUTED TO PREVIOUS PROJECTS ON THE SITE WITHIN THE LAST 36 MONTHS. I AM NOT CERTAIN ON THAT.
I DO KNOW THAT IT WAS I BELIEVE IT WAS AROUND 10%.
THAT SPECIFIC PERCENTAGE. OKAY. WE'RE NOT EXACTLY SURE AT THE MOMENT.
I DO KNOW THAT IT WAS NOT ALL OF IT. CURIOUS TO KNOW WHAT YOU KNOW, YOU SAID HALF OF IT.
TWO THIRDS OF IT. 90% OF IT. BAXTER DO YOU KNOW.
SO HALF OF A LITTLE OVER A LITTLE LESS THAN HALF OF THE REDEVELOPMENT THRESHOLD.
OKAY. DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? THAT'S MY I HAD THAT SAME QUESTION. YEAH. THAT ANSWERS THAT QUESTION. AND THEN FOR THE APPLICANT, ACTUALLY, I DO HAVE A QUESTION. GOING THROUGH OUR STAFF'S REPORT THEY NOTED THAT YOU AND YOUR CLIENTS HAD NOT DONE THE STUDY TO SEE WHAT THE POTENTIAL COST OF THIS WOULD BE AND IF IT WOULD BE BUMPING UP AGAINST THE MAXIMUM REQUIRED NUMBER.
I WAS CURIOUS WHY THAT WASN'T DONE. SO WE'VE DONE WE'VE RUN SOME OF THOSE NUMBERS NOW.
AND BECAUSE OF THE RETAINING WALLS THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED IN ORDER TO INSTALL THE SIDEWALK IN THERE, WE'RE LOOKING AT A COST, BUMPING UP AGAINST ABOUT $700,000.
[00:40:09]
THE FAIR MARKET VALUE OF THE PROPERTY. SO FOR EXAMPLE, THE FAIR MARKET VALUE OF THE PROPERTY BEING ABOUT JUST USING ROUGH NUMBERS, $9.5 MILLION. OUR CAP ON REDEVELOPMENT THRESHOLDS IS ABOUT $11,000,800.I WILL JUST ADD THAT I'M STRUGGLING TO FIND THE HARDSHIP IN THIS.
YOU MENTIONED EQUITY, BUT EQUITY IS NOT A HARDSHIP AT THE END OF THE DAY, AND OUR ORDINANCE IS BUILT IN A WAY THAT KEEPS PEOPLE FROM GAMING OUR SYSTEM AND SAYING, OKAY, I WILL BUILD A LITTLE BIT HERE. I'LL BUILD A LITTLE BIT HERE. I'LL BUILD A LITTLE BIT HERE. AND AT THE END OF THE DAY, THIS SOUNDS LIKE A TENANT LANDLORD SITUATION. IF THERE'S GOING TO BE IMPROVEMENTS DONE THAT THE LANDLORD SHOULD BE PAYING FOR THIS AND NOT THE TENANTS. SO IF YOU CAN GIVE ME SOME CLARITY AND HELP ME UNDERSTAND WHY THIS IS A HARDSHIP, AND I UNDERSTAND AND COST IS NOT A HARDSHIP EITHER. SO I'M STILL STRUGGLING TO UNDERSTAND OUTSIDE OF TOPOGRAPHY WHAT THE HARDSHIP IS HERE.
THE HARDSHIP FROM OUR POSITION. I MEAN, HONESTLY, COUNCIL MEMBER FURST PART OF THAT IS THE TOPOGRAPHY AND THE STEEP GRADE THERE AND THAT THE RETAINING WALLS THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO BUILD THAT. TO YOUR POINT, IT IS A COST, BUT IT'S VERY EXPENSIVE TO DO THOSE RETAINING WALLS ACROSS THE ENTIRE FRONTAGE. ADDITIONALLY, WE WERE CONCERNED, AS WE THOUGHT YOU MAY BE ABOUT TAKING DOWN THE NUMBER OF TREES, PARTICULARLY ON JOHNSON ROAD, THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO COME DOWN BECAUSE THAT AREA IS VERY NARROW.
SO IT IS A COST BASED CONCERN. BUT WE THOSE COST BASED CONCERNS, I THINK, ARE ROOTED IN THOSE KIND OF THREE HARDSHIPS THAT LAID OUT THE TOPOGRAPHY THAT I DO THINK IS MORE SEVERE THAN SOME OF THE PICTURES DEMONSTRATE, THE TREES THAT WOULD NEED TO COME DOWN, AND THEN MOVING THE UTILITIES AS WELL. THE EQUITY ARGUMENT I MADE, I VIEW THAT AS A SEPARATE THING, NOT RELATED TO THE HARDSHIP, BUT IF I CAN JUST COMMENT A LITTLE BIT ON THAT MORE.
WE SEE THE VALUE IN THAT IMPORTANT PIECE OF PEDESTRIAN INFRASTRUCTURE.
STAFF SITES TO PLACES IN YOUR CITY PLANS THAT HIGHLIGHT THE NEED FOR SIDEWALKS THROUGHOUT THE CITY.
BUT WHAT I'M ASKING FOR, WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO ASK FOR THROUGH THIS APPLICATION PROCESS AND STATE IS THAT WE SHOULD RECEIVE RELIEF FROM THAT REQUIREMENT BECAUSE OF THOSE TANGIBLE CONDITIONS THAT I'VE JUST DESCRIBED.
STAFF ACKNOWLEDGES THOSE CONDITIONS IN THE STAFF REPORT.
WE HAVE JUST COME TO A DISAGREEMENT ON HOW SEVERE THOSE CONDITIONS ARE.
BUT AT THE SAME TIME, I DON'T THINK IN MY TIME ON THIS COUNCIL THAT I'VE SEEN ANYBODY THAT ACTUALLY ENJOYED ACTUALLY HAVING TO PUT IN THE STREETSCAPE REQUIREMENTS OR THAT IT WAS FINANCIALLY YOU KNOW.
WELL, IT WAS GOOD FOR THEM FINANCIALLY TO PUT IN THE STREETSCAPE REQUIREMENTS.
BUT, YOU KNOW, SEEING THE BUS STOP AND THE PHOTOS ACTUALLY REMINDED ME, YOU KNOW, THAT MARTA, MARTA DID A SIGNIFICANT STUDY YOU KNOW, ON WHERE TO LEAVE BUS STOPS AND WHERE TO REMOVE THEM AND IF THEY WEREN'T FEASIBLE, IF NOBODY WAS RIDING THE BUS FROM THOSE STOPS, THEN THEY REMOVED THEM.
BECAUSE THEY WEREN'T GOOD FOR MARTA. SO, YOU KNOW, SEEING THE STOP THERE TELLS ME THAT THERE IS A NEED YOU KNOW, AND AS WE CONTINUE TO TRY TO MAKE THE CITY MORE WALKABLE YOU KNOW, THAT'S WE HAVE TO THINK ABOUT, YOU KNOW, IF NOT NOW, WHEN? WHEN, WHEN WILL BE THE RIGHT TIME FOR ANYBODY TO DO THIS.
BUT I GUESS MY ONLY QUESTION IS SO CBS HAS BEEN TENANTS THERE SINCE 1981 AND IS THE OWNERSHIP OF THE BUILDING. DOES CBS HAVE ANY RELATIONSHIP IN THAT OWNERSHIP? IS THIS A THIS IS JUST A STRAIGHTFORWARD LEASE.
THERE'S NO PARENT COMPANY THAT IS CONTROLLED BY CBS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
THIS IS JUST WE'RE JUST RENTING THE BUILDING.
[00:45:06]
SO IT'S UNDERSTOOD. AND WHAT IS THE WHAT IS THE REMAINDER OF THAT LEASE? DO YOU KNOW TIME PERIOD. TEN MORE YEARS. TEN MORE YEARS.OKAY. ALL RIGHT. JUST CURIOUS. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL? SO, BRIAN, I'M SURPRISED YOU DIDN'T BRING UP YOUR FAVORITE ONE OF YOUR FAVORITE LINES.
DO YOU KNOW WHICH ONE I'M ALWAYS SINCE I WAS GOING TO STEAL IT. BUT SINCE HE STARTED.
BUT THEN HE DIDN'T SAY IT, SO I WOULD SAY IT.
IS THERE ANYTHING THAT YOU CAN DO? I KNOW THERE'S SOME TOPOGRAPHY ISSUES.
I WAS TRYING TO LOOK ON THE MAP AND IT LOOKED LIKE YOU MAY LOSE SOME PARKING TRYING TO PUT IN THE SIDEWALK, WHICH I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU BUMP AGAINST THAT.
THERE'S SOME SORT OF PAVEMENT IMMEDIATELY OVER TO THE RIGHT THERE.
SO I DON'T ANYWAY, I JUST KNOW THERE IS SOME CHALLENGES WITH THAT SITE.
AND AS THE MAYOR LIKES TO SAY, SOME MOST OF THE TIME, DON'T TELL ME WHAT YOU CAN'T DO.
TELL ME WHAT YOU CAN DO. SO YOU KNOW WHAT ARE SOME THINGS THAT COULD HELP? I HAVE TO DO THE MATH ON THIS, YOU KNOW, 13% AND HOW THAT, YOU KNOW, AND ALL THAT STUFF.
AT LEAST GET ME ON BOARD. I CAN'T SPEAK FOR ANYBODY ELSE, BUT AT LEAST I GOT A FEW QUESTIONS.
I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH YOU, MATT.
I UNDERSTAND WHAT OUR CODE SAYS, BUT THIS SEEMS LIKE A VERY ONE OF A KIND SITUATION, ESPECIALLY BECAUSE THIS, THIS PROPERTY HAS REALLY ONLY HAS FRONTAGE ON THE ON NORTHEAST PARKWAY.
SO IT SEEMS KIND OF. I'M GOING TO SAY IT UNFAIR TO CHARGE THEM WITH PAVING FOR THE ENTIRE PROPERTY WHEN THEY DON'T EVEN OWN IT, AND IT HAS SEVERAL DIFFERENT UNRELATED TENANTS.
I AGREE THAT BUS STOP COULD USE A LOT OF LOVE.
THERE IS A DEEP CLIFF WHEN YOU ENTER THIS PARKING LOT.
THERE'S A STEEP CLIFF WHERE THAT LITTLE LINE BUMPS IN NEXT TO THE FRONTAGE OF THIS BUILDING.
BUT I JUST YEAH, SO, SO THAT WAS, THAT'S GOING TO BE EXPENSIVE.
AND WHO EVEN KNOWS IF THAT'S GOING TO WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO SAY? HOWEVER, I'M HAVING A PROBLEM WITH ITS LEASE.
IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT THE WHOLE PROPERTY. AND I DON'T AND THEY'RE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THE FACT THAT THE OTHER BUILDINGS RENOVATIONS HAVE RUN UP THE WHOLE COST AND CAUSED THEM TO BE PUT IN THIS POSITION IN THE FIRST PLACE.
SO SURE. SO I'M HAPPY TO PROVIDE ANALYSIS AS TO WHAT THE CODE REQUIRES.
WHAT WOULD BE MORE EQUITABLE. I'M NOT SURE THAT WE'RE IN A POSITION TO PROVIDE THAT.
WE WOULD LEAN ON COUNCIL'S GUIDANCE AS FAR AS THAT.
BUT THE CODE DOES NOT MAKE A DISTINCTION BETWEEN WHO'S DOING THE WORK.
UNFORTUNATELY. THIS IS A COMMON CONVERSATION WE HAVE IN OUR OFFICE WITH CUSTOMERS WHO ARE DOING TENANT FIT OUTS, AND THEN THEY BUMP UP AGAINST THE REDEVELOPMENT THRESHOLDS AND ARGUE THE LANDLORD SHOULD BE PAYING FOR IT, THAT'S A WHOLE OTHER CONVERSATION THAT WE'RE NOT ABLE TO ENTER INTO.
MR. RUSSELL, A QUESTION FOR YOU. HAS THERE BEEN ANY CONVERSATIONS BETWEEN THE TENANT AND LANDLORD ON TENANT IMPROVEMENTS, AND HOW THAT COULD BE EQUITABLY SPLIT BETWEEN THE TWO, OR IS THIS LEANING FULLY ON PARAMOUNT CBS? HAD SOME CONVERSATIONS, BUT THEY WE HAVE NOT ARRIVED AT A SOLUTION.
[9. Mayor and Council Items]
WE HAVE THE TRAIL PLANNING AT CENTURY CENTER.[00:50:04]
NOW WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT WHAT WE'RE DOING. THE CHALLENGE THERE IS WHAT'S CURRENTLY IN THE TRAILS MASTER PLAN IS A VERY VAGUE SQUIGGLY LINE THAT HAS NO BASIS IN REALITY.I THINK YOU JUST GOT THOSE NUMBERS. YES. YOU CAN GIVE US THAT, PLEASE.
YEP. I GOT THIS LIKE PROBABLY FIVE MINUTES BEFORE THE MEETING STARTED.
SO KIMLEY-HORN UNDER THEIR ON CALL ENGINEERING CONTRACT ESTIMATED A COST NOT TO EXCEED $58,875 TO DO A SCOPING UNDER GDOT SCOPING STANDARDS SO THAT IF YOU WANTED TO PURSUE THAT AFTERWARDS YOU COULD APPLY FOR GRANTS AND YOU DON'T NEED TO REDO THE WHOLE PROCESS OVER AGAIN. SORRY, WHAT WAS THAT NUMBER AGAIN? $58,875. SO NOT AN INSIGNIFICANT NUMBER IN OUR CURRENT BUDGET STATE OF THINGS.
I THINK AND I WISH WE'D HAD THIS NUMBER A LITTLE BIT SOONER.
WITH THE OTHER PROJECTS GOING ON IN THE AREA, DEKALB COUNTY IS BEGINNING THE DESIGN OF THE PORTION OF TRAIL THAT WOULD GO FROM 85 UP TO I THINK IT'S CALLED FISHER TRAIL PARK. THAT'S GOING TO BE A TIP PROCESS AS WELL.
SO THEY'RE NOT GOING TO MOVE DIRT FOR 7 TO 10 YEARS ON THAT.
AND BROOKHAVEN AT THE SOUTH END OF THIS, THEY'RE STILL IN THE CONCEPT PHASE AS WELL.
BUT I THINK WE DO NEED TO GET THE PLANNING HAPPENING.
FOR MY CONVERSATIONS WITH THE AREA VP FOR HIGHWOODS, THEY ARE INTERESTED IN WORKING WITH THE CITY TO GET THIS FIGURED OUT WHAT THE OBTAINING THE PROPERTY IS GOING TO BE, IS GOING TO BE PART OF THAT CONVERSATION.
SO I HAVE BEEN HOPING THIS WAS GOING TO BE A SMALL ENOUGH SCOPING PRICE THAT WE COULD GET ON THIS LATER THIS YEAR, BUT I THINK WITH THAT NUMBER, THIS IS GOING TO BE GOING INTO THE BUDGET PROCESS FOR 27.
SO I ALSO HAD A MEETING I DIDN'T KNOW ELMER WAS GOING TO PUT THIS ON THE AGENDA.
SO IN THAT MEETING, THAT DEN DID NOT MENTION THAT I WAS IN ATTENDANCE IN.
SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE CALLING. I'M CALLING IT HIGHWOODS.
BUT THEY WANTED US TO PURSUE AND THEY'VE GOTTEN SOME CONTACT FROM THE ARC ABOUT THE ARC PROVIDING SOME OF THE FUNDING BECAUSE THEY'VE ANYWAY, SO THAT WAS ONE OF THE THINGS I WANTED TO ADD IS THAT MAYBE WE COULD GO TO THE ARC AND SEE IF THEY WILL DO THIS MASTER HELP US WITH THIS MASTER PLAN BECAUSE THAT WAS THE NUMBER I ALSO GOT WAS ABOUT $500,000 TOO.
I BELIEVE THAT'S A. AND THAT WHAT WE SAID IN THE MEETING WAS ABOUT 500.
I BELIEVE THAT I BELIEVE I DON'T KNOW WHERE I GOT IT FROM EXACTLY.
I THINK I GOT IT FROM MATT DUNAGIN IS ACTUALLY WHERE I DON'T REMEMBER WHERE I GOT IT FROM.
I DON'T KNOW, MAYBE I JUST MADE IT UP, BUT IT WAS $500,000.
SO HEY, THAT WAS FOR A FULL MASTER PLAN. JUST FOR CLARIFICATION ON THAT.
NOT A, NOT A SCOPING, LIKE A SCOPING PROCESS.
YEAH. IT WAS JUST YEAH, JUST TO BASICALLY GET HIGHWOODS POINTED IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.
SO THAT WOULD BE ANOTHER THING THAT I WOULD SAY WE, AND THAT COULD PROBABLY POTENTIALLY HAPPEN A LITTLE BIT QUICKER BECAUSE IT WOULD BE AN OUTSIDE PERSON. BUT AGAIN, YOU KNOW, WHO KNOWS? WE HAVE NOBODY'S TALKED TO ARC YET ANYWAY. SO WE DON'T KNOW.
BUT THAT'S THAT WOULD BE ANOTHER PATH WE CAN EXPLORE.
WELL, WE HAD THAT CONVERSATION TOO, DIDN'T WE, MR. DEN WITH THEM AND THEY WERE VERY HESITANT. BUT THEN THE NEXT DAY THEY CALLED ME BACK AND SAID, HOW MUCH? I THINK MAYBE THAT'S WHERE I GOT IT. I DON'T KNOW WHERE I GOT THE NUMBER FROM, I CAN'T REMEMBER. BUT ANYWAY, THEY SAID, HOW MUCH IS THIS GOING TO BE? AND THEN THEY SAID, WELL, LET US START WORKING ON IT. SO THEY, HAD THEY ACTUALLY CAME OFF THEY'RE NOT GOING TO DO ANY FUNDRAISING.
THEY ACTUALLY MIGHT WANT TO HELP WITH THIS MASTER PLAN.
BUT ANYWAY, THAT'S. YES. JUST WANTED TO MENTION ARC TYPICALLY DOES NOT PERFORM THOSE MASTER PLANS.
BUT IF I, YEAH, IF I MADE THAT, THAT'S OF COURSE THAT'S WHAT THAT I MEANT, BUT I PROBABLY DID NOT
[00:55:05]
CLARIFY THAT THE CORRECT WAY. BUT YES, THEY WOULD FUND IT OR A PORTION OF IT.ALL RIGHT. WE'LL HAVE A LOT MORE DISCUSSION ON THIS.
PROBABLY TOMORROW. OKAY. COUNCIL MEMBER FURST.
YOU HAVE A DATA CENTER MORATORIUM? YES, PLEASE.
EVERYBODY OUT THERE, BEAR WITH ME. AS YOU CAN SEE, I'M COMING OUT OF A COLD, AND MY VOICE HAS BEEN BETRAYING ME FOR THE LAST COUPLE OF DAYS, SO I DO APOLOGIZE FOR THAT. SO I'M PROPOSING A TEMPORARY DATA CENTER MORATORIUM SO WE CAN ESTABLISH APPROPRIATE LOCAL PROTECTIONS BEFORE OUR APPLICATION ARRIVES.
THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS DIDN'T DISAPPEAR WITH THAT VOTE. DATA CENTERS COME UP REGULARLY IN OUR PUBLIC MEETINGS, AND OUR RESIDENTS DESERVE TO KNOW THAT CHAMBLEE IS ADDRESSING THE POTENTIAL IMPACTS ON OUR WATER, ENERGY, NOISE, AIR QUALITY, TREES AND STORMWATER BEFORE WE'RE FORCED TO EVALUATE A PROJECT UNDER RULES THAT WERE NEVER WRITTEN FOR THIS TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT. THERE'S FOUR POINTS I WANT TO MAKE CLEAR HERE.
THIS IS ABOUT PLANNING AND NOT ABOUT PROHIBITION.
SO CHAMBLEE SHOULD USE THAT RESEARCH RATHER THAN REPEAT THAT DELAY.
THE IMPACTS OF ENVIRONMENTAL ARE IN LOCAL A COMPACT CITY MUST CONSIDER CONTINUOUS POWER DEMANDS COOLING WATER BACKUP GENERATORS, LOW FREQUENCY NOISE, TREE LOSS, STORMWATER AND NEARBY NEIGHBORHOODS.
AND LASTLY, RESIDENTS ARE ALREADY ASKING ABOUT THIS.
SO THE REQUEST I'M MAKING IS I'D LIKE TO COUNCIL TO DIRECT THE CITY ATTORNEY AND STAFF TO BRING A LEGALLY APPROPRIATE TIME LIMITED MORATORIUM ON A NEW OR EXPANDED DATA CENTERS, ALONG WITH A WORK PLAN AND SCHEDULE FOR A CHAMBLEE DATA CENTER TEXT AMENDMENT.
QUESTIONS FOR COUNCIL MEMBER FURST. ANY TIME LIMIT, LIKE TIME STAFF WOULD PROBABLY NEED TO TELL US THAT? BUT SIX MONTHS IS USUALLY APPROPRIATE. AND I KNOW DEKALB HAS A MORATORIUM NOW THAT IS WILL BE EXPIRING IN SEPTEMBER.
SO WE HAVE TIME TO TALK ABOUT IT AND TO WRITE IT AND GET IT APPROVED IF WE SO DESIRE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? AND THEN IF YOU DIDN'T SPECIFY, BUT IT'S TYPICAL IN THE THING, WHAT ZONING THAT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE FOR WHERE A DATA CENTER LOCATION MIGHT BE, WHETHER IT BE IT, WHATEVER IT IS THAT THAT WOULD BE ALL THE STAFF TO BRING THAT TO US FOR THE PROPOSAL.
AND THEN WE WOULD TAKE THAT UP WHEN ONCE THAT'S DONE.
YES. YES. YES. SO I HAVE INCLUDED A DRAFT MORATORIUM RESOLUTION IN YOUR PACKET WHERE IT HAS A PROPOSED 180 DAY MORATORIUM. IN THAT TIME PERIOD, STAFF CAN DO A ZONING ANALYSIS AND REVIEW OF DATA CENTERS.
WE CAN LOOK AT OTHER ORDINANCES AND APPLY THAT TO OUR ZONING CODE AND MAKE A PROPOSAL TO YOU ALL.
DO THEY DO THEY TALK ABOUT IN THESE? I HAVEN'T SEEN A MODEL THAT THEY'VE SET A MODEL OF ZONING.
BUT DO THEY TALK ABOUT SIZE? I MEAN, ALL ARE THEY ALL ARE THEY OKAY.
THEY'RE NOT. I DIDN'T THINK ALL THE DATA CENTERS WOULD BE THE SAME.
I MEAN, SOME ARE MASSIVE AND SOME COULD BE WHATEVER.
I MEAN, I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ROOM FOR A MASSIVE ONE.
SO WE COULD WE SET LIMITS ON EVERYTHING ELSE AS FAR AS SIZE AND BUFFERS AND ALL THOSE GOOD THINGS.
YEAH, YEAH. SO I HAVEN'T DONE A FULL FLEDGED DEEP DIVE INTO DATA CENTERS AT THIS POINT IN TIME.
BUT FROM THE FEW ORDINANCES THAT I'VE SEEN, AND I'M SURE MATT HAS SOME IDEA TOO IS THAT THERE ARE MULTIPLE TIERS AND SIZES AND CAPACITY LEVELS WATER USAGE LEVELS. I MEAN, THERE'S A LOT OF STUFF THAT YOU CAN PUT INTO A DATA CENTER ORDINANCE.
AND THE TECHNOLOGY IS CHANGING TOO, RIGHT? SO WHAT THEIR DEMANDS ARE.
SO WE PROBABLY WANT THE SMALL UPPER END GOT THE MOST ENERGY EFFICIENT ONES, YOU KNOW, AS A REQUIREMENT, AS OPPOSED TO WHATEVER, WHATEVER THAT MIGHT BE.
AGAIN, I KNOW ENOUGH ABOUT THIS TO BE DANGEROUS, BUT I HAVE READ UP ON THEM. SO.
ALL RIGHT. COUNCIL MEMBER FURST DRESDEN/PLASTER SSD EXPANSION.
AND THIS ACTUALLY PIGGYBACKS OFF THE CBS PARAMOUNT QUESTION THAT WE HAD ABOUT SIDEWALKS.
AGAIN, THIS IS AN AREA THAT'S PROBABLY THE MOST DENSE IN THE MOST PEDESTRIAN IN THE ENTIRE CITY.
[01:00:03]
WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE KEEP OUR CITY IN THE HIGHEST IN THE BEST SHAPE IT COULD POSSIBLY BE.ESPECIALLY IF WE HAD DRESDEN TRAIL COMING DOWN THE PIPELINE.
AND ULTIMATELY I'M PUTTING THIS IN FRONT OF STAFF OR COUNCIL HERE TO GET YOUR SUPPORT.
IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, WE HAVE A LOT OF TIME TO TALK ABOUT THIS.
APRIL WILL BE THE TIME WHEN WE ACTUALLY HAVE TO SET THE MILLAGE RATE.
WE CAN PASS IT NOW. THEN, APRIL, WE SET THE MILLAGE RATE. SO IT'S NOT A DIRE NEED TO GET THIS DONE ON TUESDAY, BUT IT IS A POINT OF CONVERSATION I'D LIKE TO HAVE WITH EVERYBODY.
AND I WILL NOTE THAT IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO LEVY A MILLAGE RATE ON AN SSD, THE RESOLUTION HAS TO BE PASSED THIS YEAR, BUT THE MILLAGE RATE WOULD BE SET WHEN YOU SET THE REST OF YOUR MILLAGE RATES IN 2027.
THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARITY, MADAM CITY MANAGER.
ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? I KNOW THE ANSWER, BUT I'M GOING TO ASK ANYWAY.
SO THE BOX SAYS THAT EVERYTHING WITHIN THE RED LINE IS NOW YOU'RE GOING IS BEING CONSIDERED FOR THE EXPANSION. SO YOU PUT THAT UP A LITTLE CLEARER ON THE SCREEN HERE.
OH, THIS RIGHT HERE. I KNOW IT'S RIGHT THERE.
IT'S NOT RIGHT HERE. OH OH YOU GOT A BAD ONE.
I MEAN, I'M JUST THAT'S A BIG EXPANSION. OKAY.
IT'S PROBABLY THE PART OF THE CITY THAT NEEDS THE MOST LOVE AS WELL.
AND WE KNOW THAT IT'S BEEN IT WAS NEGLECTED FOR DEKALB FOR MANY YEARS.
SO THIS MONEY WOULD BE PUT TO GOOD USE FOR BEAUTIFICATION, SECURITY, SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS FROM TRANSPORTATION, PARKS, YOU NAME IT. WE COULD THIS MONEY WOULD BE PUT TO VERY GOOD USE.
SO THAT WHOLE AREA HAS BEEN MASHED BECAUSE OF THE AIRPORT.
OH I UNDERSTAND. YOU'RE RIGHT.
SO THE BLUE PART, WHICH IS LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, ESPECIALLY THIS LARGE PIECE THAT GOES FROM CHAMBLEE TUCKER ON THE AIRPORT SIDE OF BUFORD HIGHWAY. WHAT'S THERE NOW? THAT IS THE CDC PROPERTY.
THAT IS CDC PROPERTY. OKAY. OH, YES. OKAY. SO THAT'S TAX EXEMPT TO BEGIN WITH, RIGHT? YEAH. I WILL NOTE THAT THIS MAP WAS A LITTLE BIT TRICKY.
SO WE HAD TO TRY TO REMOVE THAT AND FINAGLE THAT IN A WAY THAT STILL HAD CONTINUITY TO IT.
SO WE'LL BE SEEKING YOUR FEEDBACK ON THIS MAP.
CAN WE GET A SIDE BY SIDE AT SOME POINT OF THE EXISTING AND THE PROPOSED, PLEASE? YES, EXACTLY. THANK YOU. SO WHAT WAS THE PURPOSE OF IF YOU GO UP TO SHALLOWFORD ROAD NORTHEAST.
JUST UNDER CHAMBLEE TUCKER ROAD. THERE'S A PARALLEL, REALLY DEEP INDENTATION.
IT LOOKS LIKE THE RED LINE THAT. SAYS THAT THE ROAD DOESN'T BELONG IN THE SSD, BUT ALL OF THE.
SEE RIGHT HERE. WHAT WAS THE REASON FOR DOING THAT? THAT'S A VERY STRANGE. THIS INDENTATION IS THAT.
YEAH. THAT'S A REALLY THAT'S A VERY STRANGE LINE.
IT'S TRYING TO CAPTURE MOST OF THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY UP AND DOWN THE CORRIDOR.
AND OBVIOUSLY BASED ON ZONING IT GETS A LITTLE FUNKY.
SO THE MAP LOOKS A LITTLE FUNKY. IT LOOKS LIKE A GERRYMANDERED MAP FOR SURE.
BUT BUT I WILL PROPERTIES ARE INCLUDED WITHIN THE SSD, BUT THE ROAD ITSELF IS NOT.
THAT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE. THE VENTURE DRIVE.
YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THAT THING AT SHALLOWFORD AND LAVENTURE. YEAH.
YEAH, I THINK IT'S JUST PROBABLY JUST A LITTLE GLITCH WITH THE MAP.
IT'S JUST THE WAY THAT THE MAP WAS. YEAH. WE'LL GET WE'LL GET A CLEARER MAP FOR EVERYBODY.
SO A LOT SOME MORE CONVERSATION BEFORE DECEMBER BEFORE DECEMBER 31ST.
ALL RIGHT. ANYTHING ELSE? VERY GOOD. ALL RIGHT.
[10. Public Comments]
THAT'LL TAKE US DOWN TO PUBLIC COMMENTS. THE MAYOR IS THE PRESIDING OFFICER. ALL REMARKS SHALL BE ADDRESSED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AS A BODY, NOT TO INDIVIDUAL MEMBERS. ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK SHALL COME TO THE MICROPHONE AND GIVE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS TO THE CITY CLERK.[01:05:03]
IF YOU WISH TO ADDRESS CITY COUNCIL, COME ON UP AND TALK TO US.MIC] AND FINALLY, THE FLOCK CAMERAS CAN LEAD TO A WRONGFUL ACCUSED ACCUSATIONS AND MOREOVER, A BURDEN ON THE SUSPECT TO CLEAR THEIR NAME. AND I THINK THE I THINK THE NO HYPOTHESIS SHOULD ALWAYS BE ON INNOCENCE. AND IT SHOULD BE ON THE PROSECUTOR TO PROVE OTHERWISE.
I THANK YOU. THAT'S. YEAH. THANK YOU FOR SHARING YOUR THOUGHTS ON THAT.
ALPRS ARE DEFINITELY A BIG TOPIC OF DISCUSSION RIGHT NOW.
ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO ADDRESS COUNCIL THIS EVENING? ALL RIGHT. DO WE HAVE EXECUTIVE SESSION? THANK GOD.
YEAH. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU ALL. THANK YOU ALL FOR JOINING US.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.